| Agency Comments - September 24, 2003 to present |
| 1 | Adequately bridge/span all creeks tributaries, drainageways and sureface water featuresConsider on-site/in-area compensatory mitigationCoordiante and combine AWWU waterline into road prism and hang on bridges - Pleae don't take agencies thru political maze - make two projects happen jointlyConstruction access shall also adequately span all waterbodies - minimize impats at creek edges - no in-stream acitivitesDesign must include: trail connctions to existing/planned trail facilities in the alignment; parking access point to trailheads and park land (east to west);make road trail and park amenity, not an impediment;wildlife crossing/access amenities(bridge spans, arches, etc. to provide wildlife conveyance east to west;Abbott Loop Road section expansion should include bridge replacement of existing culvert crosing (could be mitigation)Make sure tht bond language provides for non-construction costs related to mitigation +/or impact analysis.DOWL should consider convening a Citizens Advisory Group to work with project schedule. |
| 2 | Our major concerns with this project, deal with the construction phase. As you are aware, the north end of the project is fairly wet with a high ground water table. How you land o handle dewatering activities and work around the streams are of concern to us as control of silty water will be difficult. Dewatering activities will encounter lots of water and the discharge of such will be tricky. |
| 3 | The
Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Office of Habitat Management and
Permitting (OHMP) has reviewed the subject request for scooping comments
on a proposed project to extend and improve Abbott Loop Road from Abbott
Road East 48th Avenue. The OHMP has attended several meetings to identify
fish and wildlife issues related to this project. The COE will require
either an Environmental Assessment (EA) or an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) as part of the Section 404 permit process. The OHMP expects to conduct
an environmental review of a Draft EA or EIS when it is available. Appendix
A of DOT&PF’s September 15, 2003, letter listed the following
streams that occur in the project corridor: 1. North Fork Campbell Creek 2. South Fork Campbell Creek 3. Dowling Tributary to South Fork Campbell Creek 4. Kasuun Tributary to North Fork Little Campbell Creek 5. Lore Tributary to North Fork Little Campbell Creek 6. North Fork Little Campbell CreekThe North Fork of Little Campbell Creek and its tributaries support rearing coho salmon and resident Dolly Varden in the project area. The North Fork and the South Fork of Campbell Creek support rearing Chinook, sockeye and coho salmon as well as resident Dolly Varden and rainbow trout in the project area. Chinook, sockeye, pink and coho salmon are known to spawn downstream and upstream of the project area. The wetlands that are adjacent to these streams are also important rearing areas for coho salmon.In addition to the fishery resources of the North and South Fork of Campbell Creek, the riparian areas between and adjacent to North and South Forks of Campbell Creek provide important migratory corridors for wildlife. Large mammals, such as moose and bear utilize the stream corridors to access food and cover. Furbearers such as lynx, beaver, otter and mink are also known to inhabit this area.In the September 15, 2003, letter from DOT&PF requesting scooping comments, it was noted “that resource agencies have expressed a desire to provide as much bridge length as possible over important wetland areas in order to minimize impacts to these important fish and wildlife resources.” OHMP would recommend that consideration be given to Scenario 3 (Figure 5) that would utilize the existing disturbing utility corridor. This proposal would consist of a 300-foot bridge span over the North Fork Campbell Creek and a 1050-foot bridge span over the South Fork Campbell Creek. The OHMP recommends that the proposed bridges be clear span structures with the abutments located back as far as possible from the streambanks. If bridge piers are required, the OHMP recommends that each pier be located away from the edge of the creek to minimize construction impacts and long-term impacts to the stream.In response to your specific requests in your scooping letter, the following information is provided:1. There are numerous streams that have been specified as important for the spawning, rearing, or migration of anadromous fishes within the project area. All of the specified anadromous fish streams are known to support resident fish species. 2. There are several fish species that are important sport fish resources within the project area. 3. This proposed project will not be located within the boundaries of any state refuges, critical habitat areas or sanctuaries. 4. The two proposed bridges that would span the streams in the project area are located in wildlife habitat important to a variety of species. The riparian areas of both the North and South Forks of Campbell Creek are utilized as a travel corridor for many moose, black bears and brown bears. 5. Since this project would bisect the riparian areas previously mentioned, this project is expected to impact these migratory corridors and segment wildlife habitats. 6. In accordance with AS 41.14.840 and AS 41.14.870, all activities below the ordinary high water mark of specified anadromous fish streams and certain activities in other fish-bearing waters will require a Fish Habitat Permit from the OHMP. |
| 4 | That
e-w trail at 48th you refer to is the Campbell Creek Trail which is a
major MOA trail. I hope your documents reference this. This trail begins
at Dimond and Victor and with one significant gap at the New Seward Hwy
(which Jim Childers can tell you is being planned) connects to the Tudor
Road Crossing. The Chester Creek Trail is currently in design to hook
up north of Tudor so there will be a link to the Coastal Trail. Currently,
there is a group here that is GPS'ing all the trails for fire and police,
they should be done with that effort and then in '04 we will be working
on an update to the 1997 ATP. I hope you have a copy of that one.Tom Korosei
is an appropriate Parks & Recreation contact, especially where you
are in a park, but since I am the trails coordinator I need to be included
also to ensure that our trail system is linked up. (FYI - I work part
time for the Traffic Dept as the Trails Coordinator)*************************
new email************************************ In reality, there are no trails shown on the trails plan through this corridor, with the exception of Far North B. Park Trails. This is definitely a problem and we will be correcting this as part of the update to the trails plan, however in the interim, I will provide comments over what would likely be in this area and coordinate with my bosses in the Traffic Dept.I see the logic that a trail that originates south of Dowling on the east should continue as an unpaved multi-use trail that could be used for equestrians, however, using that same assumption we should plan for a paved multi-use trail along the corridor as well, since once originates south of Dowling. There is currently a separated trail on the east side of Bragaw south of Tudor which also connects to the existing Campbell Creek Trail, so any paved trails as part of the Abbott Loop project work should be linked to both of these trails. We will also need to plan for some kind of grade separated crossing for both the Campbell Trail and the dog mushing trails and the FNBP trails. Please add my name to your list of contacts so that I can be notified of future meetings. ************************* new email************************************ I sure hope someone noted that the trails plan shows trails through there. |
| 5 | The National Marine Fisheries (NMFS) has received the above referenced agency scoping letter by the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (ADOT &PF). The proposed project would extend and improve Abbott Loop Road from Abbott Road to East 48th Avenue. ADOT &PF has developed four initial design scenarios, all which generally include construction of a road extension between 64th and 48th Avenue, bridges over the North and South Forks of Campbell Creek, trail crossings, intersection facilities, and separated pathways.The scooping letter lists information on threatened and endangered species and specifically requests any additional information NOAA Fisheries may be able to provide. NOAA Fisheries has no additional information on threatened and endangered species. NOAA Fisheries offers the following information on Essential Fish Habitat (EFH).The North and South Forks of Campbell Creek and the Dowling Tributary of South Fork of Campbell Creek are listed as anadromous streams (Alaska Department of Fish and Game Anadromous Stream Catalog) and have been designated as EFH. Collectively, these streams provide for the migration, spawning, rearing, and/or over-wintering of Chinook salmon (Onchorynchus tshawytscha ), sockeye salmon (Onchorynchus nerka), and coho salmon (Onchorynchus kisutch). In addition, the streams and associated wetlands within the project area represent the best remaining anadromous fish habitat in the Municipality of Anchorage.The primary concern of NOAA Fisheries is that this project may adversely affect EFH and anadromous fish resources. The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) requires NOAA Fisheries to make agency action that would adversely affect EFH. The EFH Assessment may be a separate document or clearly referenced in a support document, such as an Environmental Assessment. The scooping letter states that an EFH Assessment will be prepared as part of the environmental document for the project. NOAA Fisheries applauds ADOT&PF for their early consultation with resource agencies in the scooping phase of this project.We offer the following preliminary conservation recommendations in response to your scooping request. This project is still in the early scooping phase and this letter does not fulfi8ll the coordination and consultation requirements of the EFH provisions as per 50 CFR 600.905-930. NOAA Fisheries encourages ADOT &PF to review the suggestions presented by the resource agencies during the scooping phase of this project, and incorporate these into your working plan for review.(1) Bridge design should provide as much length as possible (clarify why – is it so they don’t wash out, or less impacts to resources? How many support piers in the channel?). Follow bridge length and location recommendations of resource agencies provided in Technical Advisory Group (TAG) meetings. Resource agency recommendations called for a total of 1,450 feet of bridging for crossings of the North and South Forks of Campbell Creek, and the Dowling Tributary of South Fork of Campbell Creek. Scenarios a! and 2 provide 1000 feet of bridging, scenario 3 provides 1300 feet, and scenario 1B provides only 750 feet. While providing less bridging than requested by resource agencies, Scenarios 1A and 2 are adequate to protect aquatic resources and EFH; as is scenario 3. Scenario 1B is inadequate and unacceptable. Rationale: The project area is high quality fish and wildlife habitat. The three streams in this area, as well as associated wetlands, are spawning and/or rearing habitat for associated wetlands, are spawning and/or rearing habitat for coho, sockeye, and Chinook salmon. Bridges are ideal for fish passage as well as maintaining the natural hydrology of a stream by allowing the stream to meander and preventing channelization. Attention should be given to bridge length. Bridges are often built too short to encompass the floodplain which can cause increased sinuosity upstream and aggredation downstream, with subsequent loss of fish migratory channels and spawning and rearing habitat.(2) Install flood relief culverts within the floodplain, on either side of both the South and North Fork Campbell Creek bridges, as well as along the length of impacted wetlands. Maintenance of culverts should be incorporated into the long range project plans.Rationale: The land east of the proposed road is an extensive wetland complex. The road will essentially function as a dike. The two bridges, while extensive, will not be adequate to convey water downslope (i.e. to west). This would result in water pooling along the east roadside ditch and wetlands on the downslope side of the road (i.e. west) being deprived of water.(3) Minimize wetland fill and develop an erosion control plan for anadromous streams and associated wetlands.Rationale: Sedimentation associated with erosion can smother spawning gravels and destroy rearing habitat for salmonids. Contiguous surrounding wetlands serve to filter runoff and trap sediments before reaching the main stream channel.NOAA Fisheries hopes this information is useful to ADOT &PF in fulfilling the coordination and consultation requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and contained in 50 CFR 600.905-930. We are willing to assist you throughout the project with living marine resource issues identified during your public interest review. |
| 6 | The
Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Wildlife Conservation,
has reviewed the September 15, 2003, agency scoping letter, which outlines
the proposed Abbott Loop Extension Project. This letter is meant to serve
as our comments in regards to the proposed Abbott Loop Extension Project
(ADOTPF Project No. 56559). ADOT&PF has proposed four initial design scenarios for the Abbott Loop Extension Project. All scenarios include connecting 64th and 48th Avenues, with bridges over the North and South Forks of Campbell Creek and the Dowling tributary of South Fork of Campbell Creek, intersection improvements, trail crossings, bus stops, drainage facilities, signalization/lighting and separated pathways. The project corridor bisects natural habitat used by many wildlife species including lynx, black and brown bears, coyotes, wolves, foxes, bald eagles and other raptors, passerines, and moose. The expansion of Abbott Loop Road and associated development will increase wildlife-vehicle collisions, impact wildlife behavior and movement patterns, and result in habitat loss, alteration and fragmentation. The level of impact on wildlife depends on the type and effectiveness of mitigation measures. Potential Impacts on Moose Moose-Vehicle Collisions The Alaska Department of Fish and Game is primarily concerned with potential impacts of the Abbott Loop Extension Project on moose, as well as the public safety risk associated with increased moose-vehicle collisions. Alaska has one of the highest known moose-vehicle collision rates in the world (Child 1998). An average of 500 moose are killed on Alaska’s roads each year (ADOTPF 1995); however, this number dramatically increases in years of heavy snowfall. Many moose-vehicle collisions go unreported, indicating an even higher yearly average (Child and Stuart 1967), and this average is increasing with growing traffic volume. For example, between 1991 and 1995, moose-vehicle collisions increased from 38/100,000 miles/yr to 49.2/100,000 miles/yr (Garrett and Conway 1998). In the Municipality of Anchorage an average of 155 moose were killed each year by vehicles from 1994 to 2001. However, this average is an underestimate, because some injured moose leave the collision site but die as a result of injuries later. In addition, moose calves are orphaned when cows are hit and killed on the roadways, and many of these orphans do not survive. Human injuries result from moose-vehicle collisions. In 2003, a teenage boy was killed in Anchorage when the vehicle in which he was riding collided with a moose. Many more vehicles collide with moose or crash during evasive maneuvers and are not reported. In addition to safety concerns, collisions with moose have a significant monetary impact on Anchorage residents. Total annual cost to Anchorage drivers resulting from moose-vehicle collisions amounts to more than $2.3 million, based on the average cost of a moose-vehicle collision ($15,100; ADOTPF 1995). The proposed extension and expansion of Abbott Loop Road through important moose habitat and migration area will probably result in an increase in moose-vehicle collision rates in Anchorage. Habitat Fragmentation, Alteration, and Loss The proposed road extension project will fragment moose habitat and could potentially alter moose movements and behavior. Barriers such as roads, railways, and elevated pipelines may block or alter moose movements, resulting in disruptions of population dynamics and increased incidental mortality (Van Ballenberghe 1978, Sopuck and Vernam 1986, Andersen 1991, McDonald 1991, Modaferri 1991, Hundertmark 1998). The cumulative effect of adding another road across an undeveloped natural area and potential movement corridors could reduce moose populations in the Anchorage area. It is worth noting that the Abbott Loop Extension will be the first major road construction across a large natural area in the Anchorage Bowl in about two decades. Perhaps the last comparable road project was the Minnesota Extension and that project, which gathered no detailed data on moose distribution or movement patterns, has resulted in many moose-vehicle collisions. A considerable amount of habitat will be lost due to road construction and right-of-way clearing. Habitat may also be lost or altered if additional areas accessed by the road are opened to development. Additional development is likely if Dowling Road is extended to join with the proposed Abbott Loop Extension. It is likely that the Dowling Road extension will be incorporated into the overall proposed Abbott Loop Extension Project. Cumulative effects of habitat loss and/or alteration translate into a measurable amount of risk to the moose population in Anchorage and this should be mitigated. Recommended Mitigation Incorporating mitigation measures, such as fencing and underpasses, into the project design may alleviate some of the impacts described within this letter. Appropriate mitigation would help reduce the risk of moose-vehicle collisions and decrease vehicle damage and expense, and would result in fewer human injuries and deaths, as well as reduce moose fatalities. Mitigation measures would also help maintain moose habitat connectivity, which would reduce impacts associated with habitat fragmentation due to road development. Quantifying the amount of risk associated with habitat loss and/or alteration resulting from the proposed road project can also be used to mitigate impacts of the project on the moose population. In order to properly mitigate impacts of the Abbott Loop Extension Project on moose, we recommend that information on moose behavior, small and large-scale movements, as well as habitat availability and use be incorporated into the planning process of the Abbott Loop Extension Project. At this time, no such data are available. In order to effectively mitigate these impacts, additional research is required. Without these data, mitigation placement and focus will be haphazard, at best. It is possible that the proposed bridging will help alleviate the impacts on moose within the project corridor and surrounding area. However, without data on moose movements and habitat use, we cannot predict the efficacy of the proposed bridging as mitigation for moose. If the road is fenced without ascertaining where moose need to cross, the fencing is also likely to force moose to cross at unfenced road intersections, and the fence will separate cows from calves along the right-of-way, which will result in agitated moose running into traffic. In addition, the bridging does not address the impact of habitat loss and alteration due to road construction and increased development surrounding the project area. For these reasons, we recommend additional study focused on gathering these types of data. Potential Impacts on Bears Brown Bears Brown bears regularly feed on salmon in both forks of Campbell Creek within the project area and as far west as Lake Otis Boulevard. ADF&G biologists observed tracks of at least eight brown bears on the North and South Forks of Campbell Creek (in Bicentennial Park) on July 15, 2003. Road development will increase the amount of disturbance to brown bears due to noise and increased access to people. The proposed bridging would help reduce the potential for bear-vehicle collision in these feeding areas; however it is uncertain whether increased vehicular noise will cause bears to abandon or alter their use of these areas. Preliminary plans showed the Campbell Creek Trail crossing under the proposed road extension within a few feet of the creek, in the same area that brown bears fish. For public safety, we recommend that the trail avoid areas near the creek, due to known brown bear activity and poor visibility. Thick brush along the creek coupled with the relatively high use of the area by brown bears increases the probability for unpredictable and potentially hazardous human-bear encounters. Black Bears Black bears are found throughout Bicentennial Park, including the project area. They regularly cross the existing Abbott Loop Road into the adjacent neighborhoods. The proposed road extension and road expansion would increase traffic volume and vehicle speed, and thus would increase the potential for bear-vehicle collisions. It is uncertain whether black bears would use the bridging to safely cross the road, if brown bears were actively using the riparian areas. Typically, black bears avoid areas heavily used by brown bears. To help mitigate potential black bear-vehicle collisions, we recommend that the bridging be extended into the upland forested areas surrounding the streams. This would provide crossing areas for black bears in an area where the trees would afford cover from brown bears. If the project scope includes expanding the existing Abbott Loop Road to four lanes, we would recommend additional underpasses for bears along that segment of the road. However, appropriate moose mitigation measure would be sufficient to provide crossing for bears. Recommended Actions in Regards to Wildlife In order to mitigate impacts to wildlife within and surrounding the project area, mitigation should be incorporated into the project design. Appropriate mitigation focused on reducing the moose-vehicle collision rate and enabling habitat connectivity for moose will also alleviate many impacts on other species, such as black bears. However, to effectively mitigate development impacts on moose, data focusing on moose movements, resource selection, and impacts of habitat loss and alteration are needed. Since this information is unavailable, we recommend that a study be conducted to gather these specific data. This information will be crucial to designing appropriate road mitigation and to assess the risk (defined as habitat loss and alteration) to moose associated with the proposed project and associated developments. Currently, there has been no decision made to conduct a study to obtain data on moose movements; however two study proposals were submitted to the ADOTPF. Our detailed review found the study proposed by ABR to be inadequate. ADF&G’s comments on ABR’s study were distributed to the Technical Advisory Group for the proposed development project on October 3, 2003. The adoption of ABR’s study will do provide little, if any, data from which mitigation measures can be designed. Rather than take our word for it, you may want to have both proposals reviewed by an independent research biologist. |
| 7 | Anchorage
Parks and Recreation anticipates impacts on park lands resulting from
the project including the following:· Visual and related impacts
of the barrier effect of the roadway and loss of vegetation · Reduced park user circulation between park land areas · Increased intrusive roadway noise · Diminished air quality from vehicle emissions/use · Diminished water quality from roadway runoff · Diminished natural character of park lands including habitat impactsParks and Recreation recommends and supports consideration of these impacts in the project development process. Architecturally thoughtful design of proposed bridges, for example, rather than standard bridge design, could mitigate visual impact to a considerable degree. Barriers that might help control noise likely would exacerbate potential visual impact. At the same time, undergrounding of existing overhead electric power lines could offset some visual impact of road development. The Areawide Trails Plan shows a number of multi-use trails, both paved and unpaved, as well as dog-mushing trails along and near the roadway corridor. Plans for the roadway should include planned trails and appropriate connections in accordance with appropriate design standards.The Park, Natural Open Space, and Recreation Facilities Plan now being prepared by the Municipality of Anchorage Planning Department, should be considered and any relevant recommendations taken into consideration during the Abbott Loop project design and developmentThank you for the opportunity to comment. We look forward to further involvement in this process to address these and other concerns, and to minimize or mitigate potential adverse impacts of the project. |
| 8 | Thank
you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed Abbott Loop Road Extension.
We have gathered the following recommendations from our staff and are
looking forward to our continued participation in the project as the final
design and location decisions for the road are developed. Please recognize
that the alignment of the project as it relates to those lands managed
by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) as the Campbell Tract Facility
(CTF) is of great interest to the BLM and that it may be necessary for
the BLM to provide additional comment depending on the final project alignment.While
utilizing the CTF for administrative purposes, BLM also provides for dispersed,
non-motorized recreation and educational use by the public. With this
in mind we request the project design consider the incorporation of additional
trailhead and multiple use pathways as part of the design for the Abbott
Loop Extension. Specifically we request the following: · Create a trailhead/ parking area/ access point on lands managed by the Heritage Land Bank near the Dowling Road Abbott Loop Road Extension intersection. · Incorporate multiple use pathways separate from the roadway to enable users to safely move from the Campbell Creek Greenbelt along the bike path to the entrance of the Abbott Loop Community Park. · Tie the proposed bike path into existing public use trails and trail heads. Ensure that the existing trailhead and parking areas are retained or improved for non-motorized users. · Combine the proposed AWWU water pipeline with this project and locate the projects in the same construction footprint to minimize disruption. |
| 9 | This
letter is to bring your attention to an opportunity to intervene on behalf
of the State in implementing your vision of providing public health, safety
and transportation improvements for residents of our State. To promote
continued economic development, the State needs to work with the Municipality
of Anchorage to promote the integration of two critical projects- the
Abbott Loop North/Bragaw South Road extension to be performed by the State
Department of Transportation/Public Facilities (ADOT/PF) and Phase IV
of the Anchorage Loop Water Transmission Main Project being performed
by the Municipality. These
two projects are both long overdue and meet special infrastructure needs
for more efficient transportation and water distribution within the Anchorage
Bowl. They are projects located within very close proximity to one another
and serve as North-South links in East Anchorage, spanning between existing
road and pipeline infrastructure. Both Projects are scheduled for construction
in similar time frames, and have similar regulatory/permitting considerations.
Both are multi-million dollar investments helping to grow our economy
and support continued development in Anchorage.In 2002, voters approved
a State-wide bond issue that provided funding for the Abbott Loop North/Bragaw
South road project. Of course, funding for the water project is the responsibility
of the Municipality, and funding has been allocated for that purpose.
Therefore, project funding is in place and committed for each project.In
2002, voters approved a State-wide bond issue that provided funding for
the Abbott Loop North/Bragaw South road project. Of course, funding for
the water project is the responsibility of the Municipality, and funding
has been allocated for that purpose. Therefore, project funding is in
place and committed for each project.The Municipality, through the Anchorage
Water Wastewater Utility (AWWU) already initiated efforts to coordinate
the two projects with ADOT/PF staff. Staff contacts have been made, but
there have been no commitments as yet with respect to aligning the two
projects.There are important public interest advantages in integrating
the two projects, including: • An Environmental Assessment has been conducted of the Water Transmission Main by Federal agencies having jurisdiction over the project. The lead Federal agency, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), has indicated its concurrence for the proposed pipeline alignment. • There are opportunities for time savings with respect to environmental reviews and permitting of the road project by incorporating environmental reviews already developed for the pipeline project. • There are opportunities for cost savings by building a pipeline and road through use of common contractors(s), equipment, corridor, and reduced surface restoration effort. • Minimizing construction disturbances to traffic flow, businesses, the general public, and local residents through a coordinated construction schedule of these two large construction projects. • Lowering risk to both ADOT/PF and AWWU since pipeline and road designers will know where each combined project element is located so technical design considerations are fully addressed as the project is designed and constructed. • Ability to cost-effectively address permitting and regulatory requirement placed upon the combined project.It is also the Municipality’s understanding that agencies having jurisdiction over these projects will look more favorably on one combined project of a pipeline co-located with a road. This understanding comes from staff level discussions with those agencies having jurisdiction over these projects. Therefore, to expedite construction of the projects it is in our mutual interest of have the two agencies responsible, ADOT/PF and AWWU, establish a common project and proceed with the work.We request that you ask Commissioner Barton for his assistance in combining activities, and I stand ready to direct Municipal resources to accomplish the same purpose. Together the interests of the State, the Municipality, and residents and businesses in Anchorage will be well served by your leadership on the matter.The Municipality of Anchorage appreciates your time and effort. |
| 10 | 1.
The roadway final design should be characteristic of a traditional parkway. 2. A context-sensitive design approach to the project is encouraged. This project should stand out as a model with special considerations of the parkland surroundings. For example, street-lighting design should not glare into residences, nor grossly “over illuminate” adjacent natural areas. 3. The proposed planting strips in the roadway typical (Fig. 7) must be wide enough to accommodate snow removal/storage operations. 4. The bridge crossings at the creek sections must be designed to accommodate existing and future trail sections, and these should include appropriate safety lighting. 5. Trail connections and linkages are important, locations or relocations can be negotiated for regional trail networks (Campbell Creek Trail). 6. The Traffic Department’s, Transportation Planning Division would like the opportunity to confirm the consistency of assumptions and methodology in generating future travel and trip forecast. This effort would confirm our consistent approach for this project and the development of the new Anchorage Transportation Plan. 7. Access management should be considered as a tool in addressing the secondary and cumulative impact the road improvement might impose. 8. Realign intersection of driveway to Campbell Creek Science Center to that with 68th Avenue. 9. As the project develops it is necessary to consider the two future roadway projects connecting to the Abbot Loop Extension. One being Dowling Road east of Lake Otis ad the second is a connection to Boniface Blvd via a 48th Ave. alignment at the north end of this project. 10. The reconstruction of Abbott Loop between 68th and Abbott Road is an important component of this project. As this section of the improvements moves forward, any needed right-or-way should be strongly encourage to the East and away from existing homes located on the west side of the roadway. 11. The Anchorage Waste Water Utility’s extension of a waterline along this project corridor should continue to be closely coordinated and would recommend that they both be constructed in concert. 12. Heritage Land Bank Parcels 3-047; 3-049, 3-053 and 3-058 are located adjacent to the east of proposed Abbott extension corridor. These parcels were patented from the State to the Municipality in 1981 as a portion of the Far North Bicentennial lands as approved by the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management. The Patent carries a proviso that if the Municipality were to ‘attempt to transfer title or control over the lands to another without the prior approval in writing of the Commissioner of the Alaska Department of Natural Resources, or if the lands are devoted to a use other than public parks and recreational purposes and other compatible public purposed only in accordance with the Generalized Land Use Plan outlined in the Greater Anchorage Area Borough’s Far North Bicentennial Park Master Development Plan of September 1974, title shall revert to the Grantor without any action required on its part. This condition shall be covenant running with the land, binding upon the Grantee and its successors in interest for so long as each of them hold title to or retain use of the lands.’It should be noted that Municipal Code 25.40.015B, as it relates to disposals of land states that: “If land is withdrawn from the Heritage Land Bank Inventory for use and management by a public agency which is not supported by municipal taxes, compensation shall be paid to the Heritage Land Bank for at least fair market value of the land, unless otherwise provided in this chapter.”In 25.40.025C states: “The Heritage Land Bank shall determine which land or interests in land should be disposed of; consistent with section 25.40.020 (ref. to 5 year plan and Annual work program) and the comprehensive plan and implementing measures. If the information in the comprehensive plan and implementing measures is insufficient to determine whether a disposal of a parcel or parcels is consistent… the Heritage Land Bank shall complete a site specific land use study for the use of the land which is adopted through the public process specified in this chapter.The above would tend to indicate a potential need to conduct a site specific land use study, this might be accomplished through an expansion of the NEPA study that could include a ‘highest and best use’ component. The Municipality is exploring this possibilityThe Municipality’s Departments of Traffic, Project Management and Engineering, Planning and the Heritage Land Bank are available to work with project designers to assure these matters are addressed in a timely and efficient manner. |
| 11 | For
the record, the Anchorage Fire Department, to the extent that it facilitates
emergency response and is safely constructed, supports connectivity wherever
it is proposed within Municipality of Anchorage. Connectivity also provides more than one route for large and small area evacuations. |
| 1-20 | 21-60 | 61-74 | 75-96 | 97-121 | 122-139 | 140-160 | 161-168 | 169-200 | 201-239 |
| 240-259 | 260-268 | 269-282 | 287-295 | 296-308 | 309-337 | 338-367 | |||
| Agency Comments | Comment Main Page | ||||||||
Webdesigner. August 2003
