| Comments 161-168 - January 2004 |
| 161 | IWHERE ARE ALL THE CARS GOING TO GO WHEN THEY STOP AT ABBOTT ROAD????? WE WILL NEED TO TURN ABBOTT ROAD (WHICH IS ALREADY OVER CROWDED) INTO A FOUR LANE ROAD ALSO TO HANDLE THE TRAFFIC OR EXTEND ABOTT LOOP TO DEARMOUN AND FOUR LANE IT?? |
| 162 | Won't be in town, let's just construct the project properly with good medians and bike lanes and get on with it. Thx. |
| 163 | This
email is being sent to everyone on the email list of people interested
in the proposed construction of a road between Abbott Loop Road and Bragaw
Street. ABR Inc, Environmental Research and Services has been contracted by the Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities and DOWL Engineers to conduct a study of moose in the area of the proposed Abbott Loop Road (Bragaw Street) Extension. Results of this moose study will be used to assess the potential impacts of the proposed road construction on moose movements and moose-vehicle collisions, as well as make suggestions for the most appropriate mitigation measures (bridges, fencing, etc) to minimize these impacts. In order to obtain better information on moose use of the area, we are looking for residents of the Abbott Loop Road area and frequent trail users who are willing to help record moose sightings along roads and trails in the area. Volunteering will only take a few minutes a week, can be done at your convenience and no experience is necessary. Volunteers will simply record the general location of any moose seen in the area on simple forms, and mail or email the forms back when finished. Results will be used to compare moose sighting rates among areas and seasons. The area of interest is along the existing Abbott Loop Road, north of Abbott Rd., South of Bragaw street, east of Spruce street and about 1/4 mile east of Abbott Loop Road. If you live in this area or use the trails and are interested in filling out a survey and/or volunteering or have additional questions, please contact: Alex Prichard Research Biologist ABR Inc., Environmental Research and Services P.O. Box 80410 Fairbanks, Alaska 99708 Phone (907) 455-6777 Fax (907) 455-6781 aprichard@abrinc.com If you know anyone else that may be interested in volunteering please pass along this message. |
| 164 | It is necessary to increase major road access to this area due to the increase in housing along Abbott and Lake Otis. However, it is important to look at the overall picture. What is the vision for our city? How does this tie into the overall quality of this city? I think we should have a large major corridor around the perimeter of the city, with smaller access roads into neighborhoods. This does not really fit with that--it is just another line on the grid. So I think that is a moot point. So if this is to go through, my main concern is the quality for the money. Haste makes waste so lets be sure it is done right. Minimum impact on the natural land is a priority. Respect the integrity of the park. Maintain access but honor it's cohesiveness. Make the driving a pleasant experience as possible to all, including the nearby wildlife and neighborhoods. I like the idea of wide meridians for snow storage and drainage. I like the idea of lower lighting, not those gargantuum things like you can see miles away. Utilities underground. Pull Out areas at bus stops and park access. Thank you. |
| 165 | 1st
comment: Bragaw public meeting Monday, 5-9pm at Service High School. Today's
Bragaw article was a bit thin on the impact of this road on Anchorage's
local control over state decisions and how the road will surely increase
traffic - and probably not relieve it - in east Anchorage. It does mention
that to build the length of bridges preferred by wildlife agencies, the
budget will increase to $50 million plus from today's $37million for just
over two miles of road.Today's Bragaw extension ADN article contains an
excellent map and computer generated illustrations of engineers' proposals.
Unfortunately, it misses the point that Bragaw is being designed without
an overarching plan to deal with the additional traffic it will generate.
Are you anxious to have more cars along the roads you travel? Bragaw and
Dowling are expected to triple East side traffic between 36th and Dowling,
New Seward and Boniface according to the East Anchorage Study of Transportation.
The state's engineers gloss over that fact.What's missing from the article?Understanding
that the state is designing and building Bragaw without going through
Anchorage's approved public planning process. The EAST study that recommends
Bragaw has not been adopted by the Assembly. Nor does Anchorage's adopted
Long Range Transportation Plan recommend or approve the Bragaw Extension.
The ADN article says "some version of of the project has been in
traffic plans for decades," when in fact, it was rejected by the
1991 assembly and has not been in an approved transportation plan since
then. (I have not yet researched pre-1991 LRTP's for Bragaw do you have
any old copies?)The approved planning process would ask what are the best
investments to move people and goods over the next 20 to 50 years while
preserving what is good about Anchorage and making it better: neighborhoods,
open spaces, wildlife, fish, walking, and so forth.Questions you might
want to ask:1. Where will the additional 48,000 daily cars come from to
use the new Bragaw Extension? The Hillside? Nope. Only 7-10,000 additional
daily trips are expected from the Hillside to Bragaw in twenty years.
Unfortunately, Dowl's graphics make the Hillside-University vehicle travel
look significant, when it's only a small fraction of the increased traffic.From
Eagle River, Chugiak and Mat Su? Who knows? No one is telling where today's
traffic is coming from and going to, even after three studies of $1 million
each. Engineers are not saying where the additional 48,000 trips over
the next twenty years are coming from and going to. 2. Can the rest of
Anchorage's roads and neighborhoods withstand a tripling of east side
traffic? 3. Do east Anchorage neighborhoods agree that their traffic should
triple? 4. How will this road affect east Anchorage and the rest of town
- in terms of pedestrian safety, availability of public transit, preservation
of open space, air quality, noise and housing prices? 2nd comment: Gleaned from last night's public meeting at Service High School - The contractors, in my opinion, did a great job allowing everyone to be heard and listening carefully to comments and concerns. An estimated 120 people attended.Key issues raised: · Negative impacts of the Bragaw extension on homes, neighborhoods, the park, and ability to walk, bike or ride a horse safely near the old Abbott Loop. · Quit talking about the road and build it already.· It makes no sense to build Bragaw without connecting it to Dowling.· Traffic projections offered by EAST and Dowl appear unreliable.· Lack of information about origin and destination of today's and tomorrow's drivers.· "Not in my back yard." · Bypass Anchorage via Muldoon/Hillside or build a downtown freeway.· This park and this neighborhood are on the chopping block today. Whose park and neighborhood are next? · Where is the overall plan for Anchorage's transportation future?There was a split between those who felt people should not complain, because Bragaw/Abbott Loop were "always" intended as a major traffic thoroughfare, and those who tried to defend their neighborhood and quality of life from traffic. The public discussion went on till 10pm, with Bragaw opponents holding on till the end. Most proponents left earlier.The contractor explained that the Bragaw extension would NOT solve the problems with Lake Otis and Tudor."If bigger roads were the answer, Dimond Boulevard would be our model." 3rd comment: Nellie Moore's Community Forum, Wednesday, January 14 at 11am. Please call in.Project engineers will be on the program. I don't know much more than that...Questions to ask: 1. Why should Anchorage wreck (build a four lane road through) wild parklands to accommodate more cars from Mat Su and Eagle River? Officials have not explained where this huge twenty year traffic increase (48,000 cars per day, EAST study, 30,000 DOWL study) will come from or go to. Projected Anchorage population increases (at 30 to 40 percent) don't account for such huge (200 to 300 percent) traffic increases in east Anchorage. We must conclude the traffic is coming from population growth Mat Su and Eagle River. 2. Why should established Anchorage neighborhoods be sliced apart to accommodate huge increases in traffic? (200-300 percent increase over twenty years) How does Bragaw implement Anchorage's comprehensive plan that calls for protecting neighborhoods and reducing reliance on the automobile? 3. Can the rest of Anchorage's roads, neighborhoods and commercial areas withstand the tripling of east side traffic? Dimond and Dimond Center Center parking lots are already full. Where will these cars go when they've left Bragaw? All studies agree these cars are not just "passing through" the city. 4. Do east Anchorage neighborhoods agree that their traffic must/should triple? Or do they envision a future where their kids can still walk safely to the park and to school? The state's design/build program for Bragaw doesn't care what neighborhoods think. 5. How will this road affect traffic in the rest of town? Where else will the traffic grow? How much will it cost to widen those roads, and will those neighborhoods agree? 6. This road is about 2.8 miles including the widening of Abbott Loop. How much will it cost, beyond original estimates of $37 million? (Consultants are talking about $50 plus million if resource agencies have their way and there is enough bridging for large game to pass underneath.)6. How much will it cost to connect Boniface to Dowling? Answer unknown. 7. Will the State submit the Bragaw Extension to Anchorage's assembly and to AMATS before proceeding with design and construction? Answer: not likely 8. How will the Bragaw Extension affect public investments in pedestrian safety and public transportation? How will huge (37 million plus) spending on Bragaw affect spending on transit and sidewalks? How will increased traffic affect other open spaces, air quality, noise and the resale value of homes? If we spend all this money on a road, how much will be left for buses and sidewalks in other parts of town? (Note that Alaska could help the rest of the nation by asking its delegation to allow road construction money to go for transit operations (hiring bus drivers) but local officials are stuck thinking that federal money can only build roads.) 4th comment: Bob Kniefel represented the state's Bragaw extension project today on Nellie Moore's Community Forum.Two points caught my ear, drawing me to conclude that Bragaw engineers and planners 1. Haven't analyzed traffic projections from the EAST study and Dowl's recent presentations. 2. Are not familiar with - or disagree with? comprehensive plan land use and transit strategies to reduce traffic growth.Traffic projections unquestioned One person asked: Why will traffic triple on Abbott Loop and Dowling over the next twenty years, if city-wide population will increase only 30-40 percent over the same time? Are the extra trips from Eagle River and Mat Su drivers, or where? The answer: "No." These vehicles are not from the north. They represent new growth in the bowl. New roads are projected from future traffic demand which is calculated from the number of trips to be taken by the 30 to 40 percent new people moving to Anchorage. But the EAST study projects 250-350 percent more traffic on Abbott Loop and Dowling. This is ten times greater than the projected 30-40 percent city wide population increase. These numbers are wildly out of proportion to new population increases, and need to be explained. Especially if they are used to justify spending $37-55 million dollars.Blind eye to comprehensive plan strategies:When asked if added transit service can reduce the need for new roads, the response was "No." Even if transit ridership increased by 200 or even 300 percent it would take only 3-6 percent of all trips. That is not enough ridership to avoid building the Bragaw extension and other roads. This response is too simplistic. There was no mention of land use strategies to boost transit ridership. Or the statistic that it's you and me driving more often and longer distances. Rush hour trips are Anchorage's problem right now. These can be managed. We are not helpless in the face of ever-increasing traffic.Smart Growth experts show (and Portland demonstrates) if a city concentrates new population into higher density centers while investing in transit and sidewalks/trails, per person auto use can go down. In Portland car travel is up only 2 percent while commute time is down 9 percent from the mid 1980's to mid 1990's. The air is cleaner and people are happier with their neighborhoods' quality of life.It will take an estimated ten to twenty years for targeted land use and transit investments to successfully shift you and me from our cars to transit and walking. But it has been done elsewhere, and can be done here.Where is the leadership to ensure that Anchorage's transportation planners develop transportation strategies that live up to Anchorage's comprehensive plan? 5th Comment: Senate Bill 260 was forwarded from State Representative Ethan Berkowitz' office. It attempts to add two legislators to Anchorage's transportation planning organization, AMATS. Reading federal law, 23 CFR 450, I find no authority for the governor or the state to unilaterally add to legislators to AMATS or determine who gets to vote.Federal law states (i) The voting membership of an MPO policy body designated/redesignated subsequent to December 18, 1991, and serving a TMA, must include representation of local elected officials, officials of agencies that administer or operate major modes or systems of transportation, e.g., transit operators, sponsors of major local airports, maritime ports, rail operators, etc. When will state legislators and transportation officials begin taking care of their own business and quit meddling in Anchorage's? 6th Comment: Saturday's Daily News article was apparently correct: Anchorage plans to ask the legislature for more money to build the Bragaw extension AND extend Dowling to Bragaw. The final decision will be made this coming Tuesday when the assembly approves Anchorage's legislative agenda.Unfortunately, the Bragaw extension has not been approved in Anchorage's Long Range Transportation Plan. Nor is the Dowling extension approved in the LRTP. Since these roads are not in the LRTP, they cannot receive federal highway funds. This is perhaps the biggest reason the state sneaked the Bragaw extension into its bond package - to avoid federal planning and environmental protection requirements.Dick Traini recently shifted money from De Armoun to Dowling, but still, Dowling to Bragaw is not in the LRTP, therefore cannot receive federal funding. "Settling" such important questions in an assembly work session is inappropriate.The problem comes from assembly members who fear that the state bonds ($37 million) will not pay for a decent job on the Bragaw extension. That' fear is legitimate. The state's contractor has said the cost may exceed $50 million for 2.8 miles of road. Assembly members are trying to protect Abbott Loop neighborhoods with roadside, safe pedestrian crossings, noise barriers and so forth. All of it will cost more money than the state bonded for Bragaw and Abbott Loop - maybe 50 percent more than bonded.This is no excuse. The bottom line: The Bragaw extension has not been tested against comprehensive plan goals.Yes, Abbott Loop needs to be improved - with or without the Bragaw/Dowling extensions. The Assembly can 1. Seek state money to improve Abbott Loop and protect those neighborhoods against dangerous high speed traffic. 2. Explain to the state that Anchorage decides where and when to build roads inside our boundaries, and will not be bullied by the state. If you have opinions about this, please call your assembly representatives, and Mayor Begich too. |
| 166 | 1st
Statement: First, let me say I appreciate the efforts to keep the community
informed of the plans, changes, and public meetings concerning the Bragaw
extension. I have had the notice of the Jan 5 meeting posted on my frig
for weeks and plan to attend. Having said that, I am bewildered by the
map in Sunday morning's paper. It left out the entire Birch Run Subdivision.
We have been here for almost 8 years and will be greatly impacted by the
road. Our backyard is adjacent to Abbott Loop and a small portion of Abbott.
Changes to the traffic going through that intersection are of great concern
to me. 2nd Statement: Since we live at the intersection of Abbott and Abbott Loop I am very concerned about the level of sound that will be generated as traffic increases on A.L. My neighbors to the S.E. along Abbott have felt the berm that has been built along Abbott helped lessen noise for them. Please, please, please carefully noise! abatement procedures for impacted neighborhoods. I also have great concern about pedestrian safety between Abbott and 68th, especially the north end by the ball fields. Plan D does not give any improvement for walkways and with increased traffic there will also be increased safety concerns.As you continue to study and plan for this road, whether you use Plan B, C, D, or E please consider noise and safety issues. Create noise abatement provisions and safely provide for a pedestrian walkway. Thank you for your consideration. |
| 167 | Pedestrian underpasses are needed to cross Abott Loop road at Lore Road and across from the ball fields. At Lore Road, there is a lot of ski, horse, bicycle and foot traffic. The safest crossing is an underpass, which will not slow traffic either. |
| 168 | Do not extend Abbott Loop Road! |
| 1-20 | 21-60 | 61-74 | 75-96 | 97-121 | 122-139 | 140-160 | 161-168 | 169-200 | 201-239 |
| 240-259 | 260-268 | 269-286 | 287-295 | 296-308 | 309-337 | 338-367 | |||
| Agency Comments | Comment Main Page | ||||||||
Webdesigner. August 2003
