|
|
|
 Why
is an alternative unacceptable, neutral or acceptable? |
| Too much impact on
the watersheds of vital salmon stream ( Russian River), and both sites
on the "dark" or "cold" side of the valley plus avalanche
problems - making maintenance a nightmare. |
| Cooper Creek Alternative
crosses several private properties including 3 properties belonging to
me and 2 of my sons. However, I would rather see the highway go through
my home property than to see the Kenai River alternatives or the no-build
option if the traffic was routed away from the river. Crossing the river
near the present bridge site close to MP 48 and coming back down on the
present highway east of Gwin's Lodge isn't acceptable. Crossing Russian
River is unacceptable. There has been a lot of talk about protecting the
bears on the north side of the river. Seems to me that the famous Russian
River salmon fishery attracts bears as well as people. I've seen many
bear---brown and black---in the Russian River/Lakes corridor. One of my
sons was attacked by a bear on the Russian Lakes trail in 1969. |
| Businesses would
want access roads from new to old roads which would be to steep coming
down off of shelf above |
| Avalanche potential? |
| Russian River. I
am totally opposed to this alternative. The resource that stream provides
must be protected to the maximum. Any impact, no matter how small, would
have far reaching. I believe the proposal is intolerable. Cooper Creek.
The impact on business would be unacceptable. The impact on private property
owners equally unacceptable. |
| The cooper Creek
alternative is the best alternative. It gives the most benefit with the
least disruption to property owners and the environment. |
| Cooper Creek - less
wildlife impact, no trail impact, shorter, less visual impact (there is
already a power line corridor), and less overdevelopment of future lands. |
| If this is the only
way the highway can be built, it's OK with me. |
| I started this survey
earlier and the machine locked up. The Russian River alternative is unacceptable
because it adds large impacts to the heavily used Russian River area without
any advantage over the Cooper Creek alternative. The Cooper Creek Alternative
is highly acceptable because it keeps impacts in the Cooper Landing core
on the south side of the river where the existing road and powerline are
and south of this the road is in the existing road alignment. It also
avoids the Resurrection Trail and Juneau Creek area. |
| Would encroach on
too much private property |
| This is brown bear
country --it is already small enough. No incursion into that area |
| Stays near or crosses
River. |
| Because it impacts
too many trails. There are few enough places as it is that offer the sounds
of silence. Trails and hiking are my source of decompression. The silence
allows me the time to think and clear my head. If routes such as these
are allowed, it will mean those of us on foot will have to go further
away to get away. Further away means more time to get there, less time
to be there, and added cost to get there. It also means more access to
those who do not appreciate quiet, more vandalism, more garbage that users
don't think they have to carry out, more wear and tear on trails, and
so forth. We already have combat fishing in this area. Please do not add
assault to these beloved trails. |
| I see the need to
improve the road, and the Cooper Creek alternative appears to have the
least offensive impacts. I like the Russian River alternative less because
the bridge across the Russian seems unnecessarily disruptive. |
| Current road should
be widened, a few corners straightened out and the speed limit enforced.
This would save the viewshed, keep the wildlife habitat, not disturb any
trail systems or recreational areas and continue economic growth. |
| Russian River - quick
overview only; seems like minimal impacts - would like to attend meeting
to get better understanding of the alternative Cooper Creek - doesn't
solve the problems with some of the existing curves; only goes part of
the way |
| Too much disruption
of fishing at Russian |
| A bridge over the
Russian River is completely unacceptable. This is a prime recreation area,
and a bridge crossing would take away much of what is valued about this
area. |
| Would not help traffic
problems |
| Glaciering on the
roadway and bad shading resulting in icy roads due to northern exposure
of slope. Bridge over Cooper Creek too expensive. Too steep. Too much
visual impact. Leaves dangerous corner at Bean Creek Road-Sterling Highway
intersection. Fails to avoid extremely dangerous congestion around ferry.
Too much impact on Russian River. |
| I want to minimize
environmental impact and cost. |
| Cost too much |
| With the traffic
on the highway, a straight highway with passing lanes are important. There
are a lot of traffic that must use that highway to communicate. It is
not just a recreation highway. I feel a big risk to our live every time
I drive the present highway down to see our grandchildren. These routes
would get away from the fishing traffic. |
| In my opinion it
is unacceptable to use any alternative other than an improvement to the
existing roadway. Any other alternative would destroy the environment
and habitat of the areas that are being considered. |
| Cooper Creek is unacceptable
due to impact on private property on south side of the river. Russian
River is the most unacceptable of all the alternatives due to environmental
impact on the Russian River. A bridge across the Russian River would lead
to a parking lot, more people on the river and damage to the river bank. |
| These create new
highway corridors, which lead to a infinitely large relative increase
in impacts. From no new impact to major impact - unacceptable! |
| Does not affect Resurrection
pass trail least affects on 4(f) reserves better maintains visual character
of valley better for local business |
| These alternatives
are mostly unacceptable due to cost and traffic disruption. They do not
totally address safety issues and do impact recreational users. |
| I prefer the Juneau
Creek F variant. |
| South side will have
too great of an impact on existing recreation areas. With construction
of the north side the existing roadway will still offer a scenic byway
for summer and less winter traffic on an extremely dangerous road. |
| Any of the alternatives
that deviate significantly from the current road have significant impacts
to new areas, some of which are brown bear corridors, in high value recreation
areas, or go through special areas. |
| North side is by
far the best route |
| Gets traffic out
of town and lessens congestion. |
| Impact to Russian
River and Cooper Creek. Too steep. |
| Too expensive. In
addition, the majority of the traffic during the summer are looking for
the shortest distance between Soldotna/Kenai/Homer and Anchorage. |
| Both cost to high
but acceptable |
| Part of the area
is mud. I doubt if a perk test would pass. There would be some major bridges
to build. |
| I think the road
should stay as much on the north side as possible. Less bridges |
| Mixes through traffic
with river tourist type traffic |
| Cooper Creek has
the least impact on any new areas but still straightens the roadway. Stay
away from Russian River. It is already too congested. |
| Does not solve the
congestion problem . Any alternate that stays in the current corridor
is not acceptable. We need a straight safe new road north of the river
and cooper landing. |
| We have concerns
about both safety and the impact of these proposals on the river. |
| The selected alternative
should maximize the flow (speed) of traffic in the safest manner. This
would take it away from built up areas and straighten it to the greatest
extent possible. Do not speed up the traffic flow in one portion to drop
it into a bottleneck as the south side routes would do. |
| Least impact if any
work is chosen. |
| All southerly routes
still require significant passage through Cooper Landing which, developed
as it is, requires reduced speed, potential interaction with pedestrians,
and south-side routes have little or no sun exposure during winter months,
leaving them icy, dangerous, subject to avalanche risk and difficult to
keep clear. I am opposed to any route maintaining any significant interaction
with local vehicular and pedestrian traffic. I also oppose alternatives
which keep the highway in the shadow of a mountain. I was raised near
Butte City, in the Matanuska Valley, and remember the dreadful drive down
the icy and avalanche-prone Glenn Highway along the Knik River in the
shadow of Pioneer Peak. |
| I like getting the
highway traffic separated from the local and river recreational traffic.
The more separation the better. |
| Conservation concerns |
| SAFETY AND TIME |
| I have property in
Cooper Landing and both plans would come very close to my property. We
already have enough problems with noise. I do a lot of hiking on Russian
Lakes trails. I don't want the habitat torn up. We are losing too much. |
| Lets make a straight
shot threw the forest and skip cooper landing all together. |
| Too close to original
route, uses south side, reduces exposure for thermal radiant to control
snow/ice. |
| The Russian River
Alternative disturbs too much undeveloped area, does not appear to help
congestion around Cooper Landing as much as is stated, disturbs too much
of the Russian River recreation area, and is expensive. The Cooper Creek
Alternative also does not appear to help congestion around Cooper Landing
as much as is stated and is too expensive for the short length of new
alignment. |
| Russian River is
known practically world wide for it's fishing and recreation experiences.
Putting a high capacity road and bridge in the middle of it will negatively
alter the current experiences. Traffic noise and visibility of the road
will detract from the experiences. A 7% grade to the river will "flood"
the area with traffic noise, downshifting engine noise, & Jake brake
noise. |
| Enhancing the existing
corridor is my preference, avoiding the Juneau Creek Falls crossing is
my objective. |
| Still to close to
the river with all of the traffic. |
| Less Cost with minimal
impact, the least amount of new road needed. |
| No, need to stay
away from the Kenai River |
| Lets focus on staying
off the river and away from homes and business sites. There is not enough
room in most of the Kenai river corridor at Cooper Landing for a wider
road and existing structures/business. Get the road off the river and
bypass the congested and constricted areas. |
| Stay out of Cooper
Landing |
| Both these alternatives
do not bypass enough of the Cooper Landing community area, and therefore
do not move 65% of traffic out of the entire area. Using the existing
alignment until MP47.7 includes the area around our elementary school
so safety concerns have not been addressed. |
| The Russian goes
too far away from the Kenai river. The cooper stays closer to the river
and I think it would be more scenic |
| It won't keep people
from going to the store who really want to. |
| Cooper Creek - grades
are too steep, it cuts into the mountains too much and it doesn't take
into account the Russian River traffic problem (at least a left turn lane).
Russian River - 1200' foot bridge over the river area seems a bit much. |
| Russian River: This
could work, but it does not completely solve the problem of rerouting
the traffic outside of Cooper Landing. Cooper Creek: Not favored because
traffic will still be routed through the town. Also, from MP 51.3, traffic
will still be routed along the Kenai River. I would prefer to see the
traffic moved away from the river, preferably on the north side. |
| Russian River Alt.
- Unacceptable high cost, uses existing alignment which is unsafe and
congested Cooper Creek Alt. - Unacceptable high cost, poor LOS due to
use of existing alignment |
| I believe going near
Juneau Falls is better. |
| By creating an alternative,
we allow Cooper Landing to remain as it is...a destination stop for recreation...not
a thorough fare for traffic and goods destined elsewhere...either the
Kenai peninsula, or Anchorage. Travel time and safety would increase on
a straighter larger road. |
| Too much impact on
natural resources; I prefer the greatest effort be expended on through-town
options |
| This area as I understand
wouldn't give as much room for growth in the future with a main highway
thru it as without. |
| Cooper creek seems
like it is not too bad, I don't really like the Russian river route. |
| Can use the road
that already is their. |
| PREFER IMPROVING
EXISTING HIGHWAY |
| Going through Cooper
Landing doesn't make sense when safer, cheaper alternatives are available.
Any route on the south side is going to have little sunshine, resulting
in more snow and ice. |
| I would rather see
a route that bypasses the town, moves traffic away from the Kenai River
and does not cross as may of the other rivers in the area. |
| I drive to anchorage
4 times a month, and although I would like to see the road improved, I
also take great pleasure in the scenery in this area. The road where it
is now is fairly close to the river offering a great view of what I love
about Alaska. I would like to see the road made safer while still maintaining
the scenic integrity. |
| Both routes cross
the Kenai River and onto the Cooper Landing side of the river. A route
that bypasses Cooper Landing and does not cross the river is more preferable
as it will allow those people headed for the other Kenai Peninsula towns
to not have to deal with the tourist and fishing traffic on the Cooper
Landing side of the river. |
| Cost to much |
| I think that most
of the road will be in shaded by the mountain during the winter and allow
ice to build up on the road. |
| It is not necessary
to put a new road through Cooper Landing. |
| Looks very feasible
an would provide traffic flow |
| Would still require
crossing the river |
| There definitely
needs to be an alternative to what there is now. I feel that the area
of highway in existence is dangerous. To be honest, in all of the trips
through Cooper Landing that I've made over the past 20 years the only
reason I've made any stops in the community is to use the restroom. There
are too many sharp curves and narrow areas. I think the new route needs
to maintain the beautiful views and incorporate an alternative to going
through the "town" itself. |
| Road should bypass
cooper landing an be straightened. |
| I am tired of straightening
highways and increasing speeds - this is a perfect place to keep the same
road alignment and have people slow down and enjoy the ride. |
| The Russian River
approach adds too much new road. A simple bypass to Cooper Landing is
sufficient. |
| The road needs to
be placed on the other side of the river. Traffic needs to be moved away
from town. |
| If it gives the politicos
(in their minds) more excuse to tax us or rob the Permanent Fund, it's
unacceptable. I believe it does, so I'm against it. |
| During the summer,
Russian River will benefit by better access using the southside alternative. |
| Do as little damage
to the area. |
| Both Southside Alternatives
are essentially acceptable because they will have |
| I am afraid it would
ruin the beauty of Russian River and its habitat |
| Both of these effect
the Kenai river more directly in an emergency spill event. It would also
create more traffic in the Russian River area |
| Unacceptable-increase
negative impacts neutral- no significant unacceptable impacts acceptable-
seems to balance positive and negative aspects |
| Russian River --
creates an additional corridor which will have significant, negative aesthetic
and environmental impacts. Cooper Creek -- a little less destructive but
most of the same problems as Russian River. |
| To much shade. Will
not solve the problem. The Juneau Creek alternative is the best solution. |
| Impacts on fish,
wildlife and opportunities for outdoor recreation. |
| I don't like the
Russian River Alternative because of the crossing on Russian River. The
lower part of the Russian River is already highly impacted by the hiking
trail and salmon fisherman. The Russian is a major spawning area for salmon
and I feel putting a bridge across any part of the river will only serve
to increase this impact. The Cooper Creek Alternative allows easy access
to Cooper Landing businesses without perpetuating the problem of vehicles
speeding through an area concentrated with businesses. My only concern
is the proximity of the highway to a residential area. Both alternatives
move freight traffic away from the south side of town. |
| Keeps a lot of the
road next to the river and with the increased speed, there will be increased
accidents. The widening of the road will cut drastically into my property
leaving very little and of course decreasing values. Traffic noises are
increased with the increase of traffic. |
| Impacts to wildlife,
trails and vegetation is unacceptable to me. |
| There is worse traffic
congestion at Russian River, Jims and Sportsman's Landings than there
is in Cooper Landing and bypassing just the town doesn't change the basic
problems with that section of the highway. |
| The Russian River
and the Kenai River are world-class fisheries. They are THE central natural
resources to the economy of the Kenai Peninsula. They are the reason I
live there. The breathtaking natural beauty of those rivers is just as
important to the fishing experience as the fish in them. Having a bridge
across the Russian River with traffic roaring across it would simply ruin
the experience of fishing that wild and beautiful river. This option is
completely unacceptable. |
| Both routes will
have impact on wildlife, specifically the brown bears in the area. The
Kenai area already has a depletion of brown bear, that may not recover,
and the lowest brown bear population in the state. |
| Cooper Creek has
only 3.6 miles of new road, seems to offer best alternative with the minimum
impact. Russian River alternative has too many miles and too much impact
to natural habitat (not to mention too costly). |
| Impacts on Cooper
Creek which may be developed for better recreational access when CEA's
hydro license is renewed. Also major cultural resource impacts in Russian
R. vicinity. |
| Russian River: Visual
impacts to area from bridge crossing Crosses Russian Lakes Trail Impacts
on Bears Impacts on water quality Highway noise in prime fishing area
easily accessible to front country users Cooper Creek- much less impactive
than Russian River STAYS AWAY FROM RES PASS & Kenai River |
| Impact on river ecology |
| Russian River Alternative
does not appear to provide an overall improvement over the Cooper Creek
alternative and would creator more land disturbance. |
| Southside Bypass
will involve too much construction in untouched land (moose and bear habitat)
south of the river. |
| Cooper Creek alternative
is by far the best. It impacts the smallest wild areas, does not destroy
the Resurrection trail and has minimum impact on fisheries and wildlife.
Those who have land in this area should be paid fair market value. This
really is the best alternative if the road is moved out of its present
location. |
| Russian river route,
disturbs too much of the prime salmon fishing areas with overhead by-pass
traffic. I feel protecting the Kenai/Russian rivers throughout the corridor
is of prime importance. the cooper creek route is not as bad since the
road would cut back down to the existing road without causing more disturbance.
Neither route takes into account that residential development will probably
eventually occur on borough land on the north side of the Kenai river,
which would require more road building there. If this does occur, it makes
much more sense to keep the river area as undisturbed as possible. |
| Cooper Creek is an
acceptable alternative because it is located in an area that has already
seen development such as powerlines and logging and does not cross any
high-use recreation trails. The "trails" that this alternative
crosses are seldom used by the public. Stetson Creek "trail"
is actually an unmaintained mining road, and the road up to Cooper Lake
Dam is a utility service road. This alternative does not cross Shackleford
Creek as stated in the summary. I feel that the environmental and recreational
impacts of this alternative are minimal. The Russian River alternative,
on the other hand is unacceptable due to the additional stream crossing
of the Russian River which is so vital to the economy of the area. Any
disruption of this very important salmon river is wholly unacceptable.
Also, the crossing of the Russian River trail which is the highest use
trail on the KenaI Peninsula is also unacceptable. |
| Scenic highway issues. |
| Of the nine, Cooper
Creek is the least acceptable as the impact on the Cooper Creek Canyon
would be great. No rout crossing Russian River is acceptable. |
| I don't think the
highway should be rerouted at all |
| To expensive |
| This route looks
pretty good, and most importantly it stays well away from Resurrection
Trail and Juneau Falls |
| The main issue I
have is for the need for a fast efficient highway through Cooper Landing.
Speeds do not have to be at the 65 mph level, slower speeds need not be
labeled as inefficient. Are you looking at miles per gallon? or just speed.
How about the quality of the experience for getting to Kenai. Does efficiency
mean that the more you see the more you get.? |
| Placement of the
highway through the Russian River archaeological site is unacceptable.
Cooper Creek is dark and it doesn't eliminate the problems of pedestrians
and busy traffic at Russian River |
| Cooper Creek is not
a popular hiking area. |
| It is unacceptable
to build roads into Roadless parts of the National Forest system. This
also puts salmon spawning grounds in jeopardy with construction etc run
off. |
| The Russian River
(RR) alternative wouldn't in effect, sacrifice the lower RR. Increased
access would result in increased traffic and impact to the fishery. Cooper
Creek does not improve the traffic situation enough to warrant the construction |
| CCA because of continued
impacts to the Kenai River. RRA because of additional impacts to the Russian
River. |
| High project costs
are a drawback but minimal new road construction a positive. |
| Impact on cultural
resources. Loss of habitat. |
| These do not go with
the flow. They do not seem efficient. |
| Russian - too many
impacts to fish, wildlife, and recreational uses Cooper Creek. |
| Gets people out of
the valley for the whole distance of the town. |
| These would be more
hazardous to the community. It would also impact both the cooper creek
and Russian river. |
| The Cooper Creek
Alternative provides bypass of most Cooper Landing business & residential
area. It also provides the bypass with less new bridges & roadway.
Construction and Maintenance costs are less. |
| Need to account for
trucking needs |
| Doesn't completely
do the job. |
| Protection of fish
and wildlife |
| My first preference
is the Cooper Ck alternative. Though I would accept the Russian River
alternative I believe there would be less impact and controversy over
the Cooper CK one. |
| The Cooper Creek
Alternative, although not the best alternative (Wall Variant is), does
possess a somewhat balanced approach (unlike the Juneau Creek "Bypass"
Alternative (JCA) to achieving, in acceptable proportionally, the requisite
level of improvement in highway safety and efficiency seeked by DOT with
an acceptable level of wilderness incursion and overall environmental
impact. Russian River Alternative is unacceptable given it's highly adverse
impact on one of Alaska's top 3 sport fisheries; huge adverse footprint,
like the one posed by the JCA; and construct within an charted avalanche
zone. |
| The Russian River
alternative not only puts the Kenai at major risk from all the construction,
new bridges, but the Russian as well. Expense aside, it makes no sense
to risk both major salmon rivers so thru traffic can get to Soldotna a
little faster. Why are we worried about thru traffic having to slow at
Cooper Landing when they have to slow a lot more thru Soldotna? it is
not worth risking. We who live there manage to get around Cooper Landing
all summer in spite of the traffic. If we can tolerate the occasional
delays, surely thru drivers, who use it sporadically, can spend an extra
few minutes. We are especially worried about the Russian River alternative,
but don't think either of the southern alternatives make sense. |
| Will be on the north
side hard to maintain during the winter and will impact many different
cultural sites. Will also continue to slow traffic during peak summer
flow because it will still flow through high fishing and recreational
areas. |
| I see no reason to
lay new asphalt when minor improvements to the current highway and enforced
speed limits would cure a majority of the problems |
| Cooper creek is probably
the least disrupting of the two choices |
| These alternatives
go too close to busy recreational areas and compromise some of the habitat. |
| Neither of the Southside
bypasses address the problem of getting the highway away from the river
and eliminate the Gwin's corner. |
| There should be not
impact on the Russian River campground |
| Too costly |
| All the Southside
alternatives impact scenery, ecology, and recreational facilities in the
extreme |
| Not enough study
has been placed on the Cooper Creek Alternative. DOT engineers at the
first Cooper Landing "listening post" meeting claimed this alternative
was too expensive. Cost is not an issue here, the DOT can get the money.
The issue here is which is the best alternative. Russian River alternative
is not acceptable. |
| 1. Both alternatives
are too expensive for what they accomplish. 2. Russian River Alternative
incorporates too many bridges over environmentally sensitive waterways,
impacting both the environment and aesthetic quality of the area. This
increases the risk of catastrophic spills to the Kenai and Russian Rivers.
3. Both alternatives cross existing trail systems, impacting aesthetic
quality (noise, visual). 4. Both alternatives have a greater impact on
private property owners than other alternatives. 5. The Russian River
Alternative places the Sanctuary Area at the confluence of the Russian
and Kenai Rivers between two road systems, increasing noise and reducing
visual and aesthetic quality of the area. |
| Because of the time
and amount of routes, I feel I would like to write on the whole subject.
I know when I was laying down on my bunk in the Romig cabin on Juneau
lake September of 1997 waiting for Ken Bethe and his Beaver floatplane
to pick my friend and I up , I actually heard the plane start up on the
Kenai river and knew he was on his way. Can you imagine what a highway
of this magnitude will do to the noise pollution. The resurrections trail
pass system is , by my accounts, one of the most beautiful public walks
, cross country skiing, biking,and for those that snowmachine areas in
Alaska . Adding this noise pollution would in my opinion destroy the trail
in many ways , not just for humans , but animals also. This is one of
the most important decisions and also one of the most difficult. If how
I see it,the highway bottlenecks through a area , why not use the natural
ways of the existing route as not to destroy so much habitat. I'm not
taking sides , but trying to let people on both to see the importance
of all the alternatives. Is it that important for people to travel at
such high rates of speed , in such sensitive areas. The highway has existed
in it's present bed and the most harm has come from the big trucks. Sue
the increased pressure has made it a safety issue, but look around folks
, safety issues are increasing with everything we do in today's world.
I believe no matter what comes out of this , someone's toes are going
to be stepped on. At this time I will conclude my remarks and hopefully
have more in the future to write on this subject. Sincerely Ben Romig |
| Too expensive, too
much impact on Cooper Landing, not enough improvement for vehicle and
pedestrian safety |
| I think the alternatives
that follow the existing road are preferable. The businesses along the
highway need the highway. The Russian River alternative completely bypasses
the community and the businesses. Likewise, the Cooper Creek alternative
bypasses the majority of the businesses. Cooper Creek is the preferred
of these two options, but is still not my favored solution. |
| Favor keeping at
least one side of river minimally developed. |
| Russian River: Far
too much impact to sensitive areas. Cooper Creek: Good that it is not
on the North side of the river. Bad that the bridge is costly and curves.
Suspect it will impact bears. Will it endanger streams? |
| Cost, disturb to
much ground, by passes the business in Cooper Landing to much. |
| None of the plans
move traffic away from Kenai lake or the river past Sportsman's, so this
negates any reference to "moving traffic - hazardous materials -
away from the river in any of the alternatives. The southside routes cross
creeks that drain into the river, and all the land crossed drains into
the river. The new roadway would drain all runoff into the river, so nothing
is gained, all is a loss for habitat. |
| Neither of these
alternatives bypasses Cooper Landing and results in crossings of the Kenai
River. |
| Both alternatives
preserve Resurrection Trail, although I have some concerns about possible
impacts to archeological sites with the Russian River alternative. |
| Because of strong
public opposition to Juneau bench area, the threat of losing the beautiful
falls and impacting recreation and wildlife corridors, I would prefer
the south route. |
|
|
| Are
there issues and/or opportunities that, if addressed, could make any of
the Southside Alternatives more acceptable? |
| No - there is no
room there between the mountains and private property. |
| I don't know if having
the highway cross the lake above where the bridge is now would make that
any safer. Going above private property is probably not doable because
of the steepness. Coming back on the western end somewhere between Gwin's
Lodge and Russian River would probably take care of Russian River Campground. |
| Provide for trail
access to Cooper Lake. |
| 39 respondents said
No. |
| Cost and soil stability |
| I see little which
could improve either of these alternatives, short of moving the mountain
range out of the way. The Russian River alternative does have one commendable
feature, however: it by-passes the heavy summer traffic which plagues
the Russian River Ferry area and could significantly increase safety for
those in that area. |
| I am concerned that
the Russian River alternative seems to travel thru the Kenai Refuge Wilderness
Area. If this is the case, I would find this alternative unacceptable. |
| No, need to stay
away from the Kenai River |
| Could more parking
access to the Russian river be made available to increase fishing opportunities. |
| Cooper Creek - take
Russian into account. Russian - ditch the bridge, just add left turn lane
to Cooper creek alternative, with routing changes similar to Russian added
on (from cooper to Russian) |
| I am not quite sure
how easy it is to build on steeper terrain, but looking at the contour
maps, and from my memory, the south side makes it tougher to construct
a road. |
| My primary concern
is for the new design to provide to produce the highest level of service
and therefore improve safety, reduce congestion and optimize throughput. |
| I do not know of
any at this time |
| The Russian River
alternative is slightly better but still crosses the river twice and is
not the shortest route and would mix Cooper Landing/Kenai River traffic
with through south bound traffic for a longer period. |
| I think that all
the south side alternates would not improve driving conditions during
the winter. |
| I like the fact that
you aren't having to climb elevations like the northern alternative. My
only concern is the area of the Russian River Falls. |
| If it's not too late,
you should look at the approach that was taken on I-70 between Vail and
Glennwood Springs in Colorado. They faced many of the same issues you
do, and came up with a beautiful architectural solution. |
| Seems like the Cooper
Creek version increases safety while minimizing impacts to new areas |
| For these and all
other alternatives, waysides that permit travelers to pull off the road
to view the beauty of the Kenai Lake/Kenai River area would allow sightseers
to enjoy the view and commuters to proceed unhindered. Waysides like those
on the Parks Highway, such as the McKinley view points, would serve the
Kenai River area well. Those provide a pullout area, without taking over
large amounts of land. The Kenai River offers spectacular views and can
support narrow, long pullout areas similar to the McKinley views. |
| Cooper Creek could
at least be considered as an option, though a poor one compared to the
ones on the North side of the road. The required grades are steep, avalanche
zones are a concern, and you're still routing it through Cooper Landing
- just on the South edge of town. I don't believe there are any good solutions
to these issues. |
| Need more control
over hazardous material hauling and better contingency plans to take care
of spill cleanup |
| Doesn't look like
it -- the further you go south from the river, the bigger the impacts
on these tribs (tributaries) |
| The Cooper Cr. alternative
would have least impact on the Kenai River and this valuable ecosystem.
It would not be good to have a road that crosses the Russian River. This
area is a national treasure, having a highway over it would destroy much
of its character. |
| Probably not. Just
following the existing powerline grid is not a "non-disturbing"
alternative. Although the land is already cleared, the active traffic
would, in my opinion, have much more of a negative impact. The southern
routes would cause awkward "in-town" intersections at bean creek
and snug harbor roads since the main flow of heavy commercial traffic
will still being using the route at those points. Slower tourist and fishing
traffic will still cause congestion turning on and off the road. Pedestrian
and bicycle traffic, which we hope to encourage in "downtown"
cooper landing would be in trouble at these junctions. |
| As I said before,
the Cooper Creek alternative is one of the better ones and should be seriously
considered. |
| By the land at the
mouth of Cooper Creek and move the road down closer to the existing road
bed. |
| Address the concerns
about the Russian River fish/wildlife. |
| See above for Cooper
Creek Crossing the Russian is a no win, period. |
| Access to trail from
this stretch of road |
| I believe there is
only one acceptable southside alternative. |
| Make a trailhead
for the Stetson Ck Trail. |
| Cooper Creek Alternative:
Treat this and all other "Bypass" type alternatives as true
bypasses as DOT originally presented the public. This approach serves
core transportation "efficiency and safety goals" rather than
the evolving (removal of "Bypass" from earlier names) approaches
that attempt to support candestine land development goals that integrate
newly added wilderness harming spur roads and associated development and
compromise core safety & efficiency goals. |
| I can't think of
anything that would make the Russian River alternative acceptable. |
| For me there is not
much you could do other than bridging Kenai Lake and paralleling the existing
power line corridor. |
| Again, more study
is needed for the Cooper Creek alternative. |
| Is it possible to
eliminate the curve in the Cooper Creek bridge? |
| 13 respondents
replied "no" to this question. |
|
|
