What additional information would you like the DOT&PF to consider at this time?

I do not think that a bypass of the current Kenai Lake and Cooper Landing area businesses will be a detriment. Many Alaskans already know these areas and do not stop there anyway. But if we things we know where they are. Newcomers will probably go through the business areas to look and see what's there as well as patronize those businesses. In a northerly route, I think it important to try and stay clear of area residents. Those people live there for the peace, quiet and ruralness and we should minimize our impact to their lifestyles.

This really took a long time. All check off answers would be preferable. I lost all the data I previously entered when going to another site. It is time to showcase DOT as thinking out of the box. Planning for straighter corridors at higher speeds should not be the "box". Straighter, faster only means accidents at higher speeds. Maybe DOT does not want to set a precedence with such thinking but in a river valley with this much natural resources, a national trail system, a stressed economy and a seasonal traffic concern, I think it is time to showcase some progressive thinking.

Date to start.

The initial thought was to put the road on the north side. It was a good idea then and is still the best idea now.

Do we really need an additional road going through Cooper Landing for a problem that only exists for a few months of the year? Why not improve the existing road? Aren't you going to have to do that anyway?

What is the preferred alternative of the residents of Cooper Landing and the users of the Russian River (the largest attraction in the area).

I think you need more of the touchy-feely meetings in Anchorage. The out-of-town landowners in Cooper Landing can't get down there on weeknights but we could attend meetings in Anchorage (and give you some more down-home vision).

A no build alternative.

I have utilized this roadway since before Statehood. With the great increase in traffic it has become one of the most dangerous roads in our state. The Kenai R. will receive much less impact from accidents such as the tanker truck last winter. I don't believe local business will be impacted, the old road will offer a much more relaxed scenic route.

I wasn't sure if the original questions were asking how important impact was on wildlife, rivers;etc were during construction or once it is complete. I am much more concerned about the long-term effects, as opposed to actual construction. In otherwords, ripping up trees and grass is okay during construction, with the desire that trees, grass, and the like would be used for general post-landscaping purposes.

It is most inconvenient to have to download PDF files to look at the alternatives. I dare say most folks won't bother, and some will not have the capacity to do so if they are using a public computer where it is not permitted. Redesign your website so the alternatives can be viewed with a click of the mouse and also provide a simple summary page with a map that is also easily visible.

Viewing and rest stops.

Make logical decisions not political ones.

More information on bewared highway mile 18 to 36 and mile 8 to 0.

Regarding Highway construction, remember that the primary focus should be one safe and efficient traffic flow. The road through Cooper Landing is neither, and we should abandon any notion going back that way. On a completely different note, I have this question? Why is it that Mile Posts for the Sterling Highway start in Seward (the Sterling Highway doesn't even GO to Seward!) instead of Homer? Every highway in Alaska that I know of has mileage measured from its southern-most terminus (roads like the Denali Hwy, excepted, of course, because it runs east-west) and Homer is WAY south of Seward. And Homer has the added feature of actually BEING on the Sterling. Wooohoo!

All the impacts of habitat, wildlife, and culture burial sites. Property owners in the area.

Getting the project constructed in a timely manner. Do not dwell too much on the public comment, since most of your alternatives are as a result of vocal minority or in some cases single entities and the "nimby" attitude. The mission of dot/highways should be clearly stated and I believe it is to enhance mobility, transportation, commerce and state security issues first.

Come pave my road.

You have an opportunity to do more than "move traffic" with this project. Maintaining the "country road" atmosphere while improving public safety should be your objective, not spending federal highway dollars so, "...you can put your car on cruise control and go all the way at 55..."

Upgrading the Glenn highway long lake area. King river to long lake.

Improve specifications for asphalt. Examples...The intersection of K-Beach & Sterling HWY was redone three years ago and is already full of potholes. K-Beach road paved last year already has pot holes showing....

This section of the road really need fixed. We have several near miss accidents involving trucks along the Kenai. Lets stop debating, and move ahead with one of the Northern routes, preferably one with a significant buffer to the Kenai River.

Sell off state owned beetle killed timber to help pay for the new road.

Develop more parking lots along the Russian and Kenai rivers for fishing. Include safer entrance onto the highway from the parking lots. Get people off of the shoulder of the road.

Why don't you use the existing road and just improve it. We are in AK, not California

See previous comments, but, keep the resurrection trail as unaffected as possible. Address traffic turn lanes needed at Sportsman's Point and Russian river, as well as parking along the road near Sportsmans Pt. - what a traffic hazard that is every year - route around there or provide for FREE parking. Thanks for the opportunity to comment this way.

While cost is always an an important issue, the safety of drivers in this area. It would be worth the extra money to save lives and injuries to the thousands of drivers that pass through here every day, especially during the summer. In addition to safety, the Kenai and Russian Rivers are some of the richest environments of salmon in the world, and we need to do what we can to protect this resource. I favor routes that take the traffic away from the river, since there is always a chance of fuel spills occurring or other negative affects from the traffic passing close by.

Place high on your criteria the long term safety and throughput of the chosen alternative. This will have the biggest impact on the Peninsula economy and the safe and timely travel of residents, tourist and commercial drivers. I travel this route twice a week, so I have an interest in seeing my higher preference alternatives developed into the final recommendation. Thanks for this opportunity to give my input. Making the public meetings is very difficult for me to accommodate.

Please revamp your criteria to consider the benefits of a slower portion of highway. I do not think that DOT has proven that we need this portion to be able to maintain a 60 MPH speedway.

More focus should be placed on "highway user's" and not so much on Cooper Landing residents.

Traffic accidents in the Cooper Landing area, and trucking industry feed back

Grade, and winter snow conditions

Most of the people using the highway are Alaskans living, working, delivering goods and supplies, on the southern Kenai Peninsula year round. They are not interested in taking a scenic tour, only in getting from point A to point B by the quickest, safest means possible. The road by Cooper Landing will still be open for the summer tourists and Cooper Landing residents. The highway should be just that, a means of moving traffic in the quickest most efficient way possible.

I would like to see a bridge cross the Kenai river at rabbit run to scout road.

The long term affects. We should not have to chance the route for the next 50 years and the design should allow for minor adjustments over time. The route should be as safe and scenic as can be designed.

Get the website working better. I had problems accessing the alternatives

By-pass Cooper landing, straighten the road.

Please see my comments in #13 regarding the approach taken along the Colorado River on I-70. I'm sure it cost more, but the impact even years later is remarkable. The highway was made a part of the canyon. If you have to have a road in a scenic area (and you do), you might as well make it aesthetically pleasing as well as functional. You won't please the most rabid developer or environmentalist, but the vast majority of us will be pleased.

Get with the program and build a new highway. The present road is a safety hazard.

Before selecting any of the bypass options, think hard about how to make the existing alignment work. Try to visualize existing corridor improvements that would add capacity, safety pedestrian amenities and access to businesses and trail heads that would not be a highspeed highway but a beautiful drive through town.

I am very concerned about the lack of lighting on the Kenai Bridge (Bridge Access Road). It is often very foggy there and I think a real disaster is waiting to happen there. Couldn't you put reflector light there at least????? The other concern is the deterioration of the road near the Beaver Dam on K-Beach Road and the lack of Moose warning signs on their known paths (such as between the Beaver Dam and the bridge)

Keep it simple (KISS Technique), care for the Kenai and tributaries, care about the impact on wildlife and the town.

I feel that when the highway is moved out of town it will make Cooper Landing a much better place to leisurely drive through. I think businesses will thrive like they already do. It has been proven all through the United States. The interstates by-pass the towns but the scenic routes are all there too.

More emphasis on acceptable design speeds.

Waysides to allow tourist traffic to enjoy the scenery and wildlife the Peninsula has to offer.

Really look at the impact on the river if another vehicle should have an accident and contaminate the water.

Please, please consider the impact of this project on the river. Currently, remedial work is again being done on "Gwinn's curve" after a truck accident there last winter. Your data showed many fewer accidents (reported incidents) than actually occur here. All it will take is one spill into the river to destroy the fishery wildlife habitat - not only for us in Cooper Landing, but for those down river. There is only one Kenai River, please help us protect it.

This is a tough decision as to where to place the road. I appreciate the opportunity to comment. In June of 1969 as a young firefighter I was working on the man caused Russian River fire when a helicopter coming in to pick up my crew crashed and a young Anchorage man was killed. Our crew was waiting for that chopper when it went in. I remember this Russian River/Kenai River area as such an incredible spot that could produce such a salmon run. The focus of this road effort must be to protect this valued river ecosystem.

I feel DOT&PF has really tried to present some options for the Peninsula residents. I wish the option I like didn't have higher continued maintenance costs connected with it. I can't think of any other information at this time that I would need. Thank you

I feel strongly that the Resurrection Trail needs to be preserved. I use this trail system two or three times a year in all seasons. I recommend that people favoring road building on the North Side of the river (Juneau Falls routes) spend time up in this area. I think it would change a lot of opinions to see and experience this area.

Forest Service logs show the thousands of people who have used the Juneau Creek Trail over the years. Their interests should be represented. It's the most popular cabin-trail system we have in Alaska.

It would be better to spend a little more on this project which will create a better and safer driving environment for a popular road in Alaska while minimizing the impact on the environment. What is of special concern to me is the crossing on streams, which although the construction will try to minimize the impact on the streams, over time problems may develop as the road deteriorates and the population grows. If cultural resources are disturbed money needs to be allocated to further research and record the cultural resources in this project.

I think everyone is doing a good job at this point. The collection of data has been good. There have been a few places where information seemed to simmer to the surface a little too slow, but so she goes. I suppose the real work starts here soon: making a decision with all this wonderful data, and a very, very difficult one without one true correct answer It's at this point, that careless, or narrow minded/ heavy handed statements could start making individuals or agencies look foolish, or simply rather stupid. Not that that's ever stopped poor planning from marching into battle without it's pants on. I trust though, that that will not be the case here, and it is with great respect that I offer my prayers to this project, and a cold beer for any and all of you.

Truckers opinions. Heavy truckers!

There was a good plan in 1995 and the present process has accomplished little more than creating 8 more alternatives. This process has gone on so long that the local residents are fed up with the process and do not want to attend and find that the meetings are heavily attended by environmentalists and have no knowledge or care about the safety of our community.

I believe the Cooper Creek alternative meets the needs of most of the residents of the lower Kenai Peninsula - getting through the Cooper Landing area without dealing with local traffic. It is also the least expensive both for initial construction and maintenance. I would recommend the final decision be for the Cooper Creek route.

Truly use the Narrowing Document and Process to sharpen/focus analysis resources on all those alternatives that possess DOT 4 (f) legal compliance and no ulterior purposes that veil true evaluative perspectives.

Remember the goal is for safe transportation. It seems with the many special interest groups involved expressing their and the groups goals. That the original goal of a safe transportation corridor through the area has become lost in protection the interest of a few. Verus the good of all transportation users.

I firmly believe that the north alternative is a "done deal" because of past preferences to the northern route as well as the DOT/PF Commissioner favoring this route. Thus, I have a very difficult time in reconciling that fact that "public hearings" are being held when the decision has already been made. The public process is simply a waste of the "taxpayer dollar". I have "played" the public hearing game and I know how it works. DOT/PF and the State of Alaska needs to immediately get with the three or four home owners who will be affected by this route and make whatever arrangements are necessary. I do not want to get a visit some Monday morning by a staff clerk saying that I have to be out of my home by Friday because eminent domain is being exercised.

Putting in a rail spur to carry freight and passengers and cars to lower peninsula cities...

Consider the needs of Alaskan residents over the interests of conservation groups based outside.

Listen to the citizens, they are the ones who have to live with your decision long after you have built it and left

Providing the public with more information on what state and federal biologists, the EPA, and others are saying about these alternatives. Too much emphasis is placed on what the engineers think will work without equal input from biologists, state, federal land managers. ALL ALTERNATIVES MUST INCLUDE A REASONABLE DESIGN SPEED!

We took over four hours to review computer generated documents and other materials provided to us through the Stakeholders Sounding Board Meeting to complete this survey.

More input from the people that are interested in the habitat then their pocketbooks

More detail on access to Cooper Landing and the Russian River Ferry (boat launch).

You asked about importance of impact on resurrection trail but not about importance of impact on Russian river trail

The route is the only access to the Central & south Kenai Peninsula, accordingly traffic should be expedited thru Cooper Landing. Anyone wanting to stop still can, and Cooper Landing can have a town corridor, without being just a thru traffic zone.

I'm not sure what purpose this survey provided other than letting you know where stakeholders stand at this time.

< To Survey Results Charts | Route Alternatives Info | Other Alternatives Comments | HOME