Friday, March 4, 2011

Public Meeting #2

Last night we held our second public meeting. At this meeting we summarized:
  • the history of the project,
  • how this current effort came about,
  • the agency stakeholders who are involved,
  • the first public meeting in this current effort (November 19, 2009),
  • the development of three conceptual trail options,
  • the Value Analysis Process (where a fourth option was developed), and
  • where things go from here.
The slide show from last night is available by clicking on this link: Public Meeting #2 Slide Show


The following document are available by clicking on them below:

       
          Posted by at

          4 comments:

          1. Mark LuttrellMarch 30, 2011 at 12:01 PM

            Establishing the HLMMT for the community of Seward is a great idea. The conservation advocacy group, Resurrection Bay Conservation Alliance based in Seward, fully supports option number 4 (a paved path through the woods north of the existing Exit Glacier road). Option 3 (same route but unpaved) also answers the needs of the community.

            The trail will appeal to dog mushers, walkers and hikers, skiers (classic and skate), snowshoers, snowmachiners, runners, roller bladers, skijorers, road and mountain bikers, hunters, rafters and kayakers and those who love to participate in community and school races. It will promote healthy recreation, reduce user conflicts, promote safety, provide an economic boost, provide a new adventure for visitors, reduce vehicle traffic and fuel use and carbon emissions, and link existing trails and paths.

            A great deal of support exists for the trail. In the early 00’s, the City, USFS and the KPB all passed resolutions in support of the proposal. Currently, hundreds of locals want to have a separated, nonmotorized, and safe path.

            Thanks to the National Park Service - Kenai Fjords NP for reinvigorating this idea.

            Mark Luttrell
            Resurrection Bay Conservation Alliance

            ReplyDelete
          2. AnonymousApril 5, 2011 at 10:09 PM

            I think the trail is a great idea. I would be hesitant to use a trail not visible to the road as a single runner.

            ReplyDelete
          3. AnonymousApril 6, 2011 at 11:46 AM

            I fully support the trail. I strongly support option 3 and 4. The joy of a non-motorized recreational path is to the peace of its environmental surroundings. I do not enjoy recreating next to vehicles. While I understand the risks of our outdoor recreation given our wild large mammal neighbors, I accept that risk as a trade-off for the beautiful natural habitat! I also prefer a non-paved path to paved. Its better cushion for running, more fun for biking, and less visually intrusive than pavement. Minimalize when possible!

            ReplyDelete
          4. AnonymousApril 8, 2011 at 9:47 PM

            I support options 1 and 4. I understand the concerns of any individual runner not being visible to the road. This is Alaska after all. Paved is great since I like to walk and road bicycle. I like option 1 since it is nearer to the road, but separate. But option 4 is nice since it will expose people to a more natural and refreshing setting. I would use either one, and just be glad to get off the road itself!

            ReplyDelete

          Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)