Legislature(1999 - 2000)
05/11/1999 01:40 PM Senate TRA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
May 11, 1999
1:40 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Jerry Ward, Chairman
Senator Mike Miller
Senator Rick Halford
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Drue Pearce, Vice Chair
Senator Georgianna Lincoln
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 131 am S
"An Act relating to public rights-of-way and easements for surface
transportation across the Anchorage Coastal Wildlife Refuge."
MOVED HB 131 FROM COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS SENATE ACTION
HB 131 - See Transportation Committee minutes dated 5/6/99.
WITNESS REGISTER
Mr. Jeff Logan, Aide
Representative Joe Green
State Capitol Bldg.
Juneau, AK 99811
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on HB 131.
Mr. Paul Denkewalter, President
Nordic Ski Club
203 W 15th Ave. #207
Anchorage, AK 99501
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 131.
Mr. Doug Perkins
Bayshore Klatt Community Council
2130 Shore Dr.
Anchorage, AK 99515
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 131.
Mr. Jim Burkholder
7903 Jodhpur St.
Anchorage, AK 99502
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 131.
Mr. Mike Halko, President
Anchorage Running Club
1800 E 24th Ave.
Anchorage, AK 99502
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 131.
Mr. Jon Kumin
Arctic Bike Club
7921 Charlotte Place
Anchorage, AK 99502
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 131.
Ms. Joan Nockels
1800 E 24th Ave.
Anchorage, AK 99508
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 131.
Mr. Brian Hickey
2449 Glenwood St
Anchorage, AK 99508
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 131.
Mr. Randy Kanady
2350 Copperwood
Anchorage, AK 99518
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 131.
Ms. Mary Whitmore
940 Botanical Heights Circle
Anchorage, AK 99515
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 131.
Ms. Kimberly Olmstead
3852 Welseyan Dr.
Anchorage, AK 99508
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 131.
Ms. Peggy Cobey
3023 Knik
Anchorage, AK 99517
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 131.
Ms. Marcie Errico
1184 Oceanview Dr.
Anchorage, AK 99515
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 131.
Ms. Cindy Flanagan
P.O. Box 112244
Anchorage, AK 99511
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 131.
Mr. Phil Wright
205 E. Diamond Blvd #533
Anchorage, AK 99515
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 131.
Mr. Art Weiner
16641 Virgo Ave.
Anchorage, AK 99516
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 131.
Ms. Nancy Pease
19300 Villages Scenic Park
Anchorage, AK 99516
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 131.
Mr. Dave Carter
1920 Shore Dr.
Anchorage, AK 99501
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 131.
Mr. Mike Szymanski
1823 W 15th Ave.
Anchorage, AK 99501
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 131.
Ms. Deanna Essert
Sand Lake Community Council
6262 W Dimond Blvd.
Anchorage, AK 99502
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 131.
Mr. Peter Lekisch
1403 P Street
Anchorage, AK 99501
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 131.
Mr. Smiley Shields
Anchorage, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 131.
Mr. Geron Bruce
Department of Fish and Game
P.O. Box 25526
Juneau, AK 99802-5526
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on HB 131.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 99-14 , SIDE A
HB 131-ANCHORAGE COASTAL WILDLIFE REFUGE
CHAIRMAN WARD called the Senate Transportation Committee meeting to
order at 1:40 P.M. and announced HB 131 to be up for consideration.
MR. JEFF LOGAN, Aide to Representative Joe Green, sponsor of HB
131, said he opposes the amendment proposed by Senator Lincoln.
Any surface transportation right-of-way or easement would
compromise the integrity and habitat values of the Refuge.
Representative Green feels the Legislature should be involved any
time there is going to be a trail going through the Refuge.
MR. PAUL DENKEWALTER, Nordic Ski Club, said there are over 60,000
recreational skiers in Anchorage. A route that does not follow the
coast cannot be a coastal trail. A bike path that runs through
streets and city subdivisions would be useless to skiers. HB 131
short-circuits the public process that is now in progress. The
Department of Fish and Game and Department of Natural Resources are
already involved in this process. The Legislature need not be.
MR. DOUG PERKINS, Bayshore Clatt Community Council, supported HB
131 without amendments. It will not interfere with the route study
that is currently being conducted by the Department of
Transportation to determine the best route for extension of the
Tony Knowles Coastal Trail. If the route that is eventually
proposed is not in a State refuge, HB 131 will have no affect
whatsoever on the trail project. If the route is eventually
located in the State Refuge, HB 131 does not prohibit trails in the
Refuge, but changes the identity of the entity who will approve or
disapprove that trail. If the Refuge trail makes the most sense,
the Legislature is free to issue a surface transportation right-of-
way. HB 131 does not prevent that.
MR. PERKINS pointed out that HB 131 is not just a local issue as it
concerns State lands and resources. A State agency must still be
persuaded to issue the permit. HB 131 merely transfers that
decision to the Legislature. It does not prevent expansion of the
New Seward Highway or the Railroad.
Number 200
MR. JIM BURKHOLDER, Anchorage, said he opposed the State's
interference in the on-going process that is taking place there.
HB 131 would duplicate work that is already being done and is a
"misguided effort."
MR. MIKE HALKO, Anchorage Running Club, supported HB 131.
MR. JON KUMIN, Arctic Bike Club, said that people are appalled that
with the issue of subsistence unresolved the Legislature is
sticking their nose into what is perceived as a local issue.
People feel that the process that has been begun by the
municipality should be allowed to run its course without the
legislature's direct involvement. He said this trail is not along
a continuous route; it's a sidewalk. When there are crossings
every few feet it is dangerous to bikers.
He also believed that this project would be expensive, but is 90%
funded by federal funds. He strongly urged the Committee to let
this bill sit and let the process run its course.
Number 311
MS. JOAN NOCKELS, Municipal Trail User, thanked him for opening up
the hearing to the public. She is the representative of the
Anchorage Running Club, the Arctic Bicyclers Club, and the Nordic
Skiing Association on the Municipal Advisory Group formed to
address the coastal trail extension. She is basically speaking for
7,000 people. These organizations oppose HB 131. She explained
that all that is missing to continue the 74 mile Coastal Trail is
this 12.5 link. HB 131 is unnecessary as the alleged purpose of
the bill is to protect a fragile ecosystem and to involve the State
in the decision. They are trying to protect this fragile ecosystem
from the people who are most concerned about it - the trail users.
This trail will not be built in the Coastal Wildlife Refuge unless
ADF&G approves it. They are the professionals and she would rather
work with them than a legislative body.
When the Legislature approved the management plan, it gave the
decision on trail issues to the people of Anchorage and there is no
reason to take it away. She suggested leaving the bill as it is
and not move it out of Committee.
MR. BRIAN HICKEY, mid-town resident of Anchorage, supported the
community process that is in place to select a route. He supported
routing the trail along the coast, but raising the issue to a
legislative level would mean the death of the trail. He accused
that this is a piece of special interest legislation that's been
designed to support 70-100 homeowners who live on the bluff.
Number 389
MR. RANDY KANADY, Anchorage Nordic Ski Club member, opposed HB 131.
One of the city's best assets is the Tony Knowles Coastal Trail.
He felt that completing the trail would serve a majority of the
people in Anchorage for wildlife viewing, running, skiing, cycling
and summer and winter tourism. HB 131 would benefit a very small
number of privileged people.
MS. MARY WHITMORE supported HB 131. She said the Legislature
created the Alaska Coastal Wildlife Refuge that is managed by the
ADF&G. The municipality wants to build a trail that may go through
the Refuge with federal highway dollars and fund the balance with
State dollars. This is not just a local issue. She said the
process is not working, because there is a bias towards putting a
trail in this State Refuge which will alter existing habitat and
change the customary and traditional uses of the State's rifle
range. The bias starts with the name of the project - South
Coastal Trail Extension. The expectation is that the trail will go
along the coast and through the refuge.
MS. WHITMORE wanted the amendment for the bike trail removed.
MS. KIMBERLY OLMSTED, Anchorage runner, supported the bike trail
and keeping people involved in the process. She has a trail go
right by her house and she has never had a negative feeling about
the people using it. She is glad to see them, because she knows
they would fight tooth and nail to keep the habitat the way it is.
She opposed HB 131.
Number 476
MS. PEGGY COBEY, Anchorage resident and frequent Coastal Trail
user, opposed HB 131. She is also a member of the Municipality
Advisory Group for the South Extension of the Coastal Trail. She
clarified that the South Extension is a proposal. The Advisory
Group assesses the proposals. She urged them to respect the very
lengthy and public process that is going on now to consider
different options. She feels that it is a local issue. The rifle
range issue is being addressed in the current plan as well as the
financial concerns, since most of the funding is coming from the
federal government.
MS. MARCIE ERRICO opposed HB 131. She said it is not
representative of the City's view as a whole which is to put the
Coastal Trail on the Coast. People will continue to use the
coastal areas despite the efforts of the people who live there and
think they own their private view. We need an established trail
that meets the desires of the community and protects our treasured
environment.
MS. CINDY FLANAGAN opposed HB 131, because she is appalled that
some rich people think that money talks. One issue that has not
been discussed yet is the issue of the safety of the people who use
these trails. When she rides her bike, she has to ride on the
highway because there aren't any bike trails that are continuous.
There is a need for more trails as many of the sections are very
crowded. People who are athletes in Anchorage want the trail.
Number 538
MR. PHIL WRIGHT, newcomer who lives on the hill, said he enjoys the
pristine areas in the State. He didn't think a bike path would
have any affect on the houses on top of the hill. He thought it
would be invisible. He is concerned about the wildlife that lives
in the refuge and thought the State has the opportunity to protect
that wildlife in that Refuge. He was resentful of the people who
want to spend money just because it's federal money. He supported
HB 131 without amendments.
MR. ART WEINER, South Anchorage biologist, said he worked on
projects that moved people and built structures in environmentally
sensitive areas with a minimum of impact on the environment. He
opposed HB 131. He thought this issue should center on allowing
the biologists and engineers to do their work and develop a plan
and proposal that should be reviewed by the public. It should not
be politicized by the folks in Juneau. DNR, ADF&G, the biologists
and scientists should be left to develop alternatives for the
extension of the South Coastal Trail and proper analysis should be
done to ensure that they don't go through sensitive portions of the
Coastal Wildlife Refuge. Where they do have to cross the Refuge,
proper engineering techniques are used to minimize impacts to
wildlife and habitat. He urged them to focus on objective science
and engineering.
MS. NANCY PEASE, Anchorage resident, urged them to opposed HB 131.
Legislative involvement in the Coastal Trail process is unnecessary
an intrusive. There is a highly involved public process with
hundreds of participants representing all interests. The Anchorage
Assembly is going to vote its approval on the chosen route. The
Legislature cannot possibly learn more than the local participants
and local leaders. The value of the Refuge is its access for the
urban population.
TAPE 99-14, SIDE B
Number 590
MS. PEASE noted the access map saying the first three points didn't
have visual access, at the rifle range only marksmen get into the
Refuge, at points 5,6,and 7 there is little parking and no way down
to the Refuge unless you can scramble down a dirt embankment.
MS. PEASE said she is a member of the Board of the community
council that is along the south 3 -4 miles of the route and they
have the official position of waiting until all the alternatives
are analyzed before they vote on their choice. Finally, she urged
them to look at the extreme hazards that trail users have to face
dodging 60 mile an hour traffic on the New Seward Highway or go in
the traffic lane of the Old Seward Highway because the white line
is literally crumbling in places from severe frost heave. The need
is great for a good safe trail and coastal access.
MR. DAVE CARTER supported HB 131 without Senator Lincoln's
amendment. This is a State Wildlife Refuge and a public resource
for all Alaskans, not just the people in Anchorage. He didn't
think there was enough discussion about whether there is public
interest in having an undeveloped wildlife refuge in Anchorage,
although he thought there was. South Anchorage is becoming more
and more developed and opportunities for building trails above the
bluff in Anchorage are going to be passed by.
He urged them to move the bill out of Committee.
MS. LIZ JOHNSON, 20-year resident of Anchorage, witnessed trail use
firsthand. She supported the Compass Article by Larry Howell
entitled Legislative Footprint Not Needed in the Coastal Refuge.
Briefly, it says the sponsors of HB 131 appear to be interfering
with and circumventing an established local planning process for
the benefit of a few constituents living on the bluff above the
Refuge. The best way to protect the "fragile public habitat" is to
provide access to and education about coastal refuge lands.
She agreed this is a local issue, not a legislative issue. The
local planning process is providing ample input; there are at least
two State agencies ADF&G and DNR who will have extensive scientific
and factual information to present. The Legislature could monitor
that process independently. She said many people were opposed to
extension of the trail along the bluff because it was very
expensive and because of the public access issues, but many are now
supporters of that trail. She opposed HB 131.
Number 507
MR. MIKE SZYMANSKI said the legislation before them turns around a
significant policy that was made by the Legislature and granted to
the public. He was opposed to the idea that the Legislature is
going to take the power back from the public that was granted in
the original legislation. He thought that was contrary to public
policy making. He thought the bill should also have a Resources
Committee referral since it concerned resources and maybe they
should consider whether they want to take back public powers for
legislative approval.
Number 469
DEANNA ESSERT, Sand Lake Community Council, supported HB 131. They
understand the hazards of building a trail on the unstable marsh
and bluff. She didn't agree that the public wouldn't support
trails through their neighborhoods. Sand Lake Community Council
supports linking existing trails through the neighborhoods to
provide refuge and access to their schools, recreation sites, and
community facilities. They are in agreement with ADF&G position to
build a trail on top of the bluff that connects existing trails.
She urged the Committee to reinstate the original language in the
bill of surface transportation.
MS. ESSERT urged the Committee to remove the amended language and
move the bill.
Number 433
MR. PETER LEKISCH, Anchorage resident since 1967, has been active
in the trails out of Kincaid Park and opposed HB 131. There is a
process in Anchorage that makes it unnecessary for review at the
legislative level.
MR. SMILEY SHIELDS said he has visited the Coastal Wildlife Refuge
since 1955; he has a Doctorate in biology with expertise in animal
behavior and ecology. He lives close to the Refuge and has spent
at least 1,000 hours in the Refuge and has taken hundreds of
interested people into it on ecology field trips. He absolutely
wanted to see the trail extended to Kincaid Park through Potter
Marsh saying he categorically opposes routing it through any part
of the Refuge. He supported HB 131 as it protects the Refuge which
is a critical resting, feeding, and nesting habitat for thousands
of birds. The plants that live there can only exist under certain
narrow ranges of environmental conditions. There is no way to
build a trail in it without changing the drainage, etc. to the
extent that it would destroy the salt marsh habitat. Further,
disturbance by trail users would disrupt bird reproduction. About
10 days ago ADF&G surveyed the refuge and reported 10,000 Canada
geese, 1,500 snow geese, and more than 50 sand hill cranes. He
thought the Alaska natives would consume some of these animals as
part of their subsistence harvest. Helping to assure the
continuing food supply should be one of the priorities of the
Legislature and should take priority over self indulgences like the
bicycle trail. He didn't think the ancestral nesting and migratory
routes of dozens of species of birds is a local issue.
MR. SHIELDS said that secondly, well established data show that the
average casual cyclist travels at about 10mph. Only elite, strong
cyclists can ride in the strong winds that occur very frequently on
the Alaska Coastal Wildlife Refuge. Wind data collected over a
year needs to be reduced and he is convinced the reason it hasn't
is because it would be so damming as to proclaim the
impracticability of the refuge route.
Number 374
MR. GERON BRUCE, ADF&G, said this is a Refuge that ADF&G has a
major role in managing. The Department has been very involved in
the process so far which has just begun. They are not opposed to
the extension of the trail and no actual alignment has been laid
out. They have signaled that there are significant concerns that
would have to be addressed with the trail that went through the
Refuge - like safety around the rifle range and impairment of use
of the range by shooters. They would also look out for the habitat
and for the animals that are using that habitat. Until the
alignment is actually proposed, they haven't prepared any detailed
analysis of what any impacts would be. They support the process
that is going on and haven't concluded that the concerns cannot be
addressed.
SENATOR HALFORD moved and asked for unanimous consent to rescind
their action in adopting the amendment at the last meeting that
changed "surface transportation" to "bike path or trail." There
were no objections and it was so ordered.
SENATOR HALFORD said with the original amendment before the
Committee that he objected to the amendment.
CHAIRMAN WARD called for the roll. Senators Miller, Halford, and
Ward voted no on the amendment and the motion failed.
SENATOR HALFORD moved to pass the original House version of HB 131
with individual recommendations. There were no objections and it
was so ordered.
CHAIRMAN WARD adjourned the meeting at 2:50 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|