Legislature(2001 - 2002)
03/05/2002 01:15 PM House TRA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE TRANSPORTATION STANDING COMMITTEE
March 5, 2002
1:15 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Vic Kohring, Chair
Representative Scott Ogan
Representative Drew Scalzi
Representative Mary Kapsner
Representative Albert Kookesh
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Beverly Masek, Vice Chair
Representative Peggy Wilson
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 473
"An Act relating to transportation."
- HEARD AND HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 502
"An Act relating to the designation of and funding for rustic
roads and highways; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 473
SHORT TITLE:STATE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S)GREEN
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
02/19/02 2315 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
02/19/02 2315 (H) TRA, FIN
02/19/02 2315 (H) REFERRED TO TRANSPORTATION
03/05/02 (H) TRA AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 17
BILL: HB 502
SHORT TITLE:RUSTIC ROADS AND HIGHWAYS
SPONSOR(S): TRANSPORTATION
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
02/27/02 2408 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
02/27/02 2408 (H) TRA, FIN
02/27/02 2408 (H) REFERRED TO TRANSPORTATION
03/05/02 (H) TRA AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 17
WITNESS REGISTER
LAURA ACHEE, Staff
to Representative Joe Green
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 403
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 473 on behalf of
Representative Green, sponsor.
GEOFFREY PARKER, Attorney
7931 Huckleberry Circle
Anchorage, Alaska 99502
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 473 on behalf of
his unnamed clients.
DEANNA ESSERT
6262 West Dimond
Anchorage, Alaska 99502
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 473.
RON CRENSHAW, Member
Citizen's Advisory Board
Trails and Recreational Access for Alaska (TRAAK)
428 West 12th
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 473 and HB 507.
MIKE DOWNING, Director/Chief Engineer
Division of Statewide Design & Engineering Services
Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF)
3132 Channel Drive
Juneau, Alaska 99801-7898
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 473, saying it wouldn't
make DOT&PF or its process more efficient.
MIKE KRIEBER, Staff
to Representative Vic Kohring
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: As committee aide, answered question on HB
473; presented HB 502 on behalf of the House Transportation
Standing Committee, sponsor, and answered questions.
REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 403
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as sponsor of HB 473.
ARTHUR (MARTY) QUAAS, President
South Knik River Community Council
(No address provided)
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 502, saying he would like
to see the Old Glenn Highway paved and the Denali Highway and
Hatcher Pass Road unpaved.
LARRY DeVILBISS, School Board Member
Matanuska-Susitna Borough
HC04 Box 9302
Palmer, Alaska 99645
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 502 and
characterized the condition of the Old Glenn Highway as unsafe.
JOHN SHANDELMEIER
Meier's Lake Road House
HC 72 Box 7193
Paxson, Alaska 99737
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 502.
PAUL BOOS
HC 60 Box 336E
Copper Center, Alaska 99573
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 502, saying he did not
want to see the Denali Highway paved; expressed some concerns
with definitions in the bill.
RUTH McHENRY
HC 60 Box 336E
Copper Center, Alaska 99573
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 502; supported keeping the
bill simple.
PATRICK FITZGERALD
P.O. Box 10114
Fairbanks, Alaska 99710
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 502, saying the Denali
Highway should not be paved.
ROBIN DALE FORD
P.O. Box 10114
Fairbanks, Alaska 99710
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 502, but
questioned the development of new rustic roads, especially for
mineral development.
CHUCK KAUCIC
HC01 Box 6301
Palmer, Alaska 99645
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 502 because of the
funding formula.
MYRON WRIGHT
13720 Karen Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99515
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 502, saying that as a
landscape photographer he is economically dependent on the
Denali Highway's remaining in its present state.
MARY BETHE WRIGHT
13720 Karen Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99515
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 502, expressing her wish to
see rustic roads remain as they are.
DENNIS WESTON
P.O. Box 3019
Paxson, Alaska 99737
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 502, saying the Denali
Highway should remain as it is.
JOHN BRANT
P.O. Box 3021
Paxson, Alaska 99737
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 502, saying the
Denali Highway should remain in its present state.
WARREN OLSON
5961 Orth Circle
Anchorage, Alaska 99507
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 502, saying the Denali
Highway should be left as it is and the money for paving it
should be used on other projects.
THOMAS B. BRIGHAM, Director
Division of Statewide Planning
Department of Transportation & Public Facilities
3132 Channel Drive
Juneau, Alaska 99801-7898
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 502, saying it could be made
more simple and direct; reported that the Denali Highway project
isn't being pursued aggressively and is on the "back burner."
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 02-4, SIDE A
Number 001
CHAIR VIC KOHRING called the House Transportation Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:15 p.m. Members present at the
call to order were Representatives Scalzi, Kapsner, Kookesh, and
Kohring. Representative Ogan arrived as the meeting was in
progress.
HB 473-STATE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
[Contains discussion relating to HB 502]
CHAIR KOHRING announced the first matter before the committee,
HOUSE BILL NO. 473, "An Act relating to transportation."
Number 025
LAURA ACHEE, Staff to Representative Joe Green, Alaska State
Legislature, presented HB 473 on behalf of Representative Green,
sponsor. She explained that the legislation was drafted as a
result of an Anchorage constituent's noticing a dramatic
increase of Department of Transportation & Public Facilities
(DOT&PF) projects in the planning stage. This bill would allow
the legislature to have a chance to reevaluate projects if they
appear to be experiencing significant cost increases, and
perhaps to determine whether those projects should continue to
be approved.
Number 053
GEOFFREY PARKER, Attorney, testified via teleconference. He
told the committee the bill aims to do two things: promote
efficient transportation-planning expenditures by reducing waste
on inefficient projects, and enhance the legislature's and
public's ability to examine costs and benefits of new projects.
He said AS 44.42.050 requires the Department of Transportation &
Public Facilities (DOT&PF) to prepare an annual state
transportation plan. The missing ingredient is a cost-benefit
analysis of new transportation projects. He said the lack of a
cost-benefit analysis deprives the legislature of the ability to
compare the cost-effectiveness of a project and prevent waste.
It diminishes the legislature's ability to fund effective
projects and proper maintenance.
MR. PARKER offered that HB 473 would improve the situation by
compelling an updated cost-benefit analysis whenever preliminary
engineering and design costs rise dramatically. He called for
requiring an updated cost-benefit analysis whenever a
significant amount of time has elapsed without construction
since the funds were first allocated to the project. He
reasoned that a significant passage of time without construction
might indicate other projects are more deserving. Mr. Parker
gave several examples of projects that he felt had skyrocketing
costs. He said [DOT&PF] proposes nearly a billion dollars of
expenditures that it admits are not cost-effective. He referred
to several documents containing examples, which he'd submitted
to the committee in support of his testimony.
CHAIR KOHRING said he was surprised to see there are so many
projects from which nothing tangible results.
Number 209
REPRESENTATIVE SCALZI asked Mr. Parker if he was totally opposed
to some of the pioneer roads that would not have a positive
cost-benefit ratio aside from the ones [Mr. Parker] had listed.
He asked whether he had a "blanket no" approach, or if he was
open-minded.
MR. PARKER said he was open-minded. Projects should be looked
at on a project-by-project basis. He said he was focusing on
the major projects that do not show benefits, not pioneer roads.
Number 226
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH asked Mr. Parker whom he was
representing.
MR. PARKER said he was an attorney representing clients active
in transportation issues in both Southcentral and Southwestern
Alaska. His clients would prefer to remain anonymous.
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH said the trend of Mr. Parker's testimony
was that he was advancing the bill in the name of the public
good. Representative Kookesh expressed his thought that Mr.
Parker was being paid to lobby an interest. He raised the issue
of Mr. Parker's personal agenda.
MR. PARKER said he had no further thoughts on the matter.
Number 251
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH told the committee that since Mr. Parker
would not divulge his clients, he would view Mr. Parker as
having a conflict of interest in the matter.
CHAIR KOHRING told the committee he had no knowledge of Mr.
Parker either.
Number 262
DEANNA ESSERT testified via teleconference. She told the
committee that many projects experience cost overruns, and those
costs can exceed the intended benefits of the projects. She
expressed her thought that a cost-benefit analysis in the early
engineering and design phases would save the state millions of
dollars of federal money. She gave many examples of how
transportation money is misspent on grandiose trails. Ms.
Essert said the [Statewide Transportation Improvement Plan]
(STIP) didn't use a cost-benefit analysis in its ranking. She
said the Ship Creek Trail is another example of misspent funds.
She stated that Mr. Parker's proposal, to require an updated
cost-benefit analysis if construction has not occurred within
three years of application, will help contain costs and steer
funding toward more deserving projects.
CHAIR KOHRING asked Ms. Essert if she thought the bill would
slow down the process of bringing roads to construction.
MS. ESSERT said she didn't think the bill would slow the
process; it would speed the process, if anything.
Number 346
TIM BRIDGMAN, Construction Consultant, testified via
teleconference. He gave his support to HB 473. He expressed
concern about the tendency for certain projects to experience
major cost overruns. He stated that HB 473 would curb these
"runaway" projects. A project whose costs have exceeded its
estimates by more than 50 percent indicates a gross
miscalculation in need of review. Mr. Bridgman expanded on
cost-benefit analysis. He drew a parallel between the Iliamna-
Nondalton Road project and the Anchorage Coastal Trail. He
asked the committee to answer the question, "At what point do we
say enough is enough?"
Number 402
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH said it sounded as if Mr. Bridgman was
averse to the "coastal zone program." He asked Mr. Bridgman if
he had attended any Anchorage Metropolitan Area Transportation
Study (AMATS) meetings.
MR. BRIDGMAN said he had been to most of the public hearings
where there was discussion on the Anchorage Coastal Trail.
Number 417
MR. PARKER announced that he represented interests involved in
both the Anchorage Coastal Trail and the Iliamna-Nondalton
projects.
Number 445
RON CRENSHAW, Member, Citizen's Advisory Board, Trails and
Recreational Access for Alaska (TRAAK), testified before the
committee. He said he had been following the [Anchorage]
Coastal Trail issue closely and recognized most of the
testifiers in favor of HB 473 as strong opponents of the trail.
He told the committee that most of the delays in the project
have been a result of the machinations of a small and well-
organized group who wouldn't like to see the trail completed.
Number 465
MIKE DOWNING, Director/Chief Engineer, Division of Statewide
Design & Engineering Services, Department of Transportation &
Public Facilities (DOT&PF), testified before the committee. He
first asked if the testimony was on a [proposed] committee
substitute (CS) or the original version.
Number 472
MIKE KRIEBER, Staff to Representative Vic Kohring, Alaska State
Legislature, speaking as the committee aide, clarified that Mr.
Parker's testimony had been on the original bill.
MR. DOWNING said as chief engineer at [DOT&PF] he spends a great
deal of time making the department efficient. He offered his
belief that HB 473 would not make DOT&PF or its process more
efficient. He said he hadn't seen an instance in his tenure as
chief engineer when someone said, "The solution to my concern is
the elimination of a step." The solution is always to add a
step, and this means it takes a long time to get through a
process for all of the steps. Adding more steps to the process
will delay work, however. Mr. Downing pointed out that in the
logic of the bill, a cost increase of more than 50 percent will
arrest development and execution of the project until it has
been submitted to the legislature on an annual cycle. This
could result in up to a year's delay.
Number 500
MR. DOWNING took issue with the language of the bill and how it
groups preconstruction and planning together. He told the
committee the two are different. As to why costs increase, he
said 90 percent of DOT&PF's projects are "categorical
exclusions" - projects that are environmentally benign. For the
remaining projects, there are myriad public, environmental,
state, federal, and local comments. Those comments rarely
decrease the cost of the project; the scope and amenities are
invariably added, not subtracted. The department must respond
to public comments in a way that will keep costs down while
still addressing public concerns.
MR. DOWNING shared the example of the Chena Hot Springs Road
flood control project. He said the process that takes place
before it goes into the Statewide Transportation Improvement
Plan (STIP) is very involved, dynamic and detailed. He said
although urban projects will often have a positive cost-benefit
ratio, rural projects tend not to. He spoke to the issue of
receiving $5.20 for every dollar contributed in federal gas
taxes. This is consistent with building and maintaining roads
in rural areas where the cost-benefit ratio is less than one.
Number 575
CHAIR KOHRING said the thrust of the bill is to make the
legislature more involved in the process. He said he couldn't
see why the department was so averse to such a simplistic bill.
Number 584
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH said he didn't think it was that simple.
He suggested that if people are against the Anchorage Coastal
Trail, then they should stop it, but not by legislation. If
this bill were around when the Alaska Marine Highway was built,
there would be no ferry system. To say the bill is simple
oversight is wrong; rather, it is the way to stop a particular
project in Anchorage. He said that is not the way to do
business in Alaska. Representative Kookesh stated that it would
hurt rural Alaska, and said he would not accept its being called
a "simple" issue of helping the legislature.
TAPE 02-4, SIDE B
Number 593
REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor of
HB 473, pointed out that nothing in the bill mandates a positive
cost-benefit ratio. It just says that when an estimate is off
by more than 50 percent, the legislature should have a say on
whether to go forward on the project. He said the bill would
ask what the honest estimate is, and then would ask why it is
varying.
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH read from [sub-subparagraph] (f) [of an
unidentified proposed CS]:
Transportation projects that have a benefit-to-cost
ratio greater than one are presumed efficient and
projects that have a benefit-to-cost ratio of less
than one are presumed inefficient. Inefficient
transportation projects cannot be submitted.
MR. KRIEBER clarified that Representative Kookesh was reading
from a draft proposed CS that had not been introduced to the
committee yet. He said it was provided to members to look at
for a potential future meeting. The bill being testified on was
the one in members' packets [the original bill].
Number 568
MR. DOWNING returned to Chair Kohring's earlier question. He
said the opportunity for the legislature to have input on the
costs of a project is when the appropriation for construction is
submitted to [the legislature] in the capital budget. The time
it takes to go through the environmental-document phase, the
right-of-way acquisition phase, and the design phase is long
enough that the department submits the capital budget request
early on. Later the department submits [requests for] the
construction-appropriation monies. That is the other
opportunity for the legislature to provide input on the matter.
MR. DOWNING stated that if the department does a reconnaissance
project or a plan, it simply spends the money. If the
department embarks on an environmental document and decides not
to build, then there is no reimbursement required. If it is
decided to build, the department is "on the hook" to reimburse
the Federal Highway Administration if construction doesn't
proceed within a ten-year period. He said [the bill] could
trigger such an event. He said the construction appropriation
is the point at which the legislature should take a second look
at a project.
Number 540
The committee took an at ease from 2:10 p.m. until 2:12 p.m.
Number 537
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER told the committee she had some concerns
about the bill. It would adversely affect some projects in her
district such as Aleknagik Bridge; the project has been going on
for ten years, and it has been not an issue of cost, but rather
a dispute over where the bridge should be built. Under HB 473,
after four years the project would have to be reviewed by the
legislature. She said the bill would use up legislators' time
and political capital, and it would be especially damaging for
rural legislators to have to fight for projects every four
years.
Number 520
REPRESENTATIVE SCALZI, in reference to Representative Kookesh's
earlier concern, pointed out provisions [in the draft proposed
CS that wasn't before the committee] regarding instances of
"inefficient transportation" projects. He said the governor may
not submit inefficient transportation projects "unless the bill
is accompanied by written analysis in cost-benefits of a project
and detailed justification of the project." It sets a separate
category for roads that don't meet the criteria.
REPRESENTATIVE SCALZI asked Representative Kapsner if the new
funding category in HB 502 helped satisfied her concerns about
rural roads in her district. He said he had three projects in
his own district that would "never make it on" under HB 473.
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER said she didn't have many roads in her
district.
Number 505
CHAIR KOHRING said it didn't appear that the bill had enough
support to be moved. He announced that the bill would be held
over for further discussion.
HB 502-RUSTIC ROADS AND HIGHWAYS
[Contains discussion relating to HB 473]
CHAIR KOHRING announced the next matter before the committee,
HOUSE BILL NO. 502, "An Act relating to the designation of and
funding for rustic roads and highways; and providing for an
effective date."
Number 490
MIKE KRIEBER, Staff to Representative Vic Kohring, Alaska State
Legislature, presented HB 502 on behalf of the House
Transportation Standing Committee, sponsor. He told the
committee the Department of Transportation [& Public Facilities
(DOT&PF)] provides funding for four basic categories of roads
including the National Highway System, the State Highway System,
the TRAAK [Trails and Recreational Access for Alaska] program,
and the Community Transportation Program. Under the TRAAK
program, not much is associated with road construction; it is
primarily for trail development and enhancement purposes.
MR. KRIEBER referred members to a listing of three projects that
are dirt roads with very low usage - under 200 cars per day.
The STIP [Statewide Transportation Improvement Plan] process
would give a minimum of $40 million to pave the roads. He
offered that the paving of these roads would give a very low
cost-benefit ratio in those projects. He contrasted the Old
Glenn Highway with the roads to be paved. He characterized the
road as "falling apart" and "very dangerous," and added that the
road base is starting to degrade. There is no money
appropriated for this 7,000-car-per-day road. He said there is
inappropriate prioritization of some of the other roads in the
same funding category. The bill proposes that DOT&PF not be
allowed to pave these rustic roads, in order to free up funding
and to prioritize other roads in the state.
Number 461
MR. KRIEBER said another purpose of the bill is to create
economic development by allowing DOT&PF to use TRAAK funds to
build rustic roads, so long as they aren't paved. These roads
would be access roads into mineral-rich areas of rural Alaska.
They could also be used by the public for recreational access.
Mr. Krieber told the committee that under the bill, 50 percent
of TRAAK funds could be used for the new rustic roads category.
Number 442
REPRESENTATIVE SCALZI asked if the standards for some roads are
too high and would make it economically infeasible.
MR. KRIEBER expressed his opinion that DOT&PF could establish
the design standards for this road category.
REPRESENTATIVE SCALZI asked if there would be summer or seasonal
roads within [the rustic road] category. He asked if the bill
would obligate a year-round road.
MR. KRIEBER answered that the Denali Highway and Hatcher Pass
Road are seasonal roads that would fall into the category.
Number 431
REPRESENTATIVE SCALZI inquired about incorporating HB 473 with
HB 502.
MR. KRIEBER characterized that as an idea worth exploring
further.
Number 420
ARTHUR (MARTY) QUAAS, President, South Knik River Community
Council, testified via teleconference. He expressed his wish to
see the Old Glenn Highway upgraded because of its poor
condition. He said he represents people who live in Alaska all
year. He expressed his thought that the highway will become a
gravel road in the coming few years [because of its disrepair].
Mr. Quaas told of many accidents that were the result of the
road's potholes and poor condition.
Number 396
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN asked Mr. Quaas if he would support taking
the money that was allocated in the STIP to the Denali Highway
and Hatcher Pass Road and reallocating it to the Old Glenn
Highway project.
MR. QUAAS told the committee the residents in the Denali
Highway, Hatcher Pass, and Petersville Road areas would rather
the roads were not upgraded.
Number 386
CHAIR KOHRING added that one primary reason behind the bill was
frustration with the process that has resulted in funding for
projects that don't have a high priority when there are other
roads in serious condition, like the Old Glenn Highway.
Number 377
LARRY DeVILBISS, School Board Member, Matanuska-Susitna Borough,
testified via teleconference. He gave his support to the bill.
He characterized the situation on the Old Glenn Highway as a
"serious health and safety problem." He said the borough had
been told nothing was being done to remedy the disrepair on the
highway because of high maintenance expenses.
Number 347
JOHN SHANDELMEIER, Meier's Lake Road House, testified via
teleconference. He gave his support to the bill. He qualified
it as good because it would free up funding for high-traffic
roads, and because [the Denali Highway] is a destination highway
instead of a travel corridor. It doesn't make sense to spend
large amounts of money to make it a travel corridor when the
primary use is small-group tourism and access to hunting. He
said high-speed travel would conflict with many present uses of
the area. He cited a survey four years prior that indicated 85-
percent opposition to paving the Denali Highway.
Number 309
PAUL BOOS testified via teleconference. He gave his support to
leaving the Denali Highway unpaved, but said he'd like to see
the bill clarify what "unpaved means." He made it clear that
chip-sealing the highway is not something he would want. He
also expressed concern about using TRAAK money to fund roads to
mining activities, and spoke against it. He said he would like
to see the sunset clause either extended or removed altogether.
Number 284
RUTH McHENRY testified via teleconference, asking that the
legislature leave something for the enjoyment of "plain old
Alaskans." She said the Denali Highway doesn't cost much to
maintain, and that it isn't a bad thing to give an Alaskan a job
operating a road grader. Federal funds used for more extensive
projects are occasionally warranted by means of a program called
"preventive maintenance." Ms. McHenry offered that preventive-
maintenance money can be used on either paved or unpaved
sections of road; she mentioned a letter she had to prove it.
MS. McHENRY expressed confusion about how TRAAK funds would
apply to the maintenance of unpaved roads, since she thought
those monies apply only to capital programs. Leaving the Denali
Highway unpaved would free up over $40 million for other
projects. She offered that "rustic road" needs a definition.
She told the committee she would like that definition to state
that rustic roads are "roads that are special to Alaskans for
qualities that would be compromised by paving." Mixing such
roads with those not yet constructed might not work well. She
said new roads would require capital funds, jeopardizing the
whole rustic roads approach. If a mining company wants a road
to its prospect in the Kuskokwim area, for example, it should
build it itself so the cost to the state doesn't exceed possible
revenue gained from a mine. She urged the committee to keep the
bill simple so it would have the best chance of passage.
Number 230
PATRICK FITZGERALD testified via teleconference. He expressed
his wish to keep the Denali Highway unpaved and not chip-sealed.
He told the committee the nature of the highway [in its present
condition] lends itself to great recreation opportunities.
Number 195
ROBIN DALE FORD testified via teleconference. She expressed
support for HB 502, but said she had some questions about
provisions for new rustic roads, especially for mineral
development. She said she would like to see the rustic roads
remain as they are.
Number 175
CHUCK KAUCIC testified via teleconference. A scout leader and
father of six, he told the committee he didn't support the bill
because of its funding formula. The TRAAK program was to
provide recreation-trail access to outdoor recreation. Mr.
Kaucic said someone is stretching the definition of "trails."
He stated that the "original legislation that [he] was involved
with stated clearly that 'roads are roads, and trails are
trails.'" He described the funding formula as "robbing the poor
to satisfy the rich." He said Alaska should "leave TRAAK alone"
and "not take away the funding for roads." He suggested several
sources of information for the committee to take a closer look
at.
Number 111
MYRON WRIGHT testified via teleconference, noting that his
livelihood is derived from photographing wild areas. The Denali
Highway is a prime example of such an area, and shouldn't be
changed or improved; rather, it should be maintained. If it is
paved, tour buses and utility lines will come in, and that will
change it. Mr. Wright said not developing the area is an
economic benefit for him.
Number 085
MARY BETHE WRIGHT testified via teleconference. She expressed
her wish to see the rustic roads remain as they are for people
to enjoy them. Improvements and paving bring things that are
unimagined, and paving changes the character of a road. She
expressed that perhaps "TRAAK funds should not be used."
Number 064
DENNIS WESTON testified via teleconference. He stated his
belief that the Denali Highway should be left as it is. He said
he has an operation called Camp Wilderness, and he wants it kept
that way. He said he was also opposed to repealing the sunset
clause.
CHAIR KOHRING said the intent of the bill is to look at
different projects and make prudent priorities for improvements.
He recognized that many people want to preserve the natural
beauty and serenity, however.
Number 030
JOHN BRANT testified via teleconference. He said the Denali
Highway should be left unpaved, and added that he supports HB
502. He said the highway has a unique cultural heritage that
paving will destroy; it would create a high-speed corridor
between Paxson and Cantwell, would create a more sterile
wildlife environment, and would result in roadside litter. By
contrast, the pristine Denali Highway has offered travelers a
rewarding experience that future generations have a right to
share.
Number 009
WARREN OLSON testified via teleconference. He said many people
consider the Denali Highway the "breadbasket of Alaska." He
said the money for paving should be used somewhere else. [A
small portion of Mr. Olson's testimony was lost because of the
tape change.]
TAPE 02-5, SIDE A
Number 005
JIM STERLING testified via teleconference. He said he and his
wife support HB 502, but were wondering about the sunset clause;
he said he thought it should be excluded.
Number 022
RON CRENSHAW, Member, TRAAK Citizen's Advisory Board, testified
before the committee. He said the TRAAK program was established
in 1996 to force dialogue between agencies that hadn't existed
before, and to provide funding where there was none previously.
He said the program has brought cohesion between state and
federal agencies, and it has given benefits to all communities
in the state. He gave examples of TRAAK projects and the good
they bring to their different communities.
Number 131
THOMAS B. BRIGHAM, Director, Division of Statewide Planning,
Department of Transportation & Public Facilities, testified
before the committee. He said the department believes the bill
could be simplified and made more direct. He said he understood
that the bill aims to promote specific roads that are higher-
volume than some seen in the program - roads like the Old Glenn
Highway. The department would be open to certain projects'
being moved up in the program. Mr. Brigham spoke of a so-called
GARVEE [Grant Anticipation Revenue Vehicles] package [for
bonding] that was in the Senate Finance Committee.
MR. BRIGHAM said another objective of the bill is to prevent
certain roads from being paved. Paving saves money, but the
department has heard testimony, loud and clear, on keeping the
Denali Highway unpaved. He said the department wasn't trying to
move the project ahead aggressively; rather, it is on the "back
burner."
Number 180
CHAIR KOHRING interjected that he'd heard that the Hatcher Pass
Road, Copper River Highway, and Denali Highway were slated to be
paved by DOT&PF. He said the concern was that those projects
are moving forth ahead of the Old Glenn Highway and other needed
projects in the area.
MR. BRIGHAM said the department is happy to entertain
discussions about priority of projects.
Number 189
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN said he has seen project funding used as
leverage on legislators to get things moved through committees.
He expressed his encouragement at seeing that the Denali Highway
is being taken off the list for paving when there are other
roads in serious need of paving.
Number 217
REPRESENTATIVE SCALZI asked if Mr. Krieber would look into
combining HB 473 and HB 502. [HB 502 was held over.]
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Transportation Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 3:05
p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|