Seward to Glenn Connection PEL Study – Online Open House #5: Refined Alternatives

Welcome and thank you for participating in the fifth Seward to Glenn Connection Planning and Environmental Linkage Study Public Online Open House, hosted by the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT&PF) and Anchorage Metropolitan Area Transportation Solutions (AMATS).

The purpose of this online open house is to share the materials that were presented at the Tuesday, December 10, 2024, in-person public meeting, which focuses on refined design alternatives. This online platform is open from December 11, 2024, to January 23, 2025.

Feedback

Your feedback is important to us! To provide feedback, you may visit the last section of this Online Open House or visit the contact us page on

our website at sewardglennconnection.com.

Documents

You will also find materials shared at the in-person meeting linked on the project website at sewardglennconnection.com.

Navigating This Site

This is the text only version of the Winter 2024 Public Meeting for the Seward Glenn Connection PEL. If you need any additional assistance navigating this open house

website, please contact [email protected] or (907) 206-2289.

Habla español? | Koj hais lus hmoob? | E te tautala samoa?

(907) 206-2289 | [email protected]

Project Introduction

DOT&PF Central Region is conducting a Planning and Environmental Linkages (PEL) Study to identify and evaluate options to improve livability, regional travel between the Seward and Glenn Highways, and local travel within the surrounding neighborhoods. The project will also identify ways to improve access between the Port of Alaska and the highway network.

Your input is critical to the success of the study. We hope you will take time to review the alternatives and share your feedback.

You may download a PDF document of project related materials listed below. These documents are either downloadable PDF documents or weblinks. Adobe Reader is required to view the PDF documents. You may obtain a free copy of Adobe Reader at https://get.adobe.com/reader.

Project Fact Sheet (PDF download)

FAQs (PDF download)

English

Meeting Materials (PDF Download)

This planning document may be adopted in a subsequent environmental review process in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 168 Integration of Planning and Environmental Review. The environmental review, consultation, and other actions required by applicable Federal environmental laws for this project are being, or have been, carried out by DOT&PF pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327 and a Memorandum of Understanding dated April 13, 2023, and executed by Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and DOT&PF.

It is the policy of the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT&PF) that no one shall be subject to discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability. Persons who believe they may have experienced discrimination in the delivery of these federally assisted programs or activities may file a complaint with: Alaska DOT&PF Civil Rights Office 2200 East 42nd Avenue, Room 310, Anchorage, AK 99508; Phone: (907) 269-0851, Alaska Relay 7-1-1, or 1 (800) 676-3777; Fax: (907) 269-0847.

Study Area

What is a PEL?

A Planning and Environmental Linkages (PEL) Study considers environmental, community, and economic goals during planning so that the information and analysis can be used in the environmental process.

What is the purpose of the Planning and Environmental Linkages (PEL) Study?

The study will identify and evaluate improvements needed to improve transportation safety, access, connectivity, and livability. The study area generally follows Bragaw Street on the east, Northern Lights Boulevard on the south, C Street on the west, and Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson on the north. It includes areas where potential transportation improvements could be developed between the Glenn and Seward Highways and to and from the Port of Alaska. The study area is broad enough to also gauge how traffic levels on parallel routes may be affected.

Purpose and Need

Purpose

The purpose is to improve mobility, accessibility, safety, and livability for people and goods traveling on or across the roadway system connecting the Seward Highway, Glenn Highway, and Port of Alaska by all modes (including people on foot, bicycles, or buses) while improving community cohesion. The intent is to (1) maintain the functionality of the National Highway System while meeting the local travel needs of residents who live, play, and work in the area and must safely travel across or along those roadways; and (2) improve neighborhood connections, enhance quality of life, and accommodate adopted plans, as practicable.

Needs

The needs are presented below (in no specific order):

Reduce Conflicting Travel Functions: Serving competing regional and local travel functions on the highway network in the study area leads to conflicts that reduce mobility, safety, and accessibility for all users.
Improve Safety: Crashes for vehicles and people walking and bicycling are elevated at several study area intersections.
Promote Social Equity and Economic Development: The current connection on the Seward/Glenn Highway corridor in the study (5th and 6th Avenues and Gambell and Ingra Streets) is inconsistent with the vision expressed in recently adopted plans. Those plans envision improving neighborhood redevelopment, community cohesion, and quality of life.

Project Schedule

The project is currently in Phase 5 (see schedule graphic to the left). We are seeking public feedback and comment on refined alternatives.

In February 2024, nine preliminary alternatives were presented, and public comment and feedback was received. Now, the team is sharing four refined alternatives and seeking additional public comment.

The Seward to Glenn Connection PEL Study is scheduled to finish in spring 2025.

The major decision points of the PEL study are as follows:

Purpose and Need & Evaluation Criteria
Range of Alternatives
Screening of Alternatives
Final Recommendations

Public meetings will occur at each major decision point to encourage public input.

If you would like to be kept informed of PEL Study progress, sign up for the email list.

Balancing the Issues & Challenges

Solving the transportation challenges requires balancing several competing interests and needs. The study team created alternatives that attempt to accomplish the following:

Improve safety.
Reduce regional and local travel conflicts.
Consider the needs of all users (pedestrians, bicyclists, vehicles, and freight).
Maintain National Highway System (regional) functionality.
Improve the ability to move safely and efficiently when accessing key destinations.
Improve access between the Port and the highway while also reducing neighborhood impacts.
Improve livability by helping reconnect the neighborhood (physically and socially) by removing or separating regional and Port traffic from local traffic, improve quality of life, and promote economic development.
Accommodate ideas from adopted plans such as Gambell Main Street Redevelopment, Ingra Greenway Supportive, Development Corridor, Improvements for pedestrians and bicyclists, and Reconnecting Communities Grant (forthcoming).

Solutions should consider the needs of all user groups (pedestrians, bicyclists, local and regional vehicles, and freight).

Public Meeting #4: Preliminary Alternatives Summary

The Study team hosted a fourth public meeting on Wednesday February 7, 2024, at the Fairview Recreation Center from 4:30 to 6:30 P.M. The purpose was to inform the public about the project status, request input on the nine preliminary alternative designs, and launch a 60-day public comment period on the preliminary alternative designs. There were 79 people in attendance at the public meeting, which was advertised via email, Facebook, neighborhood flyers and People Mover ads, advertisements in the Anchorage Daily News (ADN), and postcards sent to more than 10,000 residents. An online public meeting, which included all the information presented at the in-person open house, was also available throughout the 60-day public comment period.

Advertising and Public Outreach

The project team received 283 comments from the public and agencies during the comment period. Most commenters indicated support for, concerns about, or a combination of support and concern, on the nine preliminary alternatives.

Of the comments,

109 were received through email or online comment form (40%)
8 were received through phone (2%)
13 were received through handwritten comment forms (4%)
153 were received through StoryMaps (online open house) comments (54%)

Comments

Commentors raised 14 specific key topics and areas of support or concern related to the nine preliminary alternatives, with parks and wildlife and neighborhood impacts mentioned most frequently. Topic areas included the following:

Alternative Ideas: 64
Constraints/Impacts: 63
Comment Response: 1
Environmental: 36
Land Use: 81
Maintenance: 3
Other: 37
Pedestrian and Bike Improvements: 48
Public Outreach: 22
Safety: 10
Transit: 44
Visual Design: 4

Some of the comments we heard included as follows:

“This long-discussed project is essential for enhancing safety by separating vehicles from pedestrians and cyclists, reducing accidents, and providing a safer alternative during heavy snowfalls.”
“Reduced traffic between Fairview and Downtown could facilitate housing construction in that neighborhood.”
“The project needs to be creative about right of way acquisition… housing shortage in Anchorage will worsen with any alternative selected.”
“They (Alts) all still go through the community and the overpass (Alt D) would do a lot of damage to our world-class trail system … What about a tunnel to put all the cars underground?”
“Go around Fairview, not through it (Alts C & D)!”
“Alternative A (through Fairview) is an excellent option and provides the most balanced approach…”
“A freeway alignment along 15th (Alts C) has the most potential: It can minimize the expense of trenching, use what is already a difficult-to-cross section of 15th, and it…increases connections between North and South Fairview.”

View Public Meeting #4

Download a PDF of the Comment Summary

What We Learned & Changes We Implemented

One key outcome from the comment period is a revision to the way the team is implementing the Recommended Alternative Selection Criteria Memorandum.

Concern for neighborhood impacts such as noise, air, environmental justice, right-of-way, and property values resulted in screening out and eliminating high-impact freeways.

Concerns about residential and commercial right-of-way impacts resulted in a reduction in impacts by using tunnels, parkways, and at-grade intersections.

Concerns about park impacts and support for Alternative D resulted in a reduced footprint, slower speeds to better minimize park impacts and reduce noise by allowing us to shift the roadway farther from some parks and homes.

Some commentors asked if a freeway was even necessary. General sentiments against the freeway options resulted in a parkway connection for regional traffic, use of at-grade intersections, reducing the number of lanes and traffic speed, reducing right-of-way impacts by using tunnels, and adding an enhanced Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) alternative (denoted MTP+) that builds on the adopted AMATS MTP 2050 plan.

Previous (rejected) Freeway Alternatives V. New Parkway Design

The contrast between freeways and parkways is evident in their design and functionality, particularly when comparing the previous freeway alternatives with the refined parkway design. The freeway alternatives, featuring six 12-foot lanes, have been replaced by the parkway design, which includes four 11-foot lanes. This adjustment results in a speed reduction that contributes to fewer impacts.

The parkway allows for a usable right-of-way, unlike the restrictive fencing seen in the freeway options. Instead of interchanges, the new design employs roundabouts or signals. Furthermore, it integrates sidewalks and separate pathways, elements that were missing in the previous freeway designs. With an emphasis on aesthetics, the new parkway can be enhanced by rich landscaping in a right-of-way ranging from 100 to 125 feet, compared to the less visually appealing options of the eliminated freeway alternatives that had a larger right-of-way of 150 to 200 feet and minimal landscaping.

Overall, the modern parkway significantly advances safety, mobility, and pedestrian access.

Key Differences

Previous Freeway Alternatives

Six 12-foot freeway lanes
55 miles per hour speed limit
Fenced right-of-way
Interchanges
No sidewalks or bike paths
Minimal landscaping
150-200-foot right-of-way

New Parkway Design

Four 11-foot parkway lanes
40-45 miles per hour speed limit
Usable right-of-way
Roundabouts or signals
Sidewalks or separated paths
Robust landscaping
100-125-foot right-of-way

Alternatives Development Process

Ideas for alternatives were collected from public input and a review of plans and studies as well as through outreach and workshops with city and state representatives and representatives of community groups.

The team created alternatives to try and solve the transportation problems in the corridor and conform to established design criteria. The DOT&PF is currently asking for public input on the screening that has eliminated some alternatives and any ideas or concerns with those that have been refined for further study.

We will further refine the remaining alternatives based on that input. Alternatives will then be evaluated against purpose and need factors, right-of-way impacts, and environmental impacts to identify recommendations.

PEL Screening Process

Nine preliminary alternatives were presented in February 2024. Fatal Flaw screening (Level 1) and public feedback has eliminated all freeway alternatives. Six alternatives remain:

Three with parkway connections:

Parkway Alternative AB
Parkway Alternative C
Parkway Alternative D

Three with no new roadway connections

MTP 2050 – identical to the adopted Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP). If no other improvements result from the PEL process, this will be the alternative guiding transportation in the study area.
MTP+ – adds transit and demand management to the try to solve the problems.
No Action – required as a baseline for comparison.

After Level 2 screening and additional public feedback, an alternative will be recommended in the draft PEL Study document.

Screening Data for Alternatives

The initial screening analysis for the nine preliminary alternatives was rigorous. The initial screening process was revised based on public input to prioritize right-of-way (ROW), relocations, and neighborhood impacts as fatal flaws. The criteria included the following:

Relocations

Number of residential parcels impacted
Potential residential relocations (households)
Number of residential parcels partially acquired
Residential relocation in disadvantaged Census Tracts
Residential relocation in Census Tracts with a housing boarder
Number of non-residential parcels impacted
Number of non-residential parcels to be acquired

Section 4(f) Impacts

Parks impacted
Section 4(f) park impacts (SF)
Historic properties directly impacted by alternative footprint
Potential historic properties impacted (structurally older than 1980 – full or partial take)

Community Facilities

Community facility impacted
Selected community facilities within 0.25 miles
School building within 500 feet of project footprint

Key outcomes include as follows:

Screening process revised based on public input to emphasize ROW, relocations, and neighborhood impacts.
Fatal flaws were confirmed for highway connections.
Highway connections not recommended.
Alternatives moving forward were refined to reduce impacts: parkway streets with lower speed limits and fewer interchanges and tunnels to avoid community impacts.

Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) 2050

MTP 2050 is the adopted transportation plan guiding transportation improvement in Anchorage. The MTP 2050 Alternative includes improvements to 5th and 6th Avenues, Gambell Street, and Ingra Street, with a Woonerf/trail connection along Hyder Street. Ingra and Gambel would become 3-lane, one-way streets. Hyder would become a pedestrian-focused facility. The MTP 2050 Alternative received significant support during the February-April 2024 comment period.

Pertinent improvement between the Seward Highway and the Glenn Highway include:

Removal of one lane each direction from 5th and 6th Avenues
Removal of one lane each direction on Ingra and Gambell Streets to form a 6-Lane couple.
Removal of a lane each direction on segments of 15th Avenue.
Woonerf on Hyder – a Woonerf is a pedestrian-focused street. Minimal vehicle traffic is accommodated for local access but at very slow speeds.
Trail connection (Fairview Greenway_ along Hyder to the Chester Creek greenbelt (but no extension to Ship Cree Trail is in the Plan.

Possible challenges include:

Reduced capacity of the roads will cause an increase in traffic in various neighborhoods surrounding the lane reduction areas.
The 6-lane couplet on Gambell and Ingra does not comport with the Fairview community’s vision of a Gambell Main Street.

If no other improvements or changes result from the PEL process, this will be the alternative guiding transportation in the study area.

MTP 2050 Traffic Sensitivity Tests

Traffic Modeling

The PEL Study is using a traffic model to help predict traffic changes associated with the refined alternatives. We have tested the MTP 2050 as adopted and with the community’s preferred Gambell Main Street lane configuration (2-lane of 2-way traffic, on street parking, and ample sidewalks).

The model data will helps determine how traffic routes and levels would be expected to change as lanes of vehicle capacity are removed under the MTP 2050 and Main Street vision.

Modeling Highlights

The current road system has ample capacity.
As lanes are removed, many travelers are likely to divert to other roads to avoid a slower trip along 5th Avenue and through Fairview.
The diversion starts with the MTP which takes only one lane off of 5th and 6th Avenues and Gambell and Ingra Streets.
The diversion is expected to get more pronounced if additional lanes are removed to return Gambell and Ingra Streets to a more neighborhood use and feel.
The changes are expected to impact the efficiency of the National Highway System leading to congestion
There would be an increase in traffic in project area neighborhoods where traffic would be diverting to – creating higher traffic levels and potentially congestion and safety concerns in some areas.

The modeling tells us how many cars might need to be removed from the roadways to maintain functionality of the National Highway System and to reduce the impacts on other affected streets.

To try to make the MTP 2050 work better, the project team refined the MTP 2050 alternative to create an MTP-Plus Alternative that includes several traffic reduction and transit ideas to try to reduce the number of vehicles desiring to use the National Highway System on 5th and 6th Avenues and on Gambel and Ingra Street and to keep them from diverting to other neighborhoods.

Additional traffic analysis is needed for the various alternatives and will be shared during the next public comment period.

MTP Plus

The MTP Plus alternative is intended to enhance the 2050 MTP within the study area to reduce vehicular traffic demand to solve the problems identified in the purpose and need – namely to reduce regional-local traffic conflicts, improve safety and livability, and support the community’s vision for transformed streets through Fairview while also maintaining the functionality of the National Highway System, without building a new arterial road connection.

The vehicular traffic demand reduction strategies include the following:

Frequent Express Bus Service from Mat-Su Borough to downtown and midtown Anchorage.
Upgrade transit service from Eagle River to downtown.
New express transit service from Dimond Center to downtown and midtown via C Street.
Upgrade transit route from Huffman to downtown.
New downtown, midtown, and U-Med transit service via Ingra/Gambell and 36th.
Eliminate transit fares system wide.
Double rideshare program in project corridor.
Additional non-motorized and transit amenities.
Increase activities such as telework, telemedicine, and e-learning.
Incentivizes increased density to match or exceed the 2040 Land Use Plan.
Complete a regional trail from the Ship Creen Trail to the Chester Creek Trail with a woonerf along Hyder.
Gambel Street reconstructed as a 2-way, 2-lane main street.
Ingra Street reconstructed as 3-lane 2-way street.

Because the lane reductions impact traffic by sending traffic to adjacent neighborhoods and impacting the functionality of the National Highway System, the study team worked with key stakeholders to identify traffic reduction ideas to support the MTP Plus alternative.

NOTE: The vehicular traffic demand reduction strategies would also add value to a recommended alternatives that includes a new “parkway” road connection between the Seward and Glenn Highways.

Parkway Alternative AB

The improved Parkway Alternative AB roughly follows the previous A/B1 alignment through Fairview, along Ingra. Refinements include

Road becomes an arterial street (parkway) with slower speeds rather than a highway design.
Contains a tunnel from just south of 15th to just north of 3rd, which avoids impacts to the neighborhood.
Contains a tunnel from roughly west of Reeve Blvd to east of Mountainview to avoid right-of-way impacts and commercial relocations.
Complete a regional trail from the Ship Creen Trail to the Chester Creek Trail with a woonerf along Hyder.
Gambel Street reconstructed as a 2-way, 2-lane main street.
Ingra Street reconstructed as 3-lane 2-way street.

Benefits of Parkway Alternative AB include

Ingra Street would operate above the tunnel without conflicts of the regional traffic.
With a place for the regional traffic below ground, Gambell and Ingra can be reconstructed to align with the community’s vision.

The estimated cost for the Parkway Alternative AB is $743 million (M).

Parkway Alternative C

Parkway Alternative C roughly follows the previous C1 freeway alignment along 15th Avenue and along the southeast side of Merrill Field. Improvements include

Road becomes an arterial street (parkway) with slower speeds rather than a highway design. The interchange at Lake Otis would be replaced by roundabouts.
Uses portions of 15th Avenue (roughly from Lake Otis Parkway to the proposed tunnel entrance near Merrill Field).
A proposed tunnel would run from just south of 15th to just east of the crosswind runway at Merrill Field.
Complete a regional trail from the Ship Creen Trail to the Chester Creek Trail with a woonerf along Hyder.
Gambel Street reconstructed as a 2-way, 2-lane main street.
Ingra Street reconstructed as 3-lane 2-way street.

Benefits of Parkway Alternative C include

Tunnel avoids impacts to the neighborhood (South Fairview).
Without regional traffic, Gambell and Ingra can be reconstructed to align with the community’s vision.

The estimated cost for the Parkway Alternative C is $506M. This does not include port connection costs.

Parkway Alternative D

Parkway Alternative D roughly follows the previous D alternative over Chester Creek Greenbelt on a bridge, then along the south and east sides of Merrill field. Improvements include
Road becomes an arterial street (parkway) with slower speeds rather than a highway design. The interchange at Lake Otis would be replaced by roundabouts.
Two possible options at 15th Avenue: (1) a bridge over it or (2) an at-grade roundabout.
A bridge would go over the Chester Creek Greenbelt (although it would require piers in the park).
Complete a regional trail from the Ship Creen Trail to the Chester Creek Trail with a woonerf along Hyder.
Gambel Street reconstructed as a 2-way, 2-lane main street.
Ingra Street reconstructed as 3-lane 2-way street.

Parkway Alternative D benefits include

Slower speeds allow tighter curves, which allows the alignment to avoid the Sitka Street playground area and Eastchester Park.
Without regional traffic, Gambell and Ingra can be reconstructed to align with the community’s vision.

The estimated cost for the Parkway Alternative D 2a is $393M and 2b is $420M. This does not include port connection costs.

Port Connections Alternatives

There are currently five different port connection alternatives broken out by associated alternatives. Each represent total costs for only the port connection, not including the full alternative.

MTP Plus has three possible port connections:

The first is the simplest and would connect 1st Avenue to Gambell and Ingra, with an estimated cost of $4.7M
The second would connect to Ship Creek Avenue with a bridge over the railroad tracks, with an estimated cost of $23.6M
The third would create a long bridge over the rail yard and connect to Whitney Avenue, with an estimated cost of $92.3M

Parkway Alternative AB would connect an interchange to Post Road. Port Traffic would use the existing Post Road and Whiney Road to access the port. No upgrade to Post Road or Whitney Road is proposed and therefore no image is provided.

Parkway Alternatives C and D have two possible port connections (these connections are interchangeable between C and D):

The first would connect to an interchange at Airport Heights Drive, go under Commercial Drive and Reeve Boulevard and traverse along a reconstructed 1st Avenue, with an estimated cost of $4.7M $64.3M
The second would connect to an interchange at Airport Heights Drive, go under Commercial Drive to a roundabout with Reeve Boulevard and traverse along Viking Drive, with an estimated cost of $4.7M $26.2M

Contact Us & More Information

Thank you for visiting our Online Open House, which is live from December 11, 2024, until January 23, 2025. It will be archived on the project website for later reference.

The public comment period is from December 10, 2024 – January 23, 2025.

Please submit your comments today through the following methods:

Online at sewardglennconnection.com

By email at [email protected]

By phone at (907) 206-2289

Thank you for providing feedback to help shape the future!