GIRDWOOD VALLEY SERVICE AREA BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Tracey Knutson, Chair;
Victor Duncan, Marcus Tingle, John Gallup, Nick Danger
Girdwood Board of Supervisors
June 20, 2005
Glacier City Hall
Present: Tracey Knutson, Chair; Marcus Tingle, Victor Duncan, John Gallup, Nick Danger
Call to Order: 7:00 pm, by Tracey Knutson, Chair
Approval of Minutes:
Tingle MOVES to approve minutes of April 18, 2005 GBOS regular monthly meeting; Duncan SECONDS. Vote: 3-0, unanimous (2 abstentions).
Minutes are incomplete. Approval of minutes delayed per Knutson until July, 2005, regular monthly meeting.
at www.communitycouncils.org/Girdwood/girdwood.html. The GBOS is currently working with the postmistress at the new Girdwood Post Office to arrange posting of agendas, notices, etc.
GBOS secretary reports the fund balance inquiry to the MOA was not returned.
Introductions, Presentations and Reports:
bly Member, Chris Birch.
Birch introduces himself. Sworn in on April 19th. Contact: email@example.com. Phone: 346-3265. Website: chrisbirch.com. Offers a brief rundown of Assembly issues:
o Signs: revisions to ordinance; grandfathering older signs: discussion: ones that aren’t a threat to life and safety.
o Title 21 work session: a lot of interest of assisted living homes and how they impact neighborhoods. By and large, good neighbors and function well in the community. Some concerns about a lot of cars associated with those properties in a residential neighborhood.
o AWWU presentation on I&I information.
Knutson notes that both Dick Tremaine (Birch’s predecessor) and Janice have been tireless advocates for Girdwood. Girdwood looks to the Assembly Members to assist with issues. Over the next months expects Birch will become more and more familiar with Girdwood issues. Is sure Birch is aware that this administration has made Girdwood a top priority: i.e. Crow Creek Road development; Glacier/Winner Creek expansion; water improvements; Chapter 9 of Title 21; $10 million economic grant, etc. Will look forward to working with Birch.
Birch notes he is very familiar with service area concept and has met with Chief Chadwick, for example. Lives in a local road service area himself. Familiar with challenges.
Knutson offers that Girdwood has just voted itself out from under the MOA tax
April, 05). Continue to familiarize themselves with the changes that will bring. MOA still administers the funds.
Birch asks that the Board call or email with any issue.
John Gallup adds his ‘welcome’ to Birch. Says Girdwood is a unique town. No collection of citizens are better educated on the things that run their town. Not a good representation tonight: a beautiful June night. Thank you for coming down.
Birch asks ‘what about paving the roads’?
Knutson asks not to address this subject at this time.
Janice Shamberg mentions that Robin Ward, director of HLB, who is also present tonight, can also address the issues she wants to bring up.
o HLB trade ‘land for park’ issue was pulled for a work session yet to be scheduled. Confirms that it was a trade the Board favored? (The Board answers ‘yes’.)
o Aware that Girdwood wants more individual lots for sale in the development package of the CCR land. What percent? Knutson notes that more public input is needed. A huge issue: all meetings indicate ‘ as high as you can get it.’ Knutson notes to Birch that land availability in valley is nil. Creates a lot problems: a. nothing available/affordable for lower to moderate income people- a lot of ‘hotel’ people in that consideration; b. people that have lived here for twenty to thirty (20-30) years are concerned that if large tracts were sold to developers, they would make the money and radically affect the land values; c. local folks would like to cash in on this opportunity. Some fear of forward motion; also, fear for the character of Girdwood be radically affected. Ward concurs with Knutson’s assessment. (Some light discussion between Assembly members and Board.) Knutson concludes it is very important how the land issues happen.
o Chapter 9 of Title 21 is coming out. Knutson adds there will be a brief discussion on Chapter 9 later on the agenda this evening.
Ward reads the HLB report into the record. Highlights include:
o Fire safety is a paramount concern this time of year. Camping not permitted on municipal land; fires prohibited except for cooking purposes in an approved container with spark arrester attached.
o On June 9, HLB’s Advisory Commission approved, subject to GBOS passage of a supportive resolution, as easement to USFS for a trailhead and parking lot for the Iditarod National Historic Trail near Crow Creek Road. HLB will attempt to ensure communication between the USFS and the AK DOT in its road improvement project design.
o HLB’s Advisory Commission also voted on June 9 not to accept the Crow Creek Neighborhood Master Plan. Main conflicts: a. percentage of lots publicly marketed; b. density is too much, even thought lower than the GAP. (Gallup confirms with Ward that the objection to the percentage was they felt it was too low instead of too high.)
o On Tuesday, the Assembly asked for a work session to consider the proposed exchange o HLB land for a portion of the adjoining Alpine View Estates development, south of Alyeska Highway and east of the Glacier Creek Bridge. The Assembly will announce the date for the work session on June 20 or so. Ward adds that if anyone can come and support this land trade (i.e. history, etc.) it would be very helpful to the process. Land trades are generally controversial.
o A small HLB parcel adjoining Ski View Condo on the south has been made available for public parking during the day. No overnight parking or camping will be permitted. (The Association has declined a permit. HLB is trying to keep the junk cars out of there. Have a contract with Alyeska Towing for off-hours towing. Ski View Condo Association has been notified of the arrangement.)
o A reminder: the Glacier Creek dike in the Old Townsite is reserved for use by emergency vehicles and local residents only. The dike is in poor condition, and use by vehicles will further degrade it. Without barriers, safety is also a concern.
Knutson introduces Beth Wallan. She, in turn, introduces Luke Burns, Enforcement Officer. Wallan gives thanks for opportunity to speak to the Girdwood public today.
They are ‘doing the rounds’ this time of year as summer is busiest time. Want to get feedback, answer questions regarding the law and what is done at Animal Control.
Statistical background: took in eight thousand four hundred and ten (8,410) animals: over one half (1/2) are strays. This time of year: busiest for stray animals. More dead animals on road. Higher issue of public safety issues. Health risk. Restraining laws: leash law with fence; somehow under control so they are not running stray. Can be picked up and adopted or euthanized before owner can find them. Recommend ID on animal. Call and come by. Website: www.muni.org. Have a MOA license: can avoid a trip to Animal Control: will attempt to contact owner before taking animal to Animal Control. Best ID for a cat: microchip. Please come by, visit and adopt. PR: educate first: Saturday Market, Health Fairs, Community Councils, Schools. Offer tours. Law is there for public safety and animal safety.
Telephone: 343-8118. Dispatch: 343-8119. Knutson asks fine if dog is picked up.
Burns answers: first citation is seventy-five dollars ($75). Good to have your name, phone number on dog tag: will contact owner first before impound.
Nick Danger adds that last month two (2) animal bites in Girdwood, one (1) a child, the other an adult. Will there be more patrols? In summer, a lot more dog bites. A lot of transients bring their dogs and leave them when they leave town.
Burns says they are short-staffed, not regular patrols. Will do best they can. Will try to attend Sunday Market.
Wallan asks that people call her with any questions.
9. Girdwood Playground Forest Fair fundraiser presentation, Joseph Wolner.
Wolner indicates he wanted to talk more about the plans for the playground not necessarily the fundraiser. Mission: renovation of community park, known as Little Bears Park at the corner of Hightower Road and Alyeska Highway. Purpose: to renovate the park and create a safe and fun playground, the spirit, the artistry and the imagination of the Girdwood community. Goal: to guarantee a playground that meets safety standards and is accessible for all children. (Shows some examples of playground designs offered by the company the task force intends to work with: Leathers and Associates.)
John Gallup notes to the Chair that in Lander, Wyoming they’ve left their cottonwoods in their park.
Knutson answers, thanks, so noted. Probably ‘live’ trees there.
Wolner continues Leathers and Associates approach is to come into the community; get the kids input on what they would like to see; get the artists of the community involved; create a design; give a list of materials to obtain (through donations and grants); come back for a week long community build ( like a ‘barn raising’) with free community labor. Leathers acts as general contractor for the build. Community supplies food for volunteers. Looking to use the same footprint that is existing.
Would like to expand a bit, but unsure if can do or not.
Knutson says the playground parcel is being leased from the MOA: is it leased from HLB? If so, does HLB have any objection to the plan?
Ward says she’ll need to look at the lease: if so, need to make sure the lease is long enough to support this capital investment.
Wolner adds they are looking at one hundred thousand dollars ($100,00) in donations for project.
Knutson has seen emails that show a range from fifty thousand to one hundred thousand dollars ($50,000- $100,000). Where is that money going?
Wolner says breakdown includes: Leathers: $1,000 plus travel; design documents: $8,500-$13,000; construction/consultation: $9,000-$10,000; plus 25% in design and consultation. End result: should be worth more than financial investment as labor to install ( with volunteers) would probably run at least one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000).
Knutson notes that $100,000 is a lot of money for a community to come up with with so many other needs (i.e. Town Square Park; Community School, etc.) Recommends teaming up with the Skateboard Park Task Force. Had an email from Ron Burson. Want to use some of the same parcel.
John Gallup notes the main concern: entire area is not Master Planned. Commercial Area Master Plan (CAMP) document: has a different idea of what’s going on there. And the CAMP has been adopted. Need to have conversations about the fate of the entire tract. Talked to Shine (Herfindahl) at the meeting: where does the Forest Fair Park end? Has it been surveyed? Does it have corners?
Where you propose your park is shown to have a ‘landmark building’ in the CAMP.
Knutson encourages Wolner to continue and gather facts.
Gallup asks also if the task force is looking at the ‘cadillac’ of what they sell.
Knutson asks if there are price tags for the photos he’s shown to GBOS tonight.
Wolner says some have prices.
Knutson notes there is a fundraiser at the Forest Fair: root beer garden by the smaller stage across from existing skate park. Forest Fair will provide everything, just manning it. Moose’s Tooth, Hires or A&W root beer floats.
Wolner hopes it will be a yearly event for all good causes.
Knutson asks if the playground task force has set up an account perhaps with Girdwood, Inc.?
Wolner indicates the Forest Fair committee, being a non-profit, has accepted fiscal sponsorship responsibility for playground.
Jake Thompson: If the land is under scrutiny for something else, would it be wise to find a new spot for the park?
Tingle: That’s what John (Gallup) was indicating with the master plan.
Gallup: A lot of permanent pieces in the area: thinks the playground is in a good place now. Still: as a skateboard advocate, may need to find another place in the tract that will have a lot of uses/buildings.
Knutson: With public process: need to work with Robin Ward (HLB) first: find out status of lease.
Julie Jonas: CATP is an adopted plan: Board should uphold integrity of plan.
Chris Birch: Any safety standards?
Knutson: What standards will you go by? Where do the standards come from?
Ward: ID who will maintain it as well.
Knutson: That’d be us (GBOS).
Wolner: Could be all plastic for materials for 30% more with some wood. There are options.
No report from Fincher. Knutson shares update of recent experience: Girdwood is in Federal District # 10. At the beginning of June, several representatives of the MOA, AK RR, Girdwood and GBOS, took a train ride to Seward and back with the district’s superiors and the top six (6) people from Washington D.C. as the district is being reviewed. They wanted to understand how this particular ranger partners with this community. A lot will remember previous rangers: not a genuine relationship with community. Simply not the case now. USFS in attendance with many community meetings, the hotel, etc. The USFS has been absorbed with this review. They are also beginning work on the whistle-stop project: from here to the south, mapping and surveying. The whistle-stop project involves taking the train south to Grandview and beyond. A way to get out at the Chugach: hiking trails, etc.
21, 2005, Tracey Knutson.
Knutson reviews agenda of the meeting. (Minutes from this meeting are available on www.communitycouncils.org/Girdwood/girdwood/html.) Highlights of tonight’s comments include historical comments on $10 million economic grant for Chris Birch’s benefit. Also, Board’s acknowledgment of challenges they face being out from under the municipal tax cap. Knutson touched on agenda items: community school status; Chapter 9, Title 21 schedule; HLB property update; Girdwood’s transportation problems (no taxis or other public transportation; only one (1) road in or out of Girdwood); house numbers and street naming update; and dedication of trails.
Knutson reviews the joint meeting. Had joint public meeting regarding Chapter 9, Title 21. At the LUC May meeting: had sent forward a recommendation to the BOS that the process of reviewing Chapter 9 be slowed down, another year be given to local residents and property owners; the GBOS rejected that recommendation at it’s May meeting and voted that a schedule be set for receiving public comments in Girdwood on Chapter 9. It was the Board’s view where there has been a special committee working on this on the community’s behalf in excess of four (4) years (yeas of public process), the feeling was that the community was either going to ‘get on board the train, or the train was going to leave the station’. Joint meeting was then set. At the meeting, Knutson chaired in conjunction with LUC chair, Larry Daniels. Made a decision to ask the audience first for general comments. Then for a list of potential resolutions that would suggest to the MOA Planning people, Tom Nelson and Erika McConnell, what changes should be made to the draft plan of Chapter 9. A list of potential resolutions was made. The LUC voted to end their portion of the meeting and discuss the resolutions at future LUC meetings. The GBOS voted after the LUC voted: decided to send list forward for Planning Department’s use and possible incorporation into the next public review draft of Chapter 9, due out at the beginning of June, 2005. LUC still has opportunity to have further discussion: there are a series of hearings at the municipal level.
John Gallup adds that during the LUC meeting in June, he took the list of resolutions and compared them with the ‘substantive changes’ list supplied by MOA Planning as a result of the joint meeting: at least one half (1/2) of suggestions were incorporated into the review draft. Their input and efforts did go into the final public review draft of Chapter 9.
Ward: Girdwood area residents: note the next meeting of the Planning and Zoning is in August.
Knutson: Actually, it is July 20, 2005, with the Anchorage Assembly in Girdwood.
Jonas: (Confirms the schedule.)
Kathy Frost: In Girdwood, you mention ‘all these years’ for the process. Yet is seems many people are just getting ‘in the know’ on these issues, doesn’t it?
Knutson: It does, although I would say (and I don’t mean to be discouraging regarding your comment at all): the only way you get ‘in the know’ is to participate in the meetings. And so for folks who never attend…..Kathy, I’ve seen you at a number of meetings. So you obviously have some interest in getting out there and finding out what’s going on.
Frost: It’s true. It’s hard to get out there and make it to them, but you’re right. It’s hard finding things out, sometimes even when the meetings are.
Knutson: Right next door at Little Bears, publicly posted meetings are noticed. And at the post office.
Knutson: It’s work to stay apprised I guess is what I’m saying.
Frost: There are a lot of people who are interested who don’t stay apprised.
Knutson: I don’t know what we can do. We can’t stop a five (5) year process because now people want to stand up and say, “Now I’m interested”.
Frost: Has it really been that long?
Gallup: Since 1999.
Frost: Why would people at that one meeting, like Diana Livingston, say people needed more time?
Knutson, Gallup: Honest difference of opinion.
Frost: The publication has been out for a long time?
Jonas: Quite a while. It’s been experiencing updating all along.
Knutson: You can get current copies either at the library or online: www.muni.org/Planning.
Frost: There are also different versions of GAP around.
Knutson, Gallup: There is only one version; may be some draft copies around.
Matt: What was the first resolution from the joint meeting? It passed (14-11-2).
Knutson: That was an amendment that was ‘all currently platted residential lots should be exempt from Chapter 9 until disposed of’. We were trying to get agreement on these resolutions to pass forward to MOA Planning for inclusion in this next draft plan. When they got to the second draft resolution (‘to revert to the original LUC recommendation’), the meeting ended. What the GBOS did: voted to send all of the resolutions forward to MOA Planning anyway so that they could work their way through what was appropriate and what was not. All were sent forward to Tom Nelson and Erika McConnell. What they’ve told us: not all of them are going to be appropriate.
Public Comment: Persons offering comment must state their full name and address.
Public Comment is limited to three (3) minutes per individual and must be on subjects not listed elsewhere on the agenda.
Matt White: Stopped by. Tim Cabana couldn’t come to the meeting; had to leave
for fishing tonight.
Knutson: I understand our Land Use Supervisor is prepared to address Tim’s
project this evening.
13. Action on GBOS Resolution 2005-07 ‘Regarding Phase II of the Girdwood Streets
and Drainage Improvements Program’ as read into he record at the May 16, 2005
GBOS regular monthly meeting.
Knutson rereads the resolution. Asks for the Board’s permission to ‘scrap’ this res-
olution. About to hear a discussion under New Business from consultant Jacques
Boutet about problems in the entire Town Square development area. No action
taken at this time.
14. Action on GBOS Resolution 2005-06 ‘Regarding the Approval by the MOA of the
Crow Creek Neighborhood Land Use Plan as amended by the Land Use Advisory
Committee on May 10, 2005’ as read into the record at the May 16, 2005 GBOS regular monthly meeting.
Knutson confirms with Robin Ward that one of her committee’s has rejected this.
Ward says the HLB Advisory Board (to the Assembly) has rejected the plan for
reasons listed earlier in the meeting. Notes it was purely advisory; still needs to go
through the process. Ward suggests the Board votes it’s advise by voting on the
resolution. Knutson rereads the resolution (noting her abstention from voting as was not present at the May GBOS meeting for discussion and, also, she did not author the resolution). Would note the last part should be restated: ‘therefore, let it be resolved that the GBOS recommends the MOA approve the CCNP’.
Gallup suggests Knutson’s friendly amendment be adopted and the change be
made part of the Resolution.
Knutson asks if there is a motion.
Jake Thompson asks if the Board will take public comment.
Knutson and Gallup say that public comment was heard at last month’s meeting.
Knutson offers if there is something Thompson would like to share to please go
Thompson indicates that the plan from Agnew:: Beck took a number of months; the
Girdwood Area Plan (GAP) took several years. Thinks the Agnew:: Beck plan was
fast-tracked. Says it has more impact on Girdwood than any other activity. Believes
the design doesn’t reflect Girdwood’s wishes. Explains that he is ‘for’ development,
but not Agnew:: Beck’s plan. Says there is a petition going around.
Knutson asks what is the petition?
Thompson says it says ‘Do you like what Agnew:: Beck has designed?’
Knutson asks where the petition is derived from?
Frost notes there is a lot of discussion against the plan. This is actually a survey.
She notes both she and Jake live on Crow Creek Road.
Knutson asks who is generating it?
Thompson says he did.
Knutson notes that in order for the Board to use it, has to know ‘what is it?’ ‘where’s it
coming from?’ What the petition is saying is that ‘ we the undersigned residents of
MOA Girdwood oppose the current development plans for the Crow Creek Road
area as we believe they don’t reflect the character of the area, the will of the people,
or the goals of the Girdwood Area Plan. Our small town atmosphere can only be
perpetuated with low density, single-family development, not high density cluster
housing. With our unique historical and natural environment, this is a beloved asset
in the community and we ask that it be taken off the fast-track and be more carefully
considered before it is developed’. Knutson says her question, again, is who is
getting this survey? Is it being mailed to every single one of the residents?
Thompson plans to go door-to-door with it.
Frost says perhaps at the post office, too.
Knutson says let’s stay on track. Thinking out loud about the public process as it
works with LUC or GBOS. A special group was created to entertain issues related to
the Crow Creek development. That group reported to Land Use; Land Use reported
to GBOS, etc. ‘That is the way we are designed to do public process down here. So
when we get presented with informal surveys that we cannot document went to
everybody; a petition that didn’t go before any hearing process, I frankly don’t know
what to do with it’.
Thompson asks if it would be better if it was mailed to Girdwood residents.
Knutson suggests that to give it some credibility where the Board can actually say it
reflects the opinions, etc., have to be able to document that everybody had a chance to weigh in on it. Doesn’t know how the Board can validly take it and say to the MOA
administrators that it has some credence or validity. Surveys usually have to meet
some statistical credibility issues. Not trying to shoot this down. Have gone through
the public process that is created to reach this point with resolution…
Thompson says that Kathy and Bob Persons met during the first meeting and walked through the area and were blindsided by what was given to them at the next
meeting: ‘Here’s the development. This is what we’re doing back here.’ They had
no idea this was happening. Doesn’t see how Beck worked with the Crow Creek
group: they were blindsided by him.
Knutson states the meeting is getting out of forum. First: the Board knows the answers to all of that: knows how the Crow Creek Advisory Committee was formed;
knows how it got to LUC; knows who sat on the Advisory Board; none of those
things are mysteries to the Board. So it has gone through the public process that is
in place in Girdwood. Now what ‘we have is something informal shaping up. Trying to figure out a way to give you guys credence without just sitting here and ignore the entire public process that has gone on. What is the will of the Board?’
Gallup suggests: it’s a petition. Take it and go forward, represent it directly to the Assembly. It was a very broad-based group, including several Crow Creek Road
residents from the start.
Knutson: They had a number of meetings; they were all publicly noticed.
Gallup: They attended all the meetings. Took the input, did plans; plan did change. Would argue petition is in error on one point: the plan is entirely within the GAP.
In fact, it is way under what the GAP calls for.
Thompson: No, it’s not. That’s single-family back there and you’re putting multi-family back there. Did he change that?
Frost: Chris Beck said right in this room: ‘It’s not the low density Girdwood is used
to, but it’s not Spenard.’
Gallup: It’s actually lower density than the GAP calls for.
Thompson: Supposed to be a single-family area.
(Some discussion between Thompson, Frost and Board.)
Knutson: Still stuck with the fact that we have a process. John may be correct.
Thompson: I believe the LUC shuffled it to the GBOS.
Gallup: You’re right: that specific area you talked about is single-family.
Knutson: What is the wish of the Board?
Gallup: In any deliberative process, nobody gets everything that they want. I’m vehemently opposed to a lot of things that are going to happen. My idea may not serve a broad enough number of people to carry the day. I have always been a big
Advocate of people in Girdwood living close to their downtown. I support that density. The reason being is that it may give this town a center of some kind. You, Don and eight or ten property owners are just caught in a pinch.
Thompson: HLB (talked with Art Eash)….we all talk about a town center. Have had discussions. The experts that Anchorage has brought in say it should be up by the resort. What we do down here is a little bit different. Putting high density where the
Girdwood people do not want it, is in the GAP, that- your job is to look out for the best interest of the Girdwood people. By voting for this, you’re going against the GAP. A lot of people put a lot of time into the GAP. Now we’re saying ‘to hell with that’; put high density there because some guy made one (1) plan to do it. How many ‘fall back’ plans are there?
Gallup: Would agree if we are to vote for it, we are voting against the will of some people, but we are not voting against the will of all people. This has been a pretty broad-based process coming up to this. I’ve been at every meeting both of LUC and
of that committee as I’m on it. I agree with the plan.
Knutson: Need to get back on track. Unfortunately, on tonight’s agenda, there is not
scheduled a debate on whether Chris Beck’s process is ……what we have on our agenda is ‘action on Resolution 2005-05’. Appreciate the points Jake is making. To
some degree, are stuck with public process the way that it is designed to function.
Am going to put this back in front of the Board as to what action they want to take on this Resolution 2005-06. Not discouraging you (Thompson) about further work…
When and if you have some way of sharing with us who and how many, etc., we’ll be happy to have a further discussion with you at a regularly scheduled meeting if you
want to try and get it on the agenda. Is that fair? Is there action from the Board?
Had a motion for a friendly amendment.
Duncan SECONDS the motion for the friendly amendment.
Vote: 3-1 ( 1 abstention), in favor.
Gallup MOVES GBOS adopt Resolution 2005-06 as amended by the friendly amendment; Tingle SECONDS. Vote: 3-1 (1 abstention), in favor.
Jonas notes that since talking about process: her experience, wanted to know why the advisory vote from the Board is ‘after the fact’ with the HLB Advisory Board. Ward notes that typically they are closer and our vote usually precedes their meeting. The Board vote/ resolution will go to Planning and Zoning and the Assembly. (Knutson advises Jake Thompson to move his petition forward as soon as possible to Planning and Zoning and the Assembly.)
15. From Land Use Committee meeting of June 14, 2005, action on proposed adoption
schedule for Title 21, Chapter 9.
Knutson defers to Gallup, Land Use Supervisor. Gallup notes there were two (2) motions that came forward from the LUC meeting the previous week. The first
motion was: ‘the Girdwood LUC wishes the Assembly to consider some type of grandfather rights for property owners that have improved properties whose plans were approved for construction prior to the passage of Chapter 9, Title 21; in addition, it is requesting that Planning and Zoning and the Assembly have an expedited and less costly process for Girdwood property owners impacted by the changes brought on by the passage of these regulations’. Vote at LUC: (11-0) in favor.
Gallup MOVES that GBOS send the LUC’s vote forward as a recommendation to the Assembly; Danger SECONDS. Vote: 5-0, unanimously.
Gallup notes the other motion was per Larry Daniels and is not sure he understands it. ‘Put the GBOS on notice that the LUC may be forwarding additional comments/recommendations on Chapter 9 for the July 18th GBOS meeting for the Planning and Zoning/ Assembly meeting on July 20, 2005.’ No action required by GBOS.
16. From Land Use Committee meeting of June 14, 2005, LUC Agenda item 0506-03 (Case number 2005-082): Hearing Date: Monday, July 11, 2005; Petitioner: Tim Cabana; Request Detail: A conditional use for parking calculations, landscaping and sign regulations for a hotel. Alpine View Estates Phase 1, Tract A-2C. Located on the south side of the Alyeska Highway, west of Timberline Drive in Girdwood; Legal Description: R-11 Turnagain Arm District; Site Address: NHN Kami Way.
Tim Cabana could not be present tonight, so briefed John Gallup who will present for him. As such, will ‘sit out’ any vote from the Board. Gallup indicates he will present not as Cabana’s agent, but as the only person briefed on the project for this evening.
Gallup indicates that last month the LUC and GBOS voted to support Cabana’s concept for the hotel. This month, Cabana was unable to present at the LUC concerning the location of building and parking. Cabana has moved the building over towards the intersection of the eastside connector (Kami Way), about seventy- feet (70’). The parking, which had been located on both sides of the building, has been moved to just the west side of the building. Those are the changes. The difficulties Cabana is facing: new parking plan will ‘bleed over’ from his commercial property into his also-owned multi-family property by about twenty-five feet (25’).
Knutson asks if the commercial parking infringes will it affect building late on the multi-family lot.
Gallup says yes: he will have to change the design of something later in that area because he will have that many less feet on the property. However, it is all his property. This is a new, revised site plan. What Cabana is asking for from the Board is a letter of non-objection to the revised site plan.
Julie Jonas: It seems reasonable, but isn’t this a zone issue?
Knutson: Essentially he’s (Cabana) going to go in front of P&Z to present this and is asking us not to object.
Victor Duncan: Is this approved by Tom Nelson (Planning Dept)?
Gallup: I am given to understand that this site plan is a product of a meeting between Tom Nelson and Tim Cabana. I don’t know for sure. Goes to P&Z on July 11th.
Knutson: It’s generally been my view: this type of thing, a property owner using their own property a particular way: unless it is something terribly strange, I have not been comfortable saying I will weigh in against it. Because this will go in front of P&Z. All that is being asked is a letter of non-objection. I will not vote against it and would favor a letter of non-objection. Is there action from the Board?
Duncan MOVES GBOS send a letter of non-objection. Tingle SECONDS. Vote: 4-0, unanimously in favor ( 1 abstention).
Gallup to write letter.
17. Discussion and action regarding the submittal of the 2005 Capital Improvement List
to the MOA.
Knutson starts by apologizing. Every May, the BOS sends forward to the MOA a capital improvements project list. Through a procedural error on the Board, the time frame for submission of the capital improvements list. When this was recognized in June, were between meetings. Short of calling a special meeting, the 2004 CIP list was adjusted and sent in. One (1) item was omitted (the underpass: decided not to spend federal monies on, so seemed logical to pull from list). The CIP list has largely been the same for the past seven (7) or (8) years. Needs a resolution from the Board accepting the fact the list was turned in June. Should’ve been noticed for the May, 2005, meeting so a full discussion could have been had and submitted in early June to meet the deadline.
Gallup: Opposed to idea of paving roads (wrote thoughts in email to Board).
Surprised it would be higher on the list than the Library/Community Hall project.
Would like to have at the very least the paving of roads moved far down the list and the community hall farther up the list. Wasn’t consulted on the content of the list and would have a different priority of items.
Danger: By the numbers (i.e. priority) is how they look at this not the content?
Knutson: No, it is looked at by the content. They will make an evaluation where they want to spend capital monies and what might be an appropriate project given the MOA’s goals for Girdwood. In the past, the Board has had discussions on what order to put things in and I tried not to move that order. Isn’t necessarily what’s going to drive their consideration. I sent an email to each of you to help with descriptions for each of these items. Any further discussion from the Board?
Gallup: How did road paving get on the list?
Knutson: It’s always been on the list at some point. I took the 2004 list…the only thing taken off was the underpass. I think what it was described as was the paving of the roads around Town Square.
Gallup: That’s different than all of Girdwood. Maybe I’m in Jake’s shoes now: the majority of people in my neighborhood don’t want paving.
Danger: I think you’re right.
Knutson: Let’s do this: let’s take questions from the public first. Again, apologies for the timing on this.
Julie Jonas: Can I see the list? (List is shown to her for 2005).
Knutson: Now that the list is here and we are going to be providing more description for each item to the MOA, my suggestion is if you want to re-do the order, we’ll send that order forward with the additional information that is being requested.
Gallup: Put ‘library’ first; put road paving somewhere near the bottom of the list.
Tingle: I don’t like the idea of doing that. I’m not saying we should pave the roads, but I don’t want the MOA to think that renovating our existing road structure isn’t super important to us. Because of the amount of money we waste every year on grading and dust control.
Gallup: It isn’t wasted. It’s road maintenance.
Tingle: But there are things we can do without having to do that that don’t mean paving. Such as chip-sealing: bring up existing road grade so it has a nice crown on it. Still keeps a rural feel, but it’s a fraction of the cost of paving.
Gallup: Would you accept the word ‘chip-sealing’ instead of ‘paving’?
Tingle: Yes. I’d do that and keep it higher on the list, within the first three (3) items. I’m on the road. I constantly get calls from people complaining about the roads. We can’t do anything without help. It’s such a huge problem it needs to stay close to the top of the list. That would benefit and bring up the quality of life for everyone in the valley.
Knutson: John, would it work if we put the ‘library/community hall’ to number one (1) and moved the other two (2) items down?
Tingle: How about just putting Town Square Park renovation at number three (3) and putting ‘chip-sealing throughout Girdwood’ to number two (2).
Danger: Right on.
Gallup: As long as ‘paving’ is changed to ‘chip-sealing’…..I agree with you. We’ve chip-sealed before and it isn’t a magic bullet either.
Knutson: John, when did the roads get chip-sealed before?
Gallup: Back in the 80’s. After the sewer went in in 1981, we chip-sealed. It works until it falls apart. It lasted about a year.
Tingle: A lot of the problem with why the chip-sealing isn’t lasting is due to drainage.
It’s very messed up. We’ve got to reclaim our drainage so the chip-sealing doesn’t get wet. It’s got a ten (10) year life span. Plus, if you build onto it, it just gets better and better. It’s important to get the drainage done first.
Knutson: We switched number one (1) and number (3). Are there any more changes?
Tingle: I think the Alyeska Bike Trail should also stay where it is on the list.
Knutson: Other discussion from the Board? From the public?
Gallup: The Town Square Park is happening, isn’t it, Tracey?
Knutson: Not necessarily. That’s coming up under New Business.
Tingle: Phase IIB: where is that?
Gallup: By the Fire Station: it’s happening.
Knutson: Again, this list has largely been the same since I’ve been on the Board and a few years before that. I don’t think we need to thrash about which item we’re going to get first. Think it is important to have our true intent. Any other discussion besides switching # 1 and # 3?
Janice Shamberg: Talked to head of Street Maintenance quite a bit about the chip-
sealing process. You’re right: it has improved tremendously. They’ve redesigned
how they do it, how they crown the roads.
Gallup MOVES to approve the CIP list as amended; Danger SECONDS. Vote:5-0,
18. Discussion for potential Board Action on the paving of a parking lot at the Iditarod
Trail Head by Heritage Land Bank and USFS.
Knutson defers to Ward for comments. Ward says HLB is looking at it: want to bring it forward. A lot of community interest in having something like that right there. Seems to be the proper place to do it, there at the trailhead. Since in the midst of creating the right-of-way for Crow Creek Road and the infrastructure for water and sewer for the area, it would be a good time to pursue it.
Knutson comments that in past few years in discussions with Duane Schuldt, formerly chair of Trails Committee, and in conversation with USFS, they are very much in favor of this. Asks what HLB needs from the Board?
Ward says they will be needing support for the easement when it is brought forward.
Action expected next month.
Gallup says the agenda item says specifically ‘paving’ of parking lot.
Ward says that Eash didn’t give her enough information on it.
Gallup for a very lightly used lot, asked if it couldn’t be graveled, crushed and be good? Every square meter of this town that gets paving on it..
Ward says, in the mean time, why doesn’t she get more information on it for the Board before they’re asked to take action; perhaps a ‘position paper’ on the paving of it.
Knutson says that’d be great.
19. Four Valleys Community School update and presentation for possible Board action,
By FVCS board member, Julie Jonas.
Jonas notes there are currently twelve (12) board members. Background: this past year: ACEA ran community school programs in Girdwood. While there were some successes, the local advisory board has decided that Girdwood would pursue a different course for this coming year and forward. A letter was sent to the Board. Tonight, request to Board for community school from Parks and Recreation budget. FVCS board currently has some money in the bank; did extend some of those funds last year in order to support the coordinator’s salary. However, the community school programs are largely volunteers. Takes a coordinator to work with those volunteers. Needs to be a paid position. Want two (2) things: currently pursuing non-profit status, 501 C-3; do fund raisers every year. 1) support for coordinator’s position: would need about thirty thousand dollars ($30,000) (about 20% of ‘found’ money in budget due to being out from under the tax cap; Knutson says that Parks and Rec only enjoys about 18% of the entire budget, so may not apply); 2) partnership to work through the MOA covering insurance for liability. Now: more than one hundred (100) kids in soccer, for example. Have been state budget cuts, then school cuts, then ACEA: no longer supporting after June 30, 2005.
Knutson says her understanding is that with the money in the bank, FVCS can make it through this year. Jonas says she hopes so. Knutson says that some of the difficulty that the Board has: in March, did a work session with Parks and Rec and set priorities for what the budget was going to be spent on this year. There is an injection into the budget due to the tax cap issue. But the priorities have already been established. Will be going through a budget process with Chad Frank. Am aware of the FVCS request. Are under New Business this month so Board cannot take any action. Would suggest: a process in the late Fall, after more experience with the budget. Talk to Board about what it is going to take to help FVCS: the Board can set the mil rate accordingly. Will keep in contact after budget review.
Gallup asks if P&R budget has money left over in the Spring, is it possible to agree to give FVCS that money?
Knutson notes there hasn’t been any money left in the P&R budget for a few years. But there is no question that the community school is an integral part of Girdwood. Want to be part of the process of figuring out how the community school is able to continue.
Eileen Halverson asks when Knutson says ‘this year’, which year is it?
Knutson confirms that it is the year ‘2005’ she is referring to. There will be an in-depth discussions for each department for 2006 and their priorities and how the Board and community will decide what the mill levy should be: will see what the community wants to do. Will have public hearings in the Fall to help determine.
Halverson asks if the decision will take another year.
Knutson says no, but will be hopefully late Fall and, more realistically, first of next year. The MOA sets assessments on properties in January: will then know the value per one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000). Then the Board and community will choose how to set mill rate re: how much the tax rate should be in Girdwood. The two (2) public hearings to decide this together with the community.
Jonas says her understanding is that we had missed the P&R work session not knowing it was happening. As soon as possible, a quorum of FVCS Board came together and this was the next meeting able to attend. Understand the budget hearing process, but it still behooves FVCS to come forward now in case there is any change in the priority schedule set, whether it is Town Square Park, the Skate park, the Playground, etc.
Gallup adds that the community school has a long history in Girdwood, an established part of Girdwood. Although it is technically not a ‘capital improvement’, it could be treated similarly as top of priority list.
Danger asks it enrollment will go back to the way it was before (i.e. at the school gym versus online: fourvalleys.org).
Jonas answers by saying there is a survey for community school in Turnagain Times and online: please respond with how you feel by answering the questions. Also: GBOS has always supported community school through the non-profit grant program. In 2004, received a grant: however, ACEA received the money to run the local school. There is a personal concern that the money hasn’t been accounted for.
Typically it covers the summer coordinator and assistant and was about twenty thousand dollars ($20,000). Chad has been asked to ask ACEA for an accounting.
Knutson says she’ll follow through on that.
Eileen Halverson asks if Knutson can talk to P&R about liability coverage extension which is required by ASD.
Knutson responds that she has no problem making the inquiry. Quite sure will be told by Jeff Dillon: since Girdwood is out from under the MOA tax cap, what we allocate is all there is. Will check.
20. Discussion by MOA engineer and consultant regarding flood plain issues related to
Town Square development. Howard Holtan, Jacques Boutet.
Boutet gives short history of flood plain discovery. Last year, as trying to develop Girdwood Place, encountered a federal ‘hoop’, a designated flood way that runs down Girdwood Place. Requires a regulatory permitting process. Took that part of the project out of the Phase I program to do a flood plain study. Went to their hydrology consultant. They asked for ninety thousand dollars ($90,000) to do a study. Went out and found another consultant for assistance. Took more time, but
good answers to question. In his opinion, may change direction of decision by the Board on how the rest of economic grant money is spent ($10 million dollar economic grant, the earmark appropriation from Senator Stevens).
Tonight’s presentation: Flood Hazard Issues in Girdwood/ June 20, 2005:
Boutet talks about four (4) issues:
o Flood Hazard Definitions
o Town Square Flood Hazards
o Flood Hazard Reduction Alternatives
Boutet explains flood hazard mapping: done to identify potential flood zones for risk of flooding for flood insurance. Girdwood Valley flood hazard mapping: completed in 1978. Base flood assumptions and data use are applicable today. The mapping can be used to guide Girdwood Town Square development. Flood limits are identified by computer models and field reconnaissance. Models are used to identify this area with 1% chance or greater of being flooded. The flow used in this determination is the 100-year flood event. Floodways are defined by regulation to maintain flood conveyance after development in the flood plain. Building in floodways requires extensive analysis and should be avoided. (Boutet shows Map 2. Girdwood Valley Glacier and California Creeks Modeled 100-Year Floodway and Map 1. Girdwood Valley Glacier and California Creeks Modeled 100-Year Flood Extents.) Regarding the economic development area (i.e. Town Square Park, etc.):
most of Town Square, especially on the west and south side essentially goes under water. The old post office is okay. Tim Bennett’s building is okay. Everything south of that is not. (Gallup adds that the Mercantile Building has water up to the floor in the 50’s.) Boutet says the important thing is that a financial institution pays attention to the flood plain and flood ways. Affected areas need to be addressed. There is linkage between economic development and these issues.
Wants to call particular concern to the highways (Seward and Alyeska) which are essentially dams. Culverts are needed.
Further explanation of flood ways with pictures. Development will occur in flood plains. Water will be pushed into a smaller area and that is a flood way. If flood ways are impeded, will do harm. Girdwood Place is a flood way: can’t alter elevation without remapping whole area and demonstrating not going to be pushing a flood into ‘someone’s backyard’. Water has to go somewhere. (Gallup asks if the grade today needs to be the same as today. Boutet: yes, or lower.) Can’t do that.
The other hard place: the one hundred (100) year flood is four feet (4’) higher than anyone is now. If reference Commercial Area and Transportation Plan which has a vision of storefronts pushed to sidewalk (urban village concept): flood creates disconnect. Glacier Creek: not good enough bridge. California Creek: not good enough culverts (some replaced in 90’s: didn’t solve problem). During big event: seventeen hundred (1700) cubic feet per second blasting down California Creek; twelve thousand (12,000) cubic feet per second in Glacier Creek. Can only get six hundred (600) cubic feet through culverts presently in California Creek. If tried to raise water, would push all floodwater back into Town Square.
Challenge: need to increase water flow ability in Glacier and California Creeks.
Conclusion: need one million ($1 million dollars) to install relief culverts in California and Glacier Creeks. Not in-stream culverts: set high. During big event, the culverts would be mobilized. Believe this will reduce and possibly eliminate Girdwood Place as a flood way. Additionally, will take the boundaries of the100 year flood event away from the Town Square area. Would restore the natural flow of the creeks; keep people high and dry. This is where the Board would change its decision on the budget for the economic grant: the one million dollars ($1 million) would come out of the two point seven million dollars ($2.7 million) of the economic grant.
Knutson adds that Boutet and hydrology experts met with Tingle and Knutson earlier in the week. Earlier in the evening: Resolution 2005-07: how to prioritize the spending of the $2.7 million dollars left in the economic grant; can’t do what is wanted in Town Square because of flood plain issue. If one million dollars ($1 million) is taken off of the balance, essentially cancel out the highway gateway treatment, etc. Where it stands right now: the MOA engineer, Howard Holtan is going to apply for FEMA monies and Knutson has made a formal written request to Senator Stevens office this past week to help with relief. Unfortunately won’t know on any other monies in time to deal with the flood plain issue, so the Resolution needs to be redone. Can’t go forward on Town Square until flood plain issue is resolved.
Jonas: $2.7 million is originally from which pot of money?
Knutson: $10.6 in economic development grant money; $500,000 of it was for drainage; DOT has $6.2 million (for Crow Creek Road); (Boutet interjects there was another $1 million grant for a total of three grants: $11.6 million). The balance of the $11.6 million we asked to have transferred to the MOA for administration. Notification of earmark in September, 2003. Since MOA has been administrating it’s portion have been working on project plans.
Jonas: That $10 million kind of came out of the blue. Had to go back and track it. If you go back and look at the local planning processes: the flood plain management study is indicated in the Commercial Areas and Transportation Master Plan. Talked about doing that a long time ago: kind of knew we were going to have this problem: the situation might have been avoided. 20/20 hindsight. Thanks to Senator Stevens, of course; however: we might have done this work first.
Knutson: Understands what is being said. What is known about how the money came about: somewhat ‘laissez faire’. Not sure why DOT thinks it has to have all the money and pave all the way up Crow Creek Road. Because the issue of Congressional Intent has been really ripe over the last month or two, had correspondences with Senator Stevens office and reviewed the history of how the money came to Girdwood; the way that earmark was appropriated. What is known with the Senator and his office staff’s history and through the history and minutes, etc., is that the community wrote a series of letters to the Senator asking for monies to pave the roads in Girdwood; they wanted road reconstruction in Girdwood. He got the earmark appropriated. Only expression of Congressional Intent was that the lower part of Crow Creek be paved. The most recent expression for the rest of it that comes from Lisa Sutherland (Ted Steven’s aide) was that Senator Stevens intent was: Girdwood is to figure out what they need to do. As long as it is supported by community intent and it falls within the parameters of this economic development money, Girdwood was ‘good to go’. After a series of consultants and municipal engineers this is where the situation lies. Last year when one of the four roads to be paved was in the flood plain, all the paving was put off until 2006 until this could be resolved.
Boutet: What has been done is validate the existing model. What’s left: analyze the implications, where it is possible; make improvements.
Knutson (to Jonas): The previous hydrologist had not looked at the old records and expected approximately $100,00 to do the study. The new hydrologist, Dan Billman,
did his homework and was able to find some of the historical pieces that exist and figure out where things are without having to do the $100,000 study. The documentation was there; it just was in some strange, far-flung places. Jacques had to wait a bit for him to be available, so the information was not available from Billman until just recently.
Jonas: Billman has worked on the creeks in Girdwood.
Knutson: Exactly. He knew it was there: finally had the time and capacity from his other projects to go out and scour, get the pieces and use the new standards to figure out currently where we’re at. The solution is culverts. The sad thing is Girdwood is not going to pave around Town Square and get Town Square Park; going to pave around Town Square and put some culverts in, probably.
Jonas: Or put Crow Creek Road monies towards the rest of the plan.
Knutson: That is being explored.
Thompson: What is being presented: is that revised from what FIMA said? If culverts are put in, will it take properties out of the flood plain?
Boutet: No, it is not revised from FIMA. The new culvert that was installed in the
90’s does change things; we just don’t know how much.
Thompson: If the new culverts are put in, will they take some properties out of the flood plain?
Boutet, Knutson: Yes. Potentially all of them. What we would do with the Board’s blessing, is to come back with a couple of alternatives. We’d present how much could be done for $1 million. There will be some trade-offs, but we should be able to get Town Square and a lot of the properties that surround it a lot drier than they would’ve been otherwise.
Knutson: Since we’re at 10 pm, we need a motion to continue the meeting.
Gallup MOVES to extend the GBOS meeting until all business is accomplished; Tingle SECONDS. Vote: 5-0, unanimous in favor.
Gallup: The 600 CFS is based on the old culverts?
Gallup: The new culvert is much higher capacity.
Knutson, Boutet: Yes, we know that.
Boutet: It’s not enough. The hydrologist has been doing this for twenty-five (25) years. He can’t give me the exact numbers, but he’s looked at more culverts than you or I will ever see. He said we’ll probably need one about the same size next to it.
Knutson: We’ll ask him when they come down for exact recommendations. He actually is very articulate about it.
Boutet: Don’t forget: that’s culverts in two (2) locations.
Knutson: Since this is New Business, there really is no action we can take tonight. This is our discussion to prepare for taking an action; that’s why we tabled Resolution 2005-07 because we’ll redo that resolution or do it off the floor probably next month when we take an action on this problem. Procedurally, that’s where we’re at. Further discussion from the Board? From the public? Thank you, Jacques.
Knutson: Since chairing, cannot make this motion. But would like to have a motion from the Board that we be allowed to add in one small New Business item.
Gallup MOVES that this new small business item be added to the agenda this evening; Tingle SECONDS. Vote: 5-0, unanimous in favor.
20a.Loss of Diane Bahnson on Seward Highway
Knutson explains there have been community requests to construct a memorial in
Diane’s honor. Are in the process of rebuilding some community parks, considering
new parks areas. One of Diane’s large fortes was planting: she was a gardener.
Her specialty is working with perennial beds. In talking with Reid: thought perhaps
perennial bed for Diane. Have put this under New Business. Donations will be sent
and held by Girdwood, Inc. There will be some monies available. As we proceed
this summer will have the opportunity to take further action on that. Any discussion from the Board on that issue?
Gallup: We have lots of perennial beds around town that have to be maintained.
Maybe make one of those better? There are two (2) big walls; the bank along the
Danger: She did a lot for this community and she deserves that.
Thompson: One (1) of the projects coming up is the USFS project, the Nissman
Memorial. Wouldn’t it be appropriate to do gardens down there: it is something
New. It would certainly be an asset to that project.
Knutson: It could be. We could take that into account. That project has a plaque
to Jeff Nissman.
21. Land Use Supervisor, John Gallup.
a. Title 21, Chapter 9
b. Land Use Committee Summary of June 14, 2005
c. Heritage Land Bank Report, Crow Creek Land Use Study
Nothing further to report.
22. Parks and Recreation Supervisor, GBOS Chair, Tracey Knutson.
d. Trails Committee Report and Update: From Trails Committee minutes: The Nissman Memorial is going forward: Chad Frank, P&R employee, asks that SBS be selected and provide materials through a ‘sole source memo’. SBS will provide the materials at cost and make a $250 donation so theirs is the best bid and ordering and construction can begin. The bid amount of $17,000 does not include cement. Need a contractor and exact location and then permitting meetings can be held. The SBS bid specified treated Douglas Fir. Excavation and site prep work and forms for pouring the cement are next. Chad, Carl and Alison will meet with Tommy O’Malley next week. Construction should begin after Forest Fair. We have about $26,000 to work with ($16,000 from the Nissman family and $10,000 from the P&R budget.
- Athabaskan Trail: some gravel moved; assessment for additional
needed work to be done by Carl Skustad.
- SAGA Summer Program: Chad Frank reported that have funding for
two (2) weeks of work and the crews will work mainly on the Iditarod Trail.
- Bike Trail Bridge: Frank provided some plans to Jake Thompson and
will have a bid next week; it’s expected to be around $1000. Frank will follow up with Tom Brooks at ARR to see if the RR might provide some funding for the bridge repair.
- Other trail issues:
- At Mile 1.5 of Crow Creek Road: some trees down, pose a
hazard. Tim Charnon of USFS said he preferred to have the
USFS take care of the problem. The committee members
- Matting is exposed in section of the Iditarod Trail. The
committee will work on a project list at the July meeting.
- Alison Rein reported that trees are still being cut on Crow
Creek Road without authorization. Art Eash of HLB will be
advised who to contact.
- Alison Rein reported that the contractor working on the Winner Creek Trail is interested in using the extra wood from the tram
construction for Winner Creek Trail work. Could trade for other wood to be stored at the Trails Shed. Alison will follow up on
- Beaver Pond Trail Report: Barry Kircher read a report. Work
continues on the trail. Carolyn Brodin to help with wood supply on list.
Matt Wedeking reported on the Beaver Pond Trail Extension flagging.
- Submittal to Turnagain Times and Insert for Friends of Girdwood Trails
and Parks: the articles have been submitted.
- Final Report of Crow Creek Road Neighborhood Citizens Advisory
Group: Alison Rein reported that all the trails the committee wanted had been included on the final report.
- Trails Maps for Girdwood (Winter and Summer): Norman Starkey
Explained the changes made to the map and changes that will be made. An invoice will be presented for the work and could have a CD by next week. Kate Sandberg’s trail descriptions were presented and discussed. Suggestion was made to include a version date and information regarding donations to Girdwood Trails.
- Further Trails Funding: Tim Charnon reported that the committee
Should select increments of work for the Girdwood Bike Path repair,
Should funding from the 2005 Appropriation become available. Suggestions were: 1) paint the bridge, and 2) repair and install culverts and drainage.
- Other Business:
- Livingston reported that Kate Sandberg is willing to assume the
secretarial duties for the Trails Committee, effective with the
July meeting. Sandberg is out of town November, December
and January, and Chad Frank will fill in at that time.
- The Tuesday, July 5, 2005 meeting will be held in the P&R Office, the
Old Library Building, 7 pm.
e. Parks and Recreation Update, Chad Frank.
No report this evening.
23. Public Safety and Fire Supervisor, Nick Danger.
f. Fire Department Report. Per Chief Chadwick’s report:
There were two (2) building fires; one (1) vehicle fires this month; ten (10) EMS calls; average response time is gone from five (5) minutes to eleven (11) minutes because they are covering Whittier, Portage and Turnagain Pass area right now. Danger notes they do an excellent job: a lot of care taken with any call. Open burning suspended for the summer due to elevated wildfire hazard. Exception: spruce beetle permit. Fire line: 267-5020.
The Girdwood Fire Department would like to give heartfelt condolences to the family of Diane Bahnson. Please slow down and drive safely.
g. Trooper Report. Danger offers Trooper Welch’s report from the Girdwood Post. There have been problems with people speeding on the Seward Highway: the top speeder recently cited was going 105 mph. Please slow down. A lot of extra troopers will be in town for the Forest Fair so do not drive drunk: you will be caught. Shouldn’t drive drunk anyway; please, again, slow down.
24. Roads Supervisor, Marcus Tingle.
h. Roads Budget to Date. Tingle reports that after May’s billing, balance in Roads account is eighty two thousand ninety six dollars and fifty cents ($82,096.50).
i. Monthly Road Report. The second calcium chloride application will be done in mid-July. The first application was done with fifteen (15) super sacks of product and was not sufficient to cover the entire valley. The second application will be done with eighteen (18) super sacks. We will once again start with the main roads and work out from there until we run out of product. We cannot afford more than what we have already committed to.
Gallup wants to know if any dust complaints have been received since the last application. Tingle reports that Knutson had received some calls; didn’t have enough product to get to every road; takes about twenty-five (25) sacks to do the whole valley. Hesitant to order any more: wants to make sure enough cash reserve is in place to take care of the first part of winter.
25. Utilities Supervisor, Victor Duncan.
j. Under-grounding Utilities. No report this evening.
k. Water and Sewer. Duncan reads highlights from AWWU report. They include:
- AWWU office numbers: 783-1046/1047; fax: 783-1045. Lynda
Barber-Wiltse can also be reached at 564-2751 (Anchorage office).
- Girdwood Water Projects:
- AWWU continues working with EPA to finalize/revise the grant applications so that AWWU can secure reimbursement for portions of the project that are constructed and in service. Tam Construction finished surface restoration work in June, 2005.
- Girdwood Water Improvements Phase IIB:
- The Crow Creek plan was presented to the GBOS on May 16,
2005, and GBOS Resolution 2005-06 is expected to be approved at the June meeting.
- Girdwood Wastewater Projects:
- The focus at this time continues on stemming the I&I problems.
- VEI continues to work with AWWU on the flow meter data-gathering project. AWWU continues to prepare construction plans and specifications to repair an additional 150 to 250 manholes on the east side of Glacier Creek this summer. Matt Stephl is designing the project and Tam will be performing this repair work. AWWU will be managing and QC’ing the effort.
- PM&E Girdwood Town Square Street and Drainage Improvements:
- Planning continues for installation of water pipelines in Holmgren and Girdwood Place this summer. This work will be the third side of deep utility placement around the town square. The final side (sewer upsizing on Hightower) will be completed in 2006. GBOS passed Resolution 2005-05 in May, 2005 supporting this work.
Knutson asks Duncan if he has contacted Michael Tullius of Chugach regarding the cutting of the trees in Town Square Park. Duncan responds he didn’t get anything formal, but the contractor is Hotwire. There’s a power extension going in. This is in process.
Knutson notes all Board Reports are complete. Asks for motion to adjourn.
Gallup MOVES for meeting adjournment at 10:18 pm; Tingle SECONDS. Vote: 5-0, unanimous in favor.
Meeting Adjourns: 10:18 pm
Minutes respectfully submitted,
Secretary’s note: Additional documents available by fax:
- HLB report
- GBOS Resolution 2005-07/ re: Phase II projects (not passed)
- GBOS Resolution2005-06/ re: Crow Creek Neighborhood Plan (passed)
- 2005 CIP Projects List sent to MOA
- Chapter 9/ substantive changes to latest public review draft released first of June
- FVCS request for assistance letter to GBOS/ author: Eileen Halverson
- Girdwood Trails Committee Minutes of June 7, 2005 meeting
- Girdwood Volunteer Fire Department, June report
- AWWU June report