Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-09-10 Council Packet - Work SessionAGENDA KENAI CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION SEPTEMBER 10, 2013 6:00 P.M. — 8:00 P.M. KENAI CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 210 FIDALGO AVE., KENAI, AK 99611 http: / /www.ci.kenai.ak.us A. Introduction - Rick Koch, City Manager B. Presentation of Status Report on the Kenai Spur Highway Upgrade and Reconstruction Project (MP2.1 -8.1) - Gerry Welsh, Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities C. Presentation of Status Report on the Beaver Loop Road Upgrade and Reconstruction Project — Tom Schmid, Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities D. Council Discussion and Public Comment E. Adjournment All meetings are open to the public and participation is encouraged. Agendas and supporting documents are posted on the City's website at www.ci.kenai.ak.us. For additional information, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 907 - 283 -8231. Mu PUBLIC NOTICE Notice is hereby given; the Kenai City Council will meet in a work session on Tuesday, September 10, 2013, for the purpose of receiving status reports from the Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities on the Kenai Spur Highway (MP2.1 -8.1), and Beaver Loop Road, Upgrade and Reconstruction Projects. The scope of the Kenai Spur Highway Project may include additional driving and turning lanes, intersection improvements, and lighting. The Beaver Loop Road Project may include reconstruction of the existing roadbed, realignment, construction of paved shoulders, intersection improvements, lighting, and a separated pedestrian pathway. All interested individuals are encouraged to attend. The work session will be held in the Kenai City Council Chambers located at 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska from 6:00 pm. - 8:00 p.m. The agenda and any supporting documents can be located on the City's website, www.ci.kenai.ak.us. If you have any questions related to this meeting, please contact the Kenai City Clerk's Office at 283 -8231. Sandra Modigh, CIVIC City Clerk Posted: 8/27/13 (City Bulletin & Website) Publish: 9/6/13 (Clarion) Beaver Loop Road: MP 0.0 -3.75 Improvement & Pedestrian Pathway Kenai Spur Highway to Bridge Access Road Project Overview Project No.53456 / Federal Project No. CM- 0001(453) September 9, 2013 STATE OF ALASKA Department of Transportation & Public Facilities Central Region Division of Design and Construction Preliminary Design & Environmental Section Introduction Beaver Loop Road is a state - owned, two -lane facility within the City of Kenai, connecting Kenai Spur Highway and Bridge Access Road north of the Kenai River. It is 3 % miles long, with twelve- foot paved lanes. The road corridor is largely residential, with some small businesses, a riverfront city park, a natural gas storage facility, and several gravel pits. There are no existing constructed pedestrian facilities. The existing roadway is nearing the end of its useful life; the asphalt is deteriorating and the roadway surface is uneven. Average Annual Daily Traffic is about 1,100. Commercial vehicle volumes are about 14 %. Pedestrians and bicyclists in the area use the roadway to move between subdivisions and access recreational sites including Cunningham Park. DOT &PF is in the preliminary design phase, developing conceptual alternatives. The project is a federally- funded 3R project. The project purpose is to: • Extend the service life of the facility • Improve roadway safety In accordance with the Memorandum of Agreement with the City of Kenai, the project purpose includes: • Enhance the City's pathway connectivity • Widen shoulders to four feet Beaver Loop Road MP 0 -3.75 Project Overview 9 September 2013 Page 1 BEGIN PROJECT KENAI NENAI SPUR c� qI ti END „j QOy PROJECT SIRAx9LRgY ROAD / BS �J Q 6 9� LOCATION MAP - �0 xAwgiNSfY 9iA� FO b_ PROJECT LOCAT , The road corridor is largely residential, with some small businesses, a riverfront city park, a natural gas storage facility, and several gravel pits. There are no existing constructed pedestrian facilities. The existing roadway is nearing the end of its useful life; the asphalt is deteriorating and the roadway surface is uneven. Average Annual Daily Traffic is about 1,100. Commercial vehicle volumes are about 14 %. Pedestrians and bicyclists in the area use the roadway to move between subdivisions and access recreational sites including Cunningham Park. DOT &PF is in the preliminary design phase, developing conceptual alternatives. The project is a federally- funded 3R project. The project purpose is to: • Extend the service life of the facility • Improve roadway safety In accordance with the Memorandum of Agreement with the City of Kenai, the project purpose includes: • Enhance the City's pathway connectivity • Widen shoulders to four feet Beaver Loop Road MP 0 -3.75 Project Overview 9 September 2013 Page 1 Facility History The earliest documentation of Beaver Loop Road is a set of survey plans from 1952 showing a surveyed horizontal alignment. A 1972 project to construct Bridge Access Road (named Kenai River Crossing at that time) realigned the western terminus of Beaver Loop Road to create a 90 degree intersection. A grading and paving project completed in 1977 paved the roadway. Beaver Loop Road, functionally classified as a rural major collector, connects two arterials, Kenai Spur Highway and Bridge Access Road. It provides access to a mixture of land uses. Residential development is denser to its south side than to its north. The road provides access to several large gravel pits. Roadway DOT &PF preliminary design and environmental, hydrology, materials, and maintenance & operation staff conducted a site visit in September, 2012. Maintenance staff stated spot repairs (crack sealing and pothole repair) have extended the road's service and usability. With the pavement in service for nearly four decades, spot repairs are ongoing and frequent. Drainage issues are prevalent. Culverts along the roadway, many of which were installed when the road was originally constructed, are reaching the end of their useful life. Many have rusted or missing inverts, and damaged inlets and outlets. Roadside ditches, where present, are overgrown with vegetation or filling with debris. Roadway is nearly level with surrounding terrain, compounding the drainage problem. Utilities There are a large number of utilities throughout the corridor on both sides of the roadway, close to the existing toe of slope, and crossing the roadway all along entire corridor. Preliminary research identified the presence of overhead and underground electric, underground telecommunications, natural gas, sanitary sewer, and water facilities within the project area, all of which would be relocated outside the construction limits. ROW There are 110 property parcels adjacent to the project corridor, of these 65% are along the south side, double the number along the north side. Preliminary concepts indicate the majority of ROW impacts would be narrow strip takes along the roadway frontage. ROW requirements are due primarily to utility relocations necessary to accommodate the wider roadway and improve drainage. Accommodating the utilities in addition to allowances for variations in the required side - slopes require additional ROW throughout the entire corridor on both sides of the roadway. Beaver Loop Road MP 0 -3.75 Project Overview 9 September 2013 Page 2 ALTERNATIVES The four alternatives developed assume: • 50 mph design speed • Drainage improvements including ditch construction and culvert replacement • Rehabilitate the two existing 12 -foot lanes • Construct four -foot shoulders • Construct a 10 -foot separated pathway Beaver Loop Road MP 0 -3.75 Project Overview 9 September 2013 Page 3 Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Grade Existing Existing Raise 2 feet Raise 2 feet Pathway location North South North South Total Cost 16,800,000 18,700,000 16,200,000 18,000,000 Beaver Loop Road MP 0 -3.75 Project Overview 9 September 2013 Page 3 This page intentionally left blank. Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities STATE OF ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC FACILITIES CENTRAL REGION, PRELIMINARY DESIGN AND ENVIRONMENTAL SECTION RECONNAISSANCE ENGINEERING for Kenai Spur Highway Reba Project No. September Prepared By: Gerry Welsh, PE PD &E Project Manager DOT &PF Recommended By: Eric Desentis, PE Date Central Region PD &E 1CV DOT &PF Approved By: Kenneth M. Morton, PE Central Region Preconstruction Engineer DOT &PF Date This page intentionally left blank. Executive Summary The Kenai Spur Highway is a Rural Principle Arterial in the Kenai Peninsula Borough. This State -owned and - maintained facility serves as a critical surface transportation link between the communities of Soldotna and Kenai, providing access to residential and business properties all along its length. This study examines the 5.7 mile long segment of highway from Sports Lake Road (MP 2.8) to Swires Road (MP 8.1) for a broad range of improvements. Two discrete segments corresponding to traffic data collection are analyzed: Sports Lake Road to Beaver Loop Road and Beaver Loop Road to Swires Road; the crash rate for both exceeds the statewide average. to KEN. END OF PROJECT 1 MENAI t e w &t KENAI CITY LIMITS t (5.66 man) (3.66 m••.) 6.1 q 1 v� 1 1 4� MP ze BEGINNING OF PROJECT s OLOOTNA CITY LIMITSr JI 'fir, •HCMOOG .nut .6 •rmn .w 1 1 � IOLATION IMP '- - 1 ROE01 ••• 101HW LOCATION PD &E was tasked with identifying potential corridor safety and capacity improvements. The corridor was initially evaluated according to 3R guidelines with a 10 -year design life. There were no 3R- indicated geometric improvements. The corridor evaluation was expanded and improvement alternatives beyond 3R minimums were developed with a 20 -year design life. iIPage IIIIIIIIIIIIIN Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 Within the study area the existing facility is an undivided two -lane roadway, transitioning to a five -lane section south of Sports Lake Road and north of Swires Road. Capacity analysis indicates within a 20 -year horizon the LOS would deteriorate below those considered generally acceptable for rural arterials. Improvement alternatives developed included adding capacity to the roadway. The preliminary concepts investigated in this study range from providing designated left-tum pockets at six intersections to construction of a divided four -lane facility with a 30 -foot depressed median along the entire project length. Preliminary cost estimates for the improvements are summarized in the following table. In addition to the costs shown below, continuous lighting could be installed along corridor for an additional $4,000,000. Annual maintenance and operation costs for such lighting would be approximately $52,000. This report documents existing conditions, identifies I own roadway deficiencies; forecasts future traffic volumes and their associated levels -of- service; identifies and develops alternatives to address safety and capacity concerns; examines potential impacts; and provides planning level cost estimates. Its purpose is to provide decision makers with sufficient information to plan and program future facility improvements. �1" iiIPage Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 Alternative $ Millions 1: Auxiliary Left -turn Pockets Where Indicated $11.2 2: Three Lane Section, Entire $28.1 4: Five -Lane Section $25.9 5: Four -Lane Divided, Entire $69.7 This report documents existing conditions, identifies I own roadway deficiencies; forecasts future traffic volumes and their associated levels -of- service; identifies and develops alternatives to address safety and capacity concerns; examines potential impacts; and provides planning level cost estimates. Its purpose is to provide decision makers with sufficient information to plan and program future facility improvements. �1" iiIPage Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 Contents ExecutiveSummary ............................................................................ ............................... 1. Introduction ............................................................................... ............................... 1.1. Location .............................................................................. ............................... 1.2. Project Origination ............................................................. ............................... 1.3. Ownership and Maintenance ............................................. ............................... 1.4. Functional Classification .................................................... ............................... 1.5. Zoning ................................................................................. ............................... 1.6. Roadside Development ...................................................... ............................... 1.7. Population .......................................................................... ............................... 1.8. Public Involvement ............................................................. ............................... 1.9. Preliminary Purpose and Need .......................................... ............................... 2. Existing Conditions ..................................................................... ............................... 2.1. Context ................................................. ............................... .................... 2.2. Safe Routes to Schools ..................... ............................... ......................... 2.3. Bicycles & Pedestrians ................ ............................... .................... 2.4. Right- of- Way ........................ ............................... .......... ............... 2.5. Utilities .............................. ............................... ................... ............... 3. Traffic and Accident Analysis .............................. ... ... ............................... 3.1. Traffic Analysis ................. ............................... ........ ............................... 3.2. 3R Summary ....... ............................... ... ............................... .............................. 3.3. Illumination ........ ............................. :: 4. Preliminary Environmental Research ........................... t .............. ......................... . 4.1. Soil Conditions ....................................................::.............. ............................... 4.2. Cultural and Historic Sit ` ....... ...................... ............................... 4.3. Wetlands .................. .. ......................... ............................... 4.4. Hazardous Waste Site .............................. ............................... 4.5. Fish and Wildlif ......................................... ............................... 4.6. Air Quality. ..... ........................................ ..............0................ 4.7. Noise ..... ......... .................................................. ............................... ..................1 ..................1 .................. 2 .................. 2 .................. 2 .................. 3 ................. 3 ................. 3 ................. 3 ................. 3 ................. 4 4.8. Floodplain... .... ............................................................. ............................... 4.9. National Parks, s, Monuments and Wild and Scenic Rivers ........................... 5. Alternatives .................. ..................................................................... ............................... 5.1. No Build Alternative ....................................................... ............................... 5.2. Build Alternatives ........................................................... ............................... 5.3. Alternative 1: Auxiliary Left -turn Pockets ...................... ............................... 5.4. Alternative 2: Three Lane Section .................................. ............................... 5.5. Alternative 3: Five Lane Section ..................................... ............................... 5.6. Alternative 4: Four Lane Divided .................................... ............................... Guidance.................................................................................... ............................... 6. Cost Estimates ........................................................................ ............................... 7. Summary .......................................... ............................... ....... ............................... ............ 4 ............ 4 ............ 4 ........... 4 ........... 4 ........... 5 ........... 5 ........... 7 ........... 9 .........10 .........10 .........10 .........10 .........12 .........12 .........13 .........13 .........13 .........13 .........14 ..........................14 ..........................14 ..........................15 ..........................16 ..........................16 ..........................17 ..........................18 .........................19 ......................... 20 e Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 List of Tables TableA Traffic Projections ............................................................................................ ............................... 5 TableB Left -turn Lane Warrants .................................................................................... ..............................6 TableC Signal Warrants ................................................................................................. ..............................6 Table D Total Crashes, 2000 -2009 ................................................................................. ..............................7 TableE Segment Crash Rates ......................................................................................... ..............................7 Table F Moose - Vehicle Collision Rates .......................................................................... ..............................9 TableG Hazardous Waste Sites ..................................................................................... .............................12 Table H Preliminary Cost Estimates (in $1000s) ........................................................... .............................19 Table I Summary of Alternatives ................................................................................... .............................20 List of Figures Figure1 Vicinity Map ...................................... ............................... ................ ..............................1 Figure 2 Existing Typical Section ................ ............................... .. ...... .......... ..............................4 Figure 3 Preliminary Environmental Information ............... ............. 11 Figure 4 Typical Section, No Build Alternative ............... ........................... .............................14 Figure 5 Turn Pocket, Preliminary Design ............................ ............................... .............................15 Figure 6 Alternative 1, Typical Section Between Intersection 15 Figure 7 Alternative 1, Auxiliary Left -turn Pockets ....................................................... .............................15 Figure 8 Alternative 2, Three Lane Section ................................................................... .............................16 Figure 9 Alternative 3, Typical Section Beaver Loop Road to Swires Road .................... .............................16 Figure10 Existing Alignment ......................................................................................... .............................17 Figure 11 Alternative 4, Four Lane Divided Typical Section ........................................... .............................17 "4v ivIPage Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 List of Appendices Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D List of Acronyms AADT AASHTO DOT &PF KPB LOS LUST MP MVM ROW PCM PD &E USFWS TWLTL UCL 3R Report Draft Design Designation Preliminary Concept Drawings Preliminary Cost Estimates Annual Average Daily Traffic American Association of State Highway and I Alaska Department of Transportation and Kenai Peninsula Borough Level -of- Service Leaking Underground Storage T Milepost Million - Vehicle -Miles Right -of- -Way Alaska Highway Pre *Vr, `on M al Preliminary Design n rnental Section U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Two -Wa Left -Turn Lane Upper Facilities Officials v�Page Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 This page intentionally left blank. viIPage Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 1. Introduction 1.1. Location Kenai Spur Highway, located in the Kenai Peninsula Borough (KPB), is a 39 mile long facility beginning at the Sterling Highway in Soldotna, extending north through Kenai and Nikiski, and terminating at Bay Beach Road. This reconnaissance report examines the section of the highway between MP 2.8 and 8.1. For this study, the project was split into two discrete segments: Sports Lake Road to Beaver Loop Road (3.9 miles) and Beaver Loop Road to Swires Road (1.8 miles). The total length of roadway examined is 5.7 miles. Refer to Figure 1. TO K[NA' END OF PROJECT KFNA, 1� Fu (5.68 mow) $ MP SI N KENAI CITY LIMITS 1 (3.86 mlw) 1 2 (1.82 .2..) A 6. s, 1 C 1 � V 1 .. 1 / 1 .a W 2.e / BEGINNING OF PROJ #T m. OLOOTNA CITY LIMITS to l 1 At.11N1 N ANCHOR 110)pNf �( 1 LOCATION MAP — i lO /YYYY HOYF Ni�GLT LOCaTICH __ �/ 9 LL. N Figure 1 Vicinity Map 11Page Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance Engineering Report, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 1.2. Project Origination In 2012, the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT &PF) received a $20 million appropriation to rehabilitate 5.7 miles of Kenai Spur Highway between Sports Lake Road and Swires Road. This reconnaissance study, funded with Advanced Project Definition funds, aims to provide decision makers with information sufficient to plan and program future facility improvements. Its objectives are to: • Document existing conditions and identify any roadway deficiencies • Analyze current and predicted traffic volumes for level -of- service (LOS) • Develop feasible alternative(s) to address identified safety and capacity concerns • Develop planning level cost estimates and identify potential impacts for each alternative The Department's Preliminary Design and Environmental Sectio�`(PD &E) was tasked with identifying potential corridor safety and capacity needs. This ,pr ject was initially developed according to 3R guidelines with a 10 -year design life. For 3It projects, the Alaska Highway Preconstruction Manual (PCM) states, "select a desigt> year that at least equals the expected life of the improvement." The principal objective of 3R project stated in the PCM is, "to restore the structural integrity of the existing roadway, thereby extending the service life of the facility." A 10 -year study period from 2000 to 2009 was used for crash analysis. The crash rate for this section of highway exceeded the state average of 1.176 crashes per million - vehicle -miles (MVM) by over 5011( during that ti Te period. Crash clusters and locations of high severity crashes were identified and mappd. The type and observed distribution of crashes was used to identify problem areas for developing a range of improvements. Capacity analysis indicates within a 20 -ygar horizon the LOS would deteriorate below those considered generally_.acceptable for rural arterials. Therefore, alternatives to add capacity were developed with a 20 -year design life in accordance with that typically used for new construction and reconstruction (4R) projects. 1.3. Ownership and Maintenance Kenai Spur Highway is a state- owned and - maintained facility within the KPB. It is the main surface transportation link between Soldotna and Kenai and primarily serves local residents. The project begins north of Soldotna at Sports Lake Road and enters the Kenai city limits near Swallow Drive. The remainder of the project corridor lies within the City of Kenai. 1.4. Functional Classification DOT &PF functional classification for the Kenai Spur Highway (CDS Route #117600) is Rural Principal Arterial. Arterials are intended to provide high degrees of mobility and to carry heavy volumes of traffic at relatively high speeds. 21 Page Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance Engineering Report, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 1.5. Zoning KPB land use maps indicate the majority of properties adjacent to the project corridor are zoned as residential and commercial. North of Sports Lake Road (the southern project terminus) an area on both sides of the road is classified as "Timber/Farm" land. There are two properties identified as "Institutional" and six properties identified as "Accessory Building" along the project corridor. 1.6. Roadside Development Development along the highway is relatively dense in much of the corridor. Twenty -seven street approaches and 55 driveway approaches exist within the project corridor. Most development is residential, with several commercial properties. The greatest density occurs in the segment between Sports Lake Road and Beaver Loop Road, especially in the area south of Silver Salmon Drive, as well as in the vicinity of Lupine Drive. North of B less dense due to wetlands surrounding the highway corridor 1.7. Population Road, development is t development. According to the 2005 KPB Comprehensive Plan, between 1990 and1W the population of the KPB grew from 40,802 to 51,220, with an annual growth rate of 1.76 %. Kenai, the most populous city within the KPB representing nearly 14% o of its total population in 2003, had one of the lowest annual growth rates at 0.92 %. SAtna, the third t "cost populous city in the KPB representing 8% of its total population in 2003, had an annual growth rate of 1.19 %. 1.8. Public Involvement In accordance with the PCM, this component. 1.9. Prelij The following does not include a public involvement basis of the project purpose and need. This section is not intended to be a "Purpose and Nef Statement." A project "Purpose and Need Statement' should be developed early in any environmental phase undertaken. According to the PCM, the purpose of a 3R project is to prolong and preserve the service life of an existing highway, enhance highway safety, protect public investment, and derive the maximum economic benefit from the existing highway system. The Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 to 8.1 Reconnaissance was initially investigated as a possible 3R -type project to improve safety and operating conditions for highway users. Investigation of broader improvement types followed. Safety improvements would address crash rates that exceed the statewide averages for rural principal arterials. Capacity improvements would increase mobility and improve operating conditions. 3�Page Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance Engineering Report, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 2. Existing Conditions 2.1. Context Kenai Spur Highway serves as the main thoroughfare between Kenai and Soldotna. Through the project between Sports Lake Road and Swires Road, the existing highway is a paved two -lane facility. As -built information from a 2001 repaving and pathway project indicates an existing typical section of two 12 -foot lanes and eight -foot shoulders, for a total pavement width of 40 feet. Refer to Figure 2. The speed limit is 55 mph for the majority of the corridor, reducing to 45 mph as it approaches Swires Road. South of Sports Lake Road, the existing highway is a five - lane facility, transitioning to the two -lane section north of the intersection. Approaching Swires Road, Kenai Spur Highway transitions back to five lanes into Kenai. ROADWAY PATHWAY yr A r� SOUTHBOUND Figure 2 Existing Typical Section 2.2. Safe Routes to Schools There are no schools directly adja located off Swires Road anvroxi/ 2.3. Bicycles & Pedesti Construction of a shared use however, Mountain View Elementary is :file south of the Kenai Spur Highway. MP 2.8 to 8.1 was completed in 2004. The 10 -foot wide paved pathway runs along the west side of the Kenai Spur Highway and is generally separated by 20 feet or more from the highway edge of pavement. 2.4. Right- of- Way Initial investigation of tax maps, via the KPB's geographic information system, indicated the Kenai Spur Highway right -of -way (ROW) varies in width along the corridor from approximately 160 to 300 feet. The majority of intersecting roads along the corridor have ROW widths of 60 to 80 feet. Preliminary tax map information and aerial photography indicate the existing pathway may be outside the existing ROW in some locations. 2.5. Utilities Several utilities, underground and overhead, are located within the project vicinity, including water, electric, communication (fiber -optic and conventional), and natural gas. Preliminary research indicates roadway improvements could trigger a need for relocation of utilities. 41 Page Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance Engineering Report, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 3. Traffic and Accident Analysis A 3R analysis was conducted to determine if any safety improvements were indicated according to procedures laid out in the PCM. The analysis considered lane and shoulder widths, horizontal curve modification, vertical curve modification, intersections, and moose - vehicle collisions with a 60 mph design speed. Although the 3R analysis did not indicate any improvements, the regional traffic engineer indicates safety improvements may be warranted in areas with above average crash rates. The 3R report, summarized below, is included as Appendix A. 3.1. Traffic Analysis 3.1.1. Traffic Projections Traffic volumes were forecasted to determine capacity requir m for the highway in the design year (2035) as well as the construction year (2015)�aii' ° (2025). The 2010 Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) Loop Road and 9,450 from Beaver Loop Road to Section provided a growth rate of 1.34% based or (2035) the traffic volumes are forecasted tolincreE AADT data is summarized in Table A. Refet.to -E Table A Traffic Projections Segment Existing year (2010)4 Construction year (2C Mid -Life year (2025) Design Year (2035) Lake Road to Beaver Swires Road. The DOT &PF Highway Data historical growth trends. By the design year ;e to 16,050and 13,200, respectively. The B for Draft Design Designations. Lake to Beaver Loop 11,500 (LOS D) 12,300 (LOS D) 14,050 (LOS E) 16,050 (LOS F) Beaver Loop to Swires 9,450 (LOS D) 10,100 (LOS D) 11,550 (LOS D) 13,200 (LOS D) Congestion is a measure of delay experienced by vehicles and is evaluated in terms of level -of- service (LOS.) LOS is a qualitative rating of a facility's effectiveness at moving traffic. Roadway operating conditions range from free flow (LOS A) to stop -and -go traffic (LOS F). American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) policy recommends arterials in non -urban operate at LOS C. 51 Page Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance Engineering Report, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 Both segments of the studied corridor currently operate at a LOS D, indicating traffic flow is approaching unstable conditions and is limiting drivers' ability to maneuver within the traffic stream. If no improvements are made to the facility, the segment from Beaver Loop Road to Swires Road is projected to remain at LOS D in 2035, while operation on the segment from Sports Lake Road to Beaver Loop Road would decline to LOS F. 3.1.2. Intersection Turning Movements Traffic counts were performed at five intersections with a high incidence of crashes reported during the 10 year study period. Counts at the Togiak Street intersection do not meet warrants for turn lanes or signals; it was not further analyzed. The intersections at Sports Lake Road, Strawberry Road, Beaver Loop Road, and Swires Road were subject to further analysis. Each intersection was compared to AASHTO left -turn warrants and ML&D traffic signal warrants, and intersections meeting these warrants are summarized in Ta"and C. Table B Left -turn Lane Warrants Kenai Spur Hwy/ Sports Lake Rd North/ 9ouih Existing/ Existing Kenai Spur Hwy/ Strawberry Rd North/ South Yes/ No Kenai Spur Hwy/ Beaver Loop Rd North /South No/ Yes LKenai Spur Hwy/ Swires Rd North/South Existing/ Existing Table C Signal Kenai Spur Hwy/ SporTFTMkM No No Kenai Spur Hwy/ Strawberry Rd No No Kenai Spur Hwy/ Beaver Loop Rd No Yes (2034) Kenai Spur Hwy/ Swires Rd No Yes (2029) C The intersections at Sports Lake Road, Beaver Loop Road, and Swires Road were analyzed in the 3R report summarized in the next section. 61 Page Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance Engineering Report, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 3.2. 311 Summary The 3R Analysis is based on crash data from the DOT &PF's Traffic and Safety Section for the 10 -year study period from 2000 to 2009. Data were sorted according to crash location, severity (fatality, major injury, etc.) and type (head -on, rear -end, etc.). Preliminary analysis identified crash clusters near several major intersections as well as segments with higher than average crash rates. During the study period, the crash rate on this segment of the Kenai Spur Highway was more than 50% higher than the statewide average. 3.2.1. Crash Data DOT &PF crash data indicate 397 crashes occurred along the Kenai Spur Highway from MP 2.8 to 8.1 during the study period. One fatal and 21 major -injury crashes were reported during the ten years. Table D shows a breakdown of crashes by severity. Ofd 397 crashes reported, 358 were segment - related and 39 were intersection related. Table D Total Crashes, 2000 -2009 21 286 397 Table E, adapted from the 3R report, comparegmeri - rash rates within the project corridor to the statewide average crash rate for rural undivided highways. For undivided rural principal arterials, the statewide averagee is 1.176 crashes per MVM. Table E Segment Crash Rates 71 Page Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance Engineering Report, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 Crash rates for both segments are above average and above the upper control limit (UCL). Accident rates above the UCL indicate crashes are an issue for these segments and not due solely to chance. Segment crash rates indicate a substantive safety performance problem. The 3R Analysis within those segments examines discrete or overlapping geometric elements, curves and/or roadway widths not meeting current design standards for the selected design speed. 3.2.2. Lane and Shoulder Widths The 3R Analysis indicates the existing 12 -foot travel lanes with eight -foot shoulders are adequate for this roadway. 3.2.3. Horizontal Curve Modification There are nine horizontal curves located within the project limits, all of which meet design criteria for 60 mph. None of the horizontal curves along this secti f the highway requires improvement under 3R criteria. 3.2.4. Crest vertical Curve Modification I` The 3R Analysis procedure only applies to crest verti50 curves; sag vertical curves are not analyzed. Two of the 11 existing crest vertical curves within this section of the highway do not meet current design standards for 60 mph. The number of actual crashes at these curves fell below the predicted crash rate for vertical curves; therefore, no 3R requirements for flattening are indicated. 3.2.5. Intersection Impro t The 3R Analysis examined three i terseetions 'Wthis section of the highway: Sports Lake Road, Beaver Loop Road, and Swires Road. Thirty -nine intersection crashes were recorded during the study period. The Sports Lake Road and Swires Road intersection crash rates fell below the statewide average; the Beaver Loop Road intersection crash rate exceeded the statewide average but fell below the critical rate for improvement. No 3R modifications at intersections are indicated. 3.2.6. Moose- VehCollisions This segment of highway ranks 2 °d highest in the state for moose - vehicle collisions. Of the 358 segment- related crashes during the study period, 158 moose or general "animal' collisions occurred. For the purposes of this report, all "animal' crashes are attributed to moose; they constitute 44% of total segment crashes, and the sole fatality was attributable to a moose collision. The 2003 "3R Analysis Moose Accident Clarification" memo specifies the moose - vehicle collisions frequency and rate thresholds for the 75`h and 95`h percentile. Table D shows these thresholds and corresponding observed quantities for this corridor during a five -year segment of the 3R study period. 81 Page Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance Engineering Report, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 Table F Moose - Vehicle Collision Rates 3R recommends any build - alternative include removing vegetation from the existing clear zone and installing moose awareness signs. Other potential mitigation measures include illumination, fencing, and grade- separated crossings. The density of development in this area largely diminishes the potential effectiveness of moose fencing. Twenty -seven street approaches and 55 driveway approaches exist along the highway within the project corridor. Each of these approaches would require access treatment such as electromats or cattle guards to function properly. Along theEI€segment of highway between Beaver Loop Road and Swires Road, development is less dense and mWse- vehicle collisions are more prevalent than they are south of Beaver Loop oad making fencing an option for this segment. However, fencing this segment would land-%k several parcels making it an option the Department would not consider suitable. Grade- separated crossings are another potent tool. In order to function properly, these crossings require fencing to funnel moose a safe crossing locations. Grade separations would be expensive to construct and would significantly enlarge the footprint of the project, increasing environmental impacts and ROW takes; therefore, grade - separated crossings are not considered desirable for this project. 3.3.Illuminati Continuous lighting on o corridors has reduced moose - vehicle collisions by 70 to 80% over clearing vegetation alone. Continuous lighting costs approximately $700,000 per mile to install; for a total cost around $4,000,000 to light the entire project corridor. Annual operation costs would be around $52,000 for the entire project corridor. Spot lighting in areas where clusters of moose - vehicle collisions are present could be effective at a lower installation and operation costs. High densities of moose - vehicle collisions found in localized areas could indicate natural migration corridors. For instance, a 0.6 mile long segment of highway between Beaver Loop Road and Raven Street experienced 23 moose - vehicle collisions in a five -year period. Spot lighting at intersections would have benefits beyond mitigating moose - vehicle collisions; it could also reduce rear -end and angle collisions. 9IP- -e Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance Engineering Report, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 4. Preliminary Environmental Research Preliminary environmental research was conducted along the project corridor. The results, summarized below, provide an overview of existing conditions. 4.1. Soil Conditions The Kenai Spur Highway traverses a variety of glacial, glacio- lacustrine /marine, fluvial and eolian mineral soils. Commonly the core of larger hills in the Kenai lowland and study areas are composed of unsorted glacial drift, deposited during the Pleistocene. Lowland moraines and till sheets have been partially buried under a blanket of Pleistocene, sandy, glacio- lacustrine of glacio- marine sediment, deposited in an ice dammed ancestral water body that occupied the Cook Inlet basin. Subsequent stream systems draining the Kenai Lowland have deposited large quantities of coarse grained sediment in valley bottom stream floodplains and terraces, and finer - grained materials in deltas. The majority of the Kenai Lowland area, including the project area, is mantled with several inches to several feet of silty eolian loess. Surface organic materials cover much of the project and range from six inches to several feet thick; the thicker deposits are in poorly drained muskegs. The 1993 Design Study Report (Project #59872) indicated thtxisting roadway section is underlain, in localized areas, with a layer of peat. Also present in localized areas are frost susceptible silts. Soils in cut areas may be suitable for select borrow. 4.2. Cultural and Histor' Research of the Alaska Department of Naturat Resources, Office of History & Archaeology records indicates two properties along the project corridor are classified as cultural, historical, or archaeological sites. Further research would need to be completed to determine any potential impacts. 4.3. Wetlands The wetland data, obtained from the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetland Inventory Wetland Mapper and the KPB wetlands map, indicates four drainages are presently bisected by the corridor, most notably the Beaver Creek drainage. The study area may encroach on several wetland areas adjacent to the corridor. Wetland locations would be field verified during the environmental phase. Refer to Figure 3 101 Page Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance Engineering Report, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 To «cNAI END OF PROJECT ® Aatiw Haemal Ceanap Site InoetNe Hoxmat Geawp Site KENAI SPUR KPB Delineated Wetlands 8.1 N e� iC _z ,g s C' MP .4 59 VP Y z M 1 STRAx ERRY ROAD 1 1 1 41 r INNING OF PROJ CT Bic, 0 SPP TO ANCHORAGE RVAL N i TO N h Figure 3 Preliminary Environmental Information 111Page Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance Engineering Report, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 4.4. Hazardous Waste Sites A search of the Department of Environmental Conservation Contaminated Sites Program database found seven hazardous waste sites along the study corridor. Three sites are listed as "cleanup complete" and four sites are listed as "active." Further research would need to be conducted to determine any potential impacts. Location, status, and presence of Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) are summarized for each location in Table G. Refer to Figure 3 for location of the seven sites. Table G Hazardous Waste Sites 1836 Kenai Auto Inc. 37388 Kenai Spur Highway Cleanup No Soldotna, AK 99669 - Complete 24010 AT &T Alascom Soldotna 44890 Churchill No Microwave Soldotna, AK 9 0 mplep Complete 1004 AT&T Alascom Soldotna 44890 Churchill Avenue Active No Microwave Soldotna, AK 99669 23253 McLane and Associates 38240 Kenai Spur Highway Cleanup yes Kenai, AK 99611 Complete 4586 Duct or Sheet Metal, Inc. a 815 Kenai Spur Highway Active No Kenai, AK 99611 Drum Site – Mile 8 7871 Kenai Spur Highway 467 Kenai Spur Highway Kenai, AK 99611 Active No 4593 Quonset Hut Apart 825 Kenai Spur Highway Active No Kenai, AK 99611 4.5. Fish and Wildlife Fish Streams: The Alaska Department of Fish and Game Atlas to the Catalog of Waters Important to the Spawning, Rearing or Migration ofAnadromous Fishes lists Beaver Creek as an anadromous fish stream. Any work done on the existing fish passage culvert at Beaver Creek would likely require a permit. One other unnamed stream bisects the project corridor and may require fish passage measures. The project is in the vicinity of the Kenai River drainage, which is considered essential fish habitat. The Alaska Department of Fish and Game and USFWS would be consulted during the environmental phase of any project advanced. 121 Page Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance Engineering Report, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 State Refuges. Critical Habitat Areas and Sanctuaries: No State Refuges, Critical Habitat Areas, or Sanctuaries were identified in the vicinity of the project corridor. Threatened and Endangered Species): Preliminary investigation of USFWS records does not indicate the presence of any Threatened and Endangered species in the project area. Additional field work should be undertaken during the environmental documentation process would be required to ensure Threatened and Endangered species would not be affected by the project. USFWS would be consulted regarding this component of the environmental study. Eagle Nests: Field research conducted during the environmental study to determine the location of eagle's nests in the vicinity of the project corridor. If active eagle nests are found within 660 feet of the project area, DOT &PF, in consultation with the USFWS, would determine appropriate actions. Appropriate actions could include restricting constructig&.vities during sensitive nesting time periods or monitoring the nest during cot National Wildlife Refuges: The USFWS website outside of the boundaries of the Kenai National 4.6. Air Quality Study area is not in a nonattainment area; 4.7. Noise No noise analysis was performed measures would be evaluated dui 4.8. Floodplain a FEMA Flood Insurance Ra'i shows that the Kenai Sne aH floodplain Zone A, me flood elevation and flood performed during the design project corridor is analysis was performed. however, noise abatement design phase of any project. 20Wir the Kenai Peninsula Borough dated May 19, 1981 Land cross culvert at Beaver Creek are in a mapped dation during the 100 -year flood is expected but the base ctors have not been determined. An analysis would be to determine the impact of improvements on inlet and outlet water levels. The City of Kenai does not participate in the National Flood Insurance Program; therefore, work within this floodplain would not require a KPB floodplain development permit. 4.9. National Parks, Preserves, Monuments and Wild and Scenic Rivers Initial investigation of the area indicates no adverse impacts to local, state, National Parks, National Forests, or Wild and Scenic Rivers would occur from the potential project. The National Park Service and Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation websites were searched; no National Parks, Preserves, Monuments, Wild and Scenic Rivers, or State parks were indicated in the project area. 131 Page Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance Engineering Report, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 S. Alternatives Four `Build Alternatives" and one "No -Build Alternative" are presented below. 5.1. No Build Alternative The no -build alternative would not change the existing typical section. Refer to Figure 4. Only routine maintenance activities would occur throughout the project area during the next 20 years. Figure 4 Typical Section, No Build Alternative 5.2. Build Alternatives The following assumptions were made in developing all preliminary "build" alternatives: • 55 mph design speed for the entire projecorridor • Rolling terrain • Drainage via culverts and open ditches; no curbs or storm drains • Slopes are 4:1 within clear zone; 2:1 beyond the clear zone • Structural section consists of two inches Hot Mix Asphalt, three inches asphalt treated base, three inches aggregate base course, D- 1, and three feet type A fill Alternative 1 would construct auxiliary left -tum lanes at six intersecting streets; the road typical section would remaii(a two -lane section between the improved intersections. Alternative 2 would construct a three -lane section with a continuous two -way left-turn lane (TWLTL) for the entire length of project. Alternative 3 would construct a three -lane section with a continuous TWLTL from Sports Lake to Beaver Loop and a five -lane section with a continuous TWLTL from Beaver Loop to Swires. Alternative 4 would construct a four lane divided highway for the entire length of project. Alternative details are presented in the following sections. Preliminary concept drawings for each alternative are presented in Appendix C. 141 Page Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance Engineering Report, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 5.3. Alternative 1: Auxiliary Left -turn Pockets Alternative 1 would construct auxiliary left -turn pockets at six intersecting streets: Swallow Drive, Silver Salmon Drive, Strawberry Road, North Lupine Drive, Togiak Street/Dogwood Road, and Beaver Loop Road/Shotgun Drive. Existing five -lane sections would remain at Sports Lake Road and Swires Road. Need for left -turn lanes was evaluated per American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Guide for Left -turn Lanes (Exhibit 9 -75) and discussed in Chapter 3 of that report. A turn pocket conceptual plan view with a 770 -foot taper and a 545 -foot stopping/storage length is illustrated in Figure 5. These lengths correspond to a 55 mph design speed and storage of two vehicles. Actual lengths would be based on to traffic volumes. '4V I. r� Figure 5 Turn Pocket, Preliminary Design The existing pathway would be relocated at intersections. The typical section would transition to the existing two -lane roadwa. PAT AY 10'� _� 5 W 1H9Q1ND NOR11BtlMN Figure 6 Alternative 1, Ti o" ection Between Intersections iv 17+6 SWiNBWNO - NONIIBW Figure 7 Alternative 1, Auxiliary Left -turn Pockets figures 6 and 7. 151 Page Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance Engineering Report, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 5.4. Alternative 2: Three Lane Section Alternative 2 would construct a three -lane section along the entire project from Sports Lake Road to Swires Road. The typical section would consist of one 12 -foot through lane in each direction and a 14 -foot continuous TWLTL. Refer to Figure 8. Dedicated left -turn pockets would be provided in the center lane at the intersections with high incidences of crashes. The existing pathway would be relocated at intersections. The existing five -lane sections would remain at Sports Lake Road and Swires Road. Figure 8 Alternative 2, Three Lane Section S.S. Alternative 3: Five Lane Section IV Alternative 3 would construct a three -lane or five -lane section to Beaver Loop Road from the existing five -lane section at Sports Lake Road, and a five -lane section from Beaver Loop Road to the existing five -lane section at Swires Roaedicated left -turn pockets would be provided in the center lane at the intersections with high cidences of crashes. The five lane section would consist of two 12 -toot through lanes in each direction and a 14 -foot TWLTL. The existing pathwa� would be relocated at intersections. Refer to Figure 9. Figure 9 Alternative 3, Typical Section Beaver Loop Road to Swires Road A high incidence of segment- related crashes occurred along the northern segment of the project from Beaver Loop Road to Swires Road. The additional through -lanes would provide safe passing opportunities, reduce traffic platooning, and ease associated driver frustration. The continuous TWLTL would provide greater separation for opposing traffic, reducing the risk of head -on collisions; and would remove vehicles waiting for left -turn opportunities from through - lanes, reducing the risk of rear -end collisions. 161 Page Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance Engineering Report, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 5.6. Alternative 4: Four Lane Divided Alternative 4 would construct a divided four -lane facility along the entire project corridor from Sports Lake Road to Swires Road. The proposed centerline would shift, with all widening occurring to the west. Refer to Figure 10 and Figure 11 for the centerline shift. This would allow the existing lanes to carry traffic during construction of the new lanes. Existing left -turn lanes would remain at Sports Lake Road and Swires Road. The four -lane divided typical section would have two through -lanes in each direction and a 30 -foot depressed grass median. Lane width would be 12 feet with eight foot outside shoulders and six foot inside shoulders. The existing pathway would be relocated and reconstructed for the entire project length. Refer to Figure 11. Figure 10 Existing Alignment 4 —LANE v�n�wir �a Figure 11 Alternative 4 We;,'IW Typical Section Existing horizontal ica ents would remain. Median crossings would be provided at approximately half - . e increments along the highway. The exact location of median crossings and associated auxiliary turn lanes would be determined during later phases of the project. Homer Electric Association plans to upgrade overhead power lines running along the eastern edge of the existing ROW. These power line upgrades are anticipated prior to of a roadway a project. Shifting the centerline west and reconstructing the pathway would have several advantages without significantly increasing construction costs compared to shifting the roadway to the east or widening to both sides of the roadway • Minimize or avoid conflicts with upgraded power lines • Minimizes ROW impacts • Eliminate the need for a detour by utilizing the existing roadway during construction 171 Page Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance Engineering Report, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 Guidance The following guidance was utilized in developing this project. • Alaska DOT &PF, Alaska Preconstruction Manual (2005) • AASHTO, A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (2001) • AASHTO, Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities (1999) • U.S. Department of Justice, ADA Standards for Accessible Designs (2010) • Kenai Peninsula Borough Comprehensive Plan, 2005 • City of Kenai Comprehensive Plan, 2003 181 Page Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance Engineering Report, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 6. Cost Estimates Table H summarizes preliminary costs estimates for the five build alternatives. Refer to Appendix D. Table H Preliminary Cost Estimates (in $1000s) 1 $900 $1,600 $600 $8,100 $11,200 2 $2,000 $2,000 $800 $23,300 $28,100 4 $2,200 $2,000 $800 $2 0 $31,000 5 $3,500 $14,600 $4,200 AMW $69,700 In addition, continuous lighting could be installed $4,000,000. Annual maintenance and operation c $52,000. ;t coMor at a cost of would be approximately 191Page Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance Engineering Report, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 7. Summary The 3R analysis did not indicate a need to improve the existing alignment, typical section, or intersections; however, crash rates on this section of the Kenai Spur Highway exceed the statewide average by more than 50 %. Unless improvements are made to the facility, crash rates would likely continue to rise as traffic volumes increase with area growth and development. Capacity analysis indicates LOS would deteriorate within a 20 -year horizon, further reducing the operational performance and safety of the highway. Therefore, alternatives were developed beyond 3R requirements with a 20 -year design life to add capacity to this two -lane Rural Principal Arterial. Recognizing major reconstruction (Alternative 4) may not be feasible in the immediate future due to limited funding; four lesser alternatives were developed to address specific issues incrementally lower costs. Refer to Table G. Table I Summary of Alternatives . Alternatives I and 2 would address intersection- related crashes resulting from left -turns. Alternatives 3 would provide additional safe passing opportunities and increase capacity along the northern segment of the project with additional through -lanes. Alternatives 2 and 3 would provide a continuous TWLTL to remove left - turning vehicles from the through -lanes. Alternative 4 would increase safety and capacity by providing additional through -lanes, left -turn pockets, and a non - traversable median to separate opposing traffic. 201 Page Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance Engineering Report, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 Left -turn ntersection 1 2 Pockets Only P $11.2 Million 2 2 Intersection 14 feet $28.1 Million Only 4 2/4 AL 14 feet Intersection on $31.0 Million Ma'- Only 4 42 feet Full Length $69.7 Million Alternatives I and 2 would address intersection- related crashes resulting from left -turns. Alternatives 3 would provide additional safe passing opportunities and increase capacity along the northern segment of the project with additional through -lanes. Alternatives 2 and 3 would provide a continuous TWLTL to remove left - turning vehicles from the through -lanes. Alternative 4 would increase safety and capacity by providing additional through -lanes, left -turn pockets, and a non - traversable median to separate opposing traffic. 201 Page Kenai Spur Highway MP 2.8 -8.1 Reconnaissance Engineering Report, Project No. 54594 DRAFT September 9, 2013 PUBLISHER'S AFFIDAVIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, STATE OF ALASKA ss: Denise Reece being first duly sworn, on oath deposes and says: That I am and was at all times here in this affidavit mentions, Supervisor of Legals of the Peninsula Clarion, a news- paper of general circulation and published at Kenai, Alaska, that the Public Notice #102366 a printed copy of which is hereto annexed was published in said paper one each and every day for two successive and consecutive days in the issues on the following dates: September 4 8 2013 1 X SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to me before 10th — day of September 2013 td'llt� NOTARY PUBLIC in favor for the State of Alaska. My Commission expires 27- Aug -16 / PUBLIC NOTICE K / �a uuaare U Notice is hereby given; the Kenai City Council will meet in a work session on Tuesday, September 10, 2013, for the purpose of receiving status reports from the Alaska Department of Transportation & Public - Facilities on the Kenai Spur Highway (MP2.1 -8.1), and Beaver Loop Road, Upgrade and Reconstruction Projects. The scope of the Kenai Spur Highway Project may include additional driving and turning lanes, intersection improvements, and lighting. The Beaver Loop Road Project may include reconstruction of the existing roadbed, realignment, construction of paved shoulders, intersection improvements, lighting, and a separated pedestrian pathway. , All interested individuals are encouraged to attend. The work session will be held in the Kenai City Council Chambers located at 210 Fidalgo Avenue, Kenai, Alaska from 6:00 pm. - 8:00 p.m. The agenda and any supporting documents can be located on the City's website, www.ci.kenai.ak.us. If you have any questions related to this meeting, please contact the Kenai City Clerk's Office at 283 -8231. Sandra Modigh, CMC, City Clerk Publish: 914113 & 918113 D8431211 ,P�yE R Us V NOTARY C/1 —4-0-4— PUBLIC G�Q J OF Awe'