, 1MATANUSKA·SUSITNA BOROUGH COMPREHENSIVE V- PLANNING PROGRAM GROWTH POTENTIAL, DEVELOPMENT ISSUES, SETTLEMENT PAlTERNS
VOLUME20F2
HT .TANUSKA·SUSITNA·BELUGA COOPERATIVE PLANNING PROGRAM 393 .A42 M383 1982 MAY 1982 v.2
Prepared by: DOWL ENGINEERS For the: MATANUSKA·SUSITNA BOROUGH
\ paWL Engineers 4040 "0" Street Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Phone (907) 2711-1551 (Telecopier (907) 272-5742)
May 17, 1982 W.O. #013421
Dear Citizen:
The Matanuska-Susitna Borough is on the threshold of growth that may be unprecedented in Alaska in terms of long term expansion of economic base. The number of private and State governmental activities and proposed projects which are getting underway or on the horizon can be expected to exert substantial influence on the future growth and character of the Borough. They include:
o Capital move to Willow o Knik Arm Crossing o State land Disposals o large Scale Agricultural Development o Expanded Development of Mineral Resources o Susitna Hydro Projects o Port MacKenzie Industrial Development
As evidenced by the construction of the trans-Alaska oil pipeline, major economic "booms" can quickly turn into "busts."."leaving behind crippled. economies. The activities and projects listed above, i'lave the potential to significantly impact existing development and lifestyles. By anticipating these impacts with proper planning, the Matanuska-Susitna Borough's economy can grow, diversify, and prosper. The "boom/bust" cycle can give way to a healthy stable economy, an economy that can preserve existing lifestyles while allowing desirable uniform growth. In order for this "healthy" growth to occur, the decisions that are made by business, government and private individuals must be based upon sound information, public awareness, and planning.
In response to existing growth and change in the Matanuska-Susitna Borough, as well as the needs and potential for future growth, a number of governmental entities recently began independent land use, transporta tion, public facilities, and other planning efforts. Among those studies is the Matanuska-Susitna Borough Comprehensive Plan. This document is the first of several reports to be published as part of that plan. Other plans and studies being done are the Matanuska-Susitna-Beluga Area Plan by the State Department of Natural Resources (DNR), the Matanuska and Susitna Transportation Study (MAST) by the State Department of Trans portation and Public Facilities (DOT/PF), the Borough's Coastal Manage ment Program, the Knik Arm Crossing Study by DOT/PF, and the Denali land Bank Study by the Federal Bureau of land Management (BlM). Early on in these planning efforts, it became clear there was a potential for overlap and duplication. Consequently, efforts are now being made to _ 'J _ coordinate these studies through the Borough's Comprehensive Plan.
~ ;~ n;_I.;~~ "A~ ~; v .l.. D ... '_1_.... I .•. I: __ .. __ 0 ...... r ••• _I .... .,_1.. '_ n .,,_1..._,_ This and an accompanying report are the product of this coordination effort. The two reports, one prepared by the Matanuska-Susitna Borough and its consultants, the other by the State Department of Natural Re sources, present introductory information on resources, issues, growth potential, regional settlement patterns, and other information pertinent to the beginning stages of the two planning programs.
These two background reports were prepared in advance of public meet ings to be held in June 1982 in communities throughout the study areas and also in Anchorage. (Specific times and locations will be announced and publicized.) The June meetings are intended to provide the public the opportunity to identify land use, transportation, public facilities, and other key issues facing the study area and to react to the information on similar subjects prepared by government planners and presented in the two reports. The issues identified through this process will give direc tion to government decision makers over the duration of the Borough Comprehensive planning process and the DN R Area Planning.
Please review this report. Determine whether you feel the information presented is comprehensive or incomplete, whether it is accurate, or in need of augmentation. Then attend the June meetings to express your thoughts and opinions. If you are unable to attend the meetings, please send your comments or call the location given below.
GLJ:cm14i
Send comments to: Claudio Arenas Matanuska-Susitna Borough Planning Department P.O. Box B Palmer, Alaska 99645 Phone: 745-4801 ,\ ',...... " ~
F"1
;d ....,. -=='-~ "., MATANUSKA-SUSITNA BOROUGH :::::::d ~ COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING PROGRAM ,
~=1 3 Growth Potential Development Issues ~ Regional Development Patterns oJ
~
Volume 2 of 2 Matanuska-Susitna-Beluga Cooperative Planning Program ~
,...J! oJ May 26, 1982
~'"
~
~ -i
=1 , ~ Prepared by: Prepared for:
~ DOWL Engineers Matanuska-Susitna Borough ~ II 4040 I BI Street Box IIB Anchorage, Alaska Palmer, Alaska 99645 -,
... ..i'
:di C L r TABLE OF CONTENTS b
~\ Page ~
~ I. INTRODUCTION ...... 2 L lei A. Purpose of Organization of the Two Background Reports.. 2 r 1. Overview...... •. .. 2 l--C 2. Public and Agency Comments on this Report...... 4 3. Organiztion of this Report .• ...... 5 o B. The Need for Planning Coordination ...... • 8 1. Matanuska-Susitna Borough Comprehensive Plan .. .. 8 c 2. Plan for Public Lands -- Susitna-Beluga Area Plan .. 9 3. Matanuska and Susitna Transportation Study (Masts). 9 4. Denali Land Bank Study -- Federal Lands...... 9 c 5. Coastal Zone Management Plan...... •. .. 10 C. Matanuska-Susitna Borough Comprehensive Plan ...... 10 [ 1. Study Area ...... 11 2. Purpose and Products of the Comprehensive Plan . .. 11 C 3. Iss·ues ...... 12 4. Schedule for Remaining Steps in the Comprehensive Plan G Process ...... 12 rl II. GROWTH POTENTIAL...... 17 l~~~ A. Background Information...... 17 B. The Need for Goals and Objectives ...... 18 f:j 6\ C. Population Projections...... 20 1. Past Population Trends ...... 20 ~ 2. Projection Scenarios...... 23 11 3. Base Case Projections ...... 25 4. High Population Scenario ...... 27 ,.-f,;/ ~ r1 III. RESOURCE SUMMARIES AND ISSUES...... 33 i.J
w
=-'r- c c n TABLE OF CONTENTS k.J ( Continued) B t;c.;1 Page
~ IV. RESOURCES AND ISSUES BY MANAGEMENT UNIT I•o 35 A. Background Information ..... 35 n 1. Overview ...... 35 k.J. B. Parks Highway Management Unit. .. 36 1. Overview .... 36 o 2. Boundaries ...• 37 3. Land Ownership. 37 D 4. Access ..... 38 5. Existing Land Uses 39 6. Resource Base - Potential Use .. 41 C 7. Land Use Issues ...... 45 C. Willow Sub-Basin Management Unit. 47 C 1 . Overview. ... 47 2. Boundaries .... 48 C 3. Land Ownership. 48 n 4. Access ..... 49 u 5. Existing Land Uses . 51 6. Resource Base -- Potential Use 54 n 7. Land Use Issues ...... 56 ~,._.1 D. Glenn Highway Management Unit. 57 1. Overview .... 57 c 2. Boundaries .. .. 58 3. Land Ownership. 58 [3 4. Access ..... 59 5. Existing Land Uses . 60 g 6. Resource Base - Potential Use. 63 7. Land Use Issues .... 65 un [: ii
.,.;j c [
TABLE OF CONTENTS C ( Continued)
E Page l:;; .., v. REGIONAL SETTLEMENT PATTERNS 67 A. Background Information. 67 ~] 1. Overview...... 67 ,J B. Settlement Categories . 69 C. Settlement Category Definitions 70 o 1. Urban ..... 70 2. Rural Suburban. . 73 01, 3. Rural Rustic .. 76 4. Rural Recreation 78 [} 5. Remote Bush .. 79 6. Remote Mountains 80 n 7. Recreation 81 l; D. Future Growth - Impacts and Implications 82 1 . Background Information ...... 82 C 2. Potential Impacts on Existing Settlement Patterns 83 3. Regional Settlement Patterns - Future Issues .. 89 nl ~ g
v g., t1 i.J.
1-';'Pi ~
r-, I; riJ
...... ,i iii ~
"",
~
~ """~ ~
TABLE OF FIGURES ~. "~J
"l
_,J
~\ Page . ~
,,~ :.;) Figure 1 - Planning Area Boundaries Map 3 "'1 J Figure 2 - Management Unit Boundaries Map 7 ~
.) Figure 3 - Population Projections Graph 32
""'" J Figure 4 - Regional Settlement Patterns Map ...... Pocket
~.
... ~
.." ~ J ,'" .J
~
~
'1t =t :1
~ =~;¥ ~ ..Ji
'1 ~ ~
¢,"!:! iv ~
.~
..i -,
-;
-., LIST OF TABLES ;oJ
~ Table Page \ ~ 1 Annual Growth Rates - 1970 - 1981. . 22 2 Matanuska-Susitna Borough Population Projection Base Case. 26 "\ . 3 Matanuska-Susitna Borough Population Projection High Population ;:J Scenario ...... 29
~~ 4 Matanuska-Susitna Borough Population Projection Moderate Senario i 1 (Mid Range) ...... 31 _..J 5 Department of Natural Resources/Division of Agriculture "'.~ Agricultural Disposal Summary April 1982. 43 j 6 Existing Land Use and Activities ... 72
~ 7 Existing Public Facilities and Services 74' j
"1 -}
"'"tI
,,;I
~
J g ~ .J
=> "! j ~j
o--"'! ;) 'l J
=i \ ~
~~-, 3;, cJ IIob"l' ,.t ..J v'
~ I I I I I I I I CHAPTER J I INTRODUCTION I I I I I
- 1 -
\ ""1'
~
d I. INTRODUCTION
'"';! ~ :J c.J
'"~ j A. PURPOSE AND ORGANIZATION OF THE TWO BACKGROUND REPORTS
"1
~3 1. OVERVIEW
~ :} The Matanuska-Susitna Borough's Comprehensive Plan will be used as a tool for decision makers in both private and public sectors of ~ J the Borough in guiding future development. The study will review existing and acquired supportive data and background information .". and make recommendations concerning future land use allocations, J transportation policies and systems, economic development potentials ,. and options, and land management programs. It will address hous· ing needs, public facilities and services, and identify measures
~ necessary for effective plan implementation.
.,,-J, This report is the first phase of the Matanuska-Susitna Borough ""3 -; j Comprehensive Plan. It is the product of existing information con cerning socio-economic conditions, public opinions, physical charac ~ teristics, and economic potential. It has also utilized the products , .,;j of ongoing studies providing a broad range of background informa ~: tion upon which to build the plan. This information comes from a ~ number of planning efforts currently underway. This and the
~ other plannjng efforts will recommend appropriate uses for public ~ -~ ~ and private lands in much of the study area and will influence use of those lands, directly and indirectly, by implementation measures 1 and decisions concerning transportation facilities, public services, J and public land management.
~ o j
...:; - 2 -
....l l~",]:J j \11.,,) ;..1 l'.I, ,,j~ """,, u,.} .... l iJ o , 12 II 24 SCALI: • -,Ie. Figure 1 PLANNING AREA BOUNDARIES _•_ •• Borough boundary - boundary of the Matanuska-Susitna Borough Comprehensive Plan being prepared by the Matanuska-Susitna Borough, and the Matanuska and Susitna Transportation Study (MASTS) being prepared by the State Department of Transportation and Public Facilities P777J Major focus of the Matanuska-Susitna Borough Comprehensive ~ Plan (primarily the road accessed portions of the borough) Boundary of the State Department of Natural Resources , Susitna-Beluga Area Plan for Public lands (Includes the Willow Sub-basin where a land use plan for public lands is already complete) Major focus of the Susitna-Beluga Area Plan (primarily D non-road accessed areas) ____ Boundar'iesof BlM's Denali Planning Block Study ..." ~~ ~ _J This report identifies population projections and the components of growth that could affect the future of the Borough. Potential is d sues affecting the study area are identified and strategies for ad dressing change in the future are discussed. Existing regional :J 1 _3 settlement patterns are also identified and discussed in terms of land use, transportation, and public facilities. "1 , :-~ A report prepared by the Alaska Department of Natural Resources "') (Volume I) presents background resource information to be used in ~) this and a number of other land use and planning efforts. Infor ~" -, mation in Volume I includes preliminary resource inventory by re .::.~ ;;.j source type (e. g., agriculture, timber, minerals, etc.). It also divides the study area into geographic units called management ~ i units and discusses the resource opportunities and issues in each. :J '"'~ 2. PUBLIC AN'D AGENCY COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT ..J ~ This report is intended to outline information concerning regional ~i growth that has been developed to date in the planning process. It ~ indicates what the planning team knows about the Borough and its -" individual communities on a regional scale. It suggests the pro jected growth that can be expected to occur within the Borough. ~ ~ It also addresses the settlement patterns that have developed and ~ may continue to develop within the Borough in the future as growth :->. and change continues to occur. This information was specifically ~ .... l prepared to provide the public and interested agencies the oppor --" tunity to review the information and let the planners know where it ~ is correct and where it is incomplete, where additional emphasis may' ~ be necessary, and where accuracy might exist. --] J The first opportunity the public will have to respond to the infor 1 J mation in these reports is at public meetings to be held in June at ~ communities throughout the Borough (schedule to be announced). '-J People are also encouraged to send their written comments or call .J the locations given in the cover letter. If requested, representa- ...... -A - 4 - --, ~ ~ "'" ~J tives from the planning team responsible for preparing the plan will be available to meet with groups of people who would like to ex cd press opinions on land use issues or land use preferences. '"'~ People and organizations who are interested in the future of the ~ Borough and in the type of growth and development that might ~ occur, affecting the economic base as well as residential lifestyles, j are strongly encouraged to take this opportunity to help guide the ., planning process. Issues discussed as part of this planning proc ,J ess will include everything from the future use and disposal of ~ State and Borough lands to the provision of basic community facili '-1 .J ties and potential need for land use regulations to help guide future growth of- the Borough. If you have questions or comments, con ~ tact either the person or agency mentioned in the cover letter. .... 1 ") 3. ORGANIZATION OF THIS REPORT ..J ""t The majority of the information contained in this report deals with -J sources of general information or background information necessary C"l for planning population projections, land use issues, and regional ,,, settlement patterns. Reference is made to Volume I (prepared by DNR) which outlines resource and resource management issues. =; ,,~ The report is broken into five chapters as follows: j J a. Chapter Introduction (this cha.eter) "£ •.) ~~ As well as explaining the purpose and organization of the back 3' ground reports, this chapter describes the overall organization and the products that can be expected from the Matanuska ~ -i .J Susitna Borough Comprehensive Planning Program. It also out lines the purpose and project schedule for the comprehensive ~ - ~ plan. J ~ J ..J - 5 - '~ .:; rl::.7 r b. Chapter II - Growth Potential ~ r-: = This chapter will include a brief description of the Alaska n Department of Natural Resources data base included in Volume I ::::-in J and its importance to the planning process. It includes popula tion projections in both tabular and graphic form through the !"l year 2001. These population projects are based on a baseline growth scenario as well as indications of growth changes that n L= may occur as a result of various specific development projects v that are either planned or proposed for the Borough. o c. Chapter III - Resource Summaries and Issues t1 This chapter will briefly summarize the information on resource summaries and issues that have been prepared as part of C Chapter III of DNR's Volume I. It will outline the process used to determine the resource inventories and the types of issues C that have been identified. n d. Chapter IV - Resource and Issues by Management Unit ~ The Borough's Comprehensive Plan deals specifically with the o road served areas of the borough as well as the entire area within the borough boundaries. This chapter deals primarily with the road served area. (The next chapter deals with re gional concerns.) For the purpose of efficient use of the available background information developed by DNR, the road C served area is broken into three of the management units de veloped by DNR. This chapter will explain the resource and B land use issues that are facing the Borough within those units. Physical descriptions of the units will be provided including o land ownership, access characteristics, the unit boundaries and sizes. Existing uses and settlement patterns will also be de ~ I; scribed. Within each unit a resource base inventory will be ~ [ - 6 - I'---~ I ...... ~ ) lJ.~:if 'lLI,J ':" "d L .J \".,,,,:111 t."L"I,l.) L .. I,:,,) LIJ,.J1lJl , LL,~.: O~_C6=~1~2,",!,_18=~2~ mil.. SCALE Figure 2 MANAGEMENfUNIT BOUNDARIES For purposes of issue and resource analysis, the Matanuska-Susltna-Beluga study area was divided Into 14 large management units. inclUding a portion of Denali National Park and Preserve, and Denali State Park which will not be addressed; and the Willow Sub-basin where a land use plan for public lands Is already complete. Information on each of these areas is presented In Chapter IV of this report; the development of management unit boundaries is described in ~ ~ ,=,_:1 presented. Issues facing future developments within those ~ units will be discussed. cd e. Chapter V- Regional Settlement Patterns 1"'" ;1 This chapter will present and define general settlement cate ~ gories for· use in analyzing regional settlement patterns on a J Borough-wide basis. It will map and explain the existing con ., ~ ditions within the Borough by those categories. The chapter ~J will then explore the potential effects of general economic and , special project developments within the defined settlement areas. ~ Specific emphasis will be placed on public facilities and services existing within the areas and the identification of expected ~ J demands as a result of population growth pressures. '""'l ....., B. THE NEED FOR PLANNING COORDINATION ." .J Both this volume and V(Jlume I are products of coordination between the ~ Matanuska-Susitna Borough and the State of Alaska. The numerous d planning programs underway by the State and Borough must be coordi nated in order to increase efficiency of resource inventories, improve """; J -i public participation, and coordinate land use decisions. The following ~ are brief descriptions of the ongoing agency planning projects in the ~ region. Map 1, at the beginning of this chapter, shows the study area 1 ~i for each project. =:J d 1. MATANUSKA-SUSITNA BOROUGH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ~ J The borough comprehensive plan will guide land use, transportation and public services and facilities decisions on public and private ~ J lands throughout the borough. The final comprehensive plan will ....:J recommend land use policies for future development for all parts of ':1 the borough . .:i ~ .J - 8 - ~ ~ r"'"""l! Lead Agency: Matanuska-Susitna Borough Planning Department Completion Date: November 1982 , ~ ~ 2. PLAN FOR PUBLIC LANDS -- SUSITNA-BELUGA AREA PLAN .;: The area plan will guide land uses and establish land management ~ guidelines for State and Borough owned lands throughout the oJ Matanuska-Susitna Borough and in the vicinity of the Beluga coal ~ ---:;; fields in the Kenai Borough (see Map 2). The area plan will pri -" marily focus on land use issues in the non-road accessed portions ~, of the study area (the location of the majority of public lands). d ., Lead Agencies: Matanuska-Susitna Borough Planning Department, Ii Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Division J of Research and Development ~ Completion Date: Spring 1983 u 3. MATANUSKA AND SUSITNA TRANSPORTATION STUDY (MASTS) ~ ~i This project is a study of transportation needs throughout the Matanuska-Susitna Borough. Its products will be recommendations for improvements and additions to transportation facilities maintained , by the State. It will also set up an ongoing process to coordinate j transportation planning between local state and federal govern 9 ments. ~ -.-J Lead Agency: Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities ~ .J (;;;> Completion Date: Fall 1983 ~ ,,-:-:-~ J 4. DENALI LAND BANK STUDY -- FEDERAL LANDS ~ !-~ - -'i This federal environmental assessment project will determine the U appropriate use of federally owned land in the northeast quadrant 1 of the Borough (see Map 1). The study will determine which lands ~'" should be opened to mineral entry, mineral leasing, and settlement. r -:', .J - 9 - ~ <::"'-3 " ~, The study will also develop a management plan for visual resources along the Denali Highway. ;;;.;: Lead Agency: Bureau of Land Management, U. S. Department of ~ Interior =:;: J Completion Dates: Environmental Assessment - June 1982 Scenic ~ Highway Corridor Study - March 1983 ~ ~ ~ 5. COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PLAN -) The Borough's coastal zone plan will develop management policies ri B and land use designations to protect coastal resources as mandated under the State and Federal Coastal Resources Acts. The final ~ plan, under authority vested in it through State law, interjects a U review process prior to approval of land use and development [ activities within the coastal zone. n Lead Agency: Matanuska-Susitna Borough Planning Department U Completion Date: Winter1983 u C. MATANUSKA-SUSITNA BOROUGH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN o The information included in this report was prepared by consultants and F; staff members for the Matanuska-Susitna Borough. The information U within the report includes preliminary population projections outlining future growth scenarios within the Borough. Resource and management g issues are presented for the area within the Borough that generally is served by the road and highway system. Finally, regional settlement patterns are discussed in terms of present growth patterns and the LJn impact that possible changes in existing patterns may have on the Bor n ough. The remainder of this section explains more about the comprehen w sive plan including its study area, purpose, and products, as well as the schedule for its completion. ljn [ - 10 - C ., ~ """'\ I _4 1. STUDY AREA "] ~ d The Matanuska-Susitna Borough Comprehensive Plan has two fairly distinct study areas. The Regional Plan will include the entire ~ ~ Matanuska-Susitna Borough. Primary emphasis in the Regional plan :oJ will be on Borough-wide resource and land use issues, settlement "'i patterns, and transportation needs. The second study area is the j road served area shown on Map 1. This will include sub-area plans ~ for a variety of communities within the road served area and will -..J include specific land use recommendations and transportation system ~, recommendations for that area. ;j 2. PURPOSE AND PRODUCTS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ",. ~ § j , As indicated in the cover letter, the Matanuska-Susitna Borough is on the verge of a significant growth period.. That growth c~n have ,J both positive and negative effects on the Borough as well as its , residents. In order to capitalize on the positive potential and ~" minimize negative impacts, planning is necessary. ~ ~~ The diversity of the Borough and its people pose intriguing plan ning considerations. The Borough's 23,OOO~ square miles include a "'1 -~ J broad range of physical features which define opportunities and limitations. Vast mountain ranges dominate the northern part of the ~ ~ Borough, then give way to fertile river valleys and lowlands. ~ -' Areas of mineral, agricultural and/or timber potential for example ~ must be identified and assessed for their economic potential. All ~ ~ J areas such as wildlife habitats, geological hazards, and other en 3 vironmentally sensitive areas must be identified and have assess ~:·i J ments made of their potential limitations. Diversity of lifestyles and , attitudes are also present throughout the Borough. From the ~ ll - , "urbanite of Palmer to the IIbush dweller II of Tokosha, each resi .; dent is an individualist with needs and goals different from the ~ rest. This project, in order to succeed, must identify the physical " J characteristics and the opportunities and limitations presented by ~ - 11 - ~ u n them. It must also identify the needs and goals of the individual residents and property owners. The plan must provide for a c mutual coexistance of people who are as diverse as the land on which they live. Competent local planning, which combines mean ~ ingful citizen input with sound planning principles based upon empirical data, will provide the Matanuska-Susitna Borough with a ~ comprehensive plan necessary to gain public support and utilization. tJ The plan can then be used to provide a base from which public and f private decision makers can draw. o 3. ISSUES A number of issues are facing decision makers in the near future. o Decisions must be made as to whether or not the economic base of the. Borough should be expanded or left as is. Should there be an emphasis on additional local employment opportunities or should the o Borough grow up as a bedroom community to Anchorage? Should development patterns be controlled? Is it necessary to help en c courage intensely concentrated community type development with its savings in provision of necessary public facilities, or should devel [i opment be allowed to continue to spring up haphazardly or IIsprawlll, causing more expensive per capita governmental services? 1 °lJ.. The decision makers, both taxpayers and governmental officials, need to face those issues and determine what the cost versus benefits of a given lifestyle are. The comprehensive plan will D facilitate this process. Through the comprehensive plan we will raise the issues and present them to community groups, govern o mental officials, and politicians. The plan will then provide a base o from which sound decisions can be made. 4. SCHEDULE FOR REMAINING STEPS IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN o PROCESS I The comprehensive planning process, of which this report and the o June meetings make up the first phase, will continue until the final [ - 12 - ~ """'\ -.-;.J -, :_j comprehensive plan is adopted by the Borough this coming winter. ,..".." The major steps in this process are as follows. J a. Initial Document Review ~ j .., This report will be reviewed over the next few weeks by public and private entities. The June meetings will allow the project ~ ~i sponsors to take the document to communities and gain their "'l input. The process will provide for adjustments to the docu -~ _J ments that reflect the additional information gained through the ~ public input of community attitudes. It will also provide direc j tion to the project planners to utilize in progressing with the ., next phases of the study. J b. Issue Resolution/Policy Direction -", oJ As a result of these public meetings and the information pre , sented within the reports, meetings will be held with the Bor d ough Planning Staff, the Borough Planning Commission, and the ~ Borough Assembly to discuss the issues raised and the input ~-j generated. Direction from the Commission and Assembly will be -, sought on how to address the broad land use issues facing the -} Borough. This policy direction will be utilized in developing J the remainder of the plan. ~ -' c. Sub-Area Plans :l d Specific sub-area plans will be developed for the road serviced ~ areas shown on Map 1. This will include identification of com --j ; o.j munity centers, both existing and proposed. Land use recom mendations will be made based on the goals and objectives and ~ issue assessments made in the previous steps. Recommendations ,;iJ for public facilities will also be developed for each of the com ~ munity areas. J J - 13 - ~ ~ ~J "9 -~ d. Transportation Plan -, ~3 Concurrent with the sub-area planning will be the development of the transportation plan. This will include development and ~ application of a road classification system to the Borough's J roads. Recommendations wi II be made for future classifications, ~ road upgrading, and future road development to serve expand --'1 ~ ing growth within the Borough. Guidelines for future prioriti , zation of transportation projects will be made as a result of __J identified needs. :J <' & J e. Regional Plan ~ J As a result of the input and planning accomplished during the summer, the Regional Plan for the entire Borough will be pre '"1 pared. This will include broad land use categories and trans ...J portation recommendations based upon the goals and objectives "l tp be developed and recommended public lands management J practices. -, ~j f. Public Hearings/Public Input ""l _ ~'i J By fall of 1982, all of the above steps will be completed. A series of public meetings will be held to discuss the regional ~ plan, the sub-area plans, and the transportation plans. They j will be presented in both narrative and graphic form < to com , munity groups, service organizations, and interest groups as d well as the public at large. Input will be gained and adjust ments will be made pursuant to public attitudes as well as "1 J policy directives. ~ ~ g. Implementation Measures ;;J "l ~ As a result of input from public hearings and information based :J upon the goals and objectives and inventory data collected ear- J - 14 - ~ -" ~ .. J. ~- _...1 Iier, a series of implementation measures will be recommended. It is impossible to say what those measures will be. They could ~ range from very passive policies to very direct regulatory func tions such as land use regulations, financial, and taxation """i measures. These will be the subject of additional public hear J ings prior to inclusion into the final plan. "1 .::o~ h. Draft Plan Presentation ?~ _1 The draft plan will be prepared and circulated to the public. ~, They will review the draft plan in total and comments will be ;; J received. i. Final Plan as Prepared "J -; The planning team will revise the final plan based on the com ments and direction from the public, the Borough Planning ~ Commission, and the Borough Assembly. ~ :"0\ j. Final Plan Adoption -, The final plan will be presented to the Assembly for adoption. ~ 1 -j Its implementation will follow based on the implementation guide ;:,J lines recommended within the plan. --", ~ -' This chapter has outlined the purpose, process, and the schedule for the :l comprehensive plan. It should be emphasized that the most important role in ;J developing this plan is that of the public. Without adequate public input n and support of the final product, the plan cannot provide the future deci J sion makers with the direction necessary to adeqautely address the substan tial issues that will be facing the Borough in the future. =::---! .; ~ j It is difficult to plan for an area as dynamic as the Matanuska-Susitna Bor 1 ough. In order for a plan to serve any purpose, it must also be dynamic. j ;.i The comprehensive plan functions as a yardstick to measure the effects of ~ -"' - 15 - ..J -; =1J "'" growth, the amount of change, and the necessity for adjustments to public policy. ..l The comprehensive plan is a tool for residents of the community to use to '"~ .;;J help provide stability within the community. It provides a tool for business men to project business needs within a growing area, and it provides gov 4 ernmental leaders with an opportunity to assess the needs of the community j and a method to gauge the changes in those needs as conditions change. In '1 doing so it allows all three entities to prepare for growth and change rather .., than to respond to it after the fact. 1, J ~ --~ J ., ,.J ...i J :i "" 1 J ;, j ...... .J =t -~ ..] 9 J 1 oJ .J - 16 - .", I I I I I I I I CHAPTER II I GROWTH POTENTIAL I I I I I _J \ c c o II. GROWTH POTENTIAL B ~ A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION B Neither the public nor the planner can make sound decisions concerning the comprehensive plan or future development issues without sound U background information. Existing and future characteristics of a given community are in large part determined by physical features, geographi U cal setting, natural and man-made transportation characteristics, land use in cooperation with land status factors, and a variety of other o natural and socio-economic features. Any comprehensive plan must be based upon an accurate portrayal of this data coupled with the public o input described in the previous chapter. Much information has been and is being generated concerning the C Matanuska-Susitna Borough. The Alaska Department of Natural Re sources has developed a significant amount of physical inventory infor G mation and resource data (see Volume I). That information includes: [J 0 Physical Features 0 Geological Conditions 0 Natural Hazards o 0 Vegetative Characteristics 0 Hydrology D 0 Habitat Area 0 Regional Land Use U 0 Regional Land Characteristics J I ~ This information will be invaluable not only in the development of the tJ issues and management strategies, that will be a result of the Depart- C·'" ~ - 17 - ..J [ [ ment of Natural Resources study, but also in the development of the n regional plan and the ensuing sub-area plans as part of the Borough1s 6 Comprehensive Plan. g An important part of the necessary background information for compre hensive planning is demographic analysis and growth projections. Popu G lation projections have been done for the Matanuska-Susitna Borough via a variety of entities over the last few years. These projections have fl.· varied greatly, not only in their numerical product, but also in the C process and assumptions which they were based upon. As part of this report those projections have been reviewed and analyzed and the most o likely of them have been presented as growth scenarios upon which this plan and future planning should be based. r;u o B. THE NEED FOR GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Public input is also an important part of the data base. Both historical public attitudes as well as new input is being analyzed as part of this C study. One end result of the input process will be Goals and Objectives to guide the implementation of this planning study. D A significant amount of public input was gained in 1977 and 1978 by the o Borough Planning Commission and Assembly in reviewing a then proposed set of Goals and Objectives. l=J~ Many of' the problems and aspirations facing the Borough residents in 1978 remain today. A rapidly incr.easing population is straining the C capabilities of local government to provide the necessary level of services while the local economy is unable to provide the number of jobs neces ..-,~ Q._:i sary to employ Borough residents. High unemployment, sometimes reaching an estimated 20% of the total work force, pressures many resi o dents into searching for employment opportunities in other areas of the State. The daily commute to and from Anchorage has become a neces o sary practice of those residents (approximately 30% of the Borough work- l]f."""".-.... - 18 - C c c force) appreciative of the lifestyle available in the Borough, but unable [J to find local employment. As population continues to grow, as a result of the Borough's attraction B as a "bedroom communityll, its tax base does not develop proportion ately. As a government whose tax base is predominately residential in D nature, the Matanuska-Susitna Borough is experiencing difficulty in acquiring the local revenue needed to provide a basic level of necessary services. L0..... Il.. ~.' While the increasing population is having profound effects on local U economy, the existing lifestyles and the natural environment of the Borough are also being tested with sometimes damaging results. Many [Jf't... ,. people are drawn to the Borough by the land and the lifestyle that it affords, not because of economic opportunities. The Borough is now o experiencing problems caused by conflicting land uses and lifestyles being drawn closer together as the population density increases. The loss of prime agricultural lands to residential sprawl, commercial strip C development, and degradation of some of the Borough's natural environ ments are but a few examples of threats to the very qualities which B attract new residents to the Borough. Lacking proper guidance, it is likely that much of the same will continue. A.,.: lj Conflicts between population growth, economic development, and natural resource utilization and preservation must be identified and, to the U extent possible, eliminated. Government is expected to take the lead role in encouraging and providing for economic development while pro C tecting the environment and the desired lifestyles. Goals and objectives B can provide guidance to the government decision makers in doing this. The public ideas, attitudes, needs, and desires that are stated in the ~.~ bJ June 1982 public meetings will play an important part in drafting new Goals and Objectives for the Borough. During this summer, the Plan -...I ning Commission and Assembly will be reviewing the 1978 Goals and Q... " r.-.·.··u.. - 19 - [J Objectives and comparing them with new community needs and public input. A new set of Goals and Objectives will result. C. POPULATION PROJECTIONS Population projections are an important tool in the planning process. They provide a basis for determining community needs for a variety of public and private commodities including public services, public facili ties, and transportation systems. They also help determine required allocations of land use, the need for business services, housing and other privately produced goods and services. Population projections are based upon a set of assumptions concerning future growth. The onJy empirical data available is that of past growth and current conditions. Consequently any projection$ must be a result of those past characteris tics compared to assumptions of future characteristics. As a result, predicting future population is risky at best. In a situation as dynamic as the Matanuska-Susitna Borough1s, the task of a demographer in mak ing projections is even more difficult. However, for the purposes of this plan, it is important to estimate future population growth trends based upon the information we have available today and the assumptions have been made relative to future growth potential. Since one of the major products of this plan is to be recommendations for public facilities, transportation systems and land use allocations, an estimate of future population is required. 1. PAST POPULATION TRENDS Population levels within the Matanuska-Susitna Borough in recent years have been volatile. Growth characteristics have varied great ly between 1960 and the present. During the 1960's the population of the Borough increased by over 25% from 5,188 in 1960 to 6,509 people in 1970. The majority of that increase occurred between 1960 and 1966 when the population reached 6,481. This represents a 24.9% increase. Between 1966 and 1970 the population increased - 20 -. c c only by .4% (Source: Matanuska-Susitna Borough Comprehensive " Development Plan, Phase I, Survey and Analysis, Alaska State u Housing Authority, March 1968, and the 1970 Decennial Census, u.S. Department of Commerce). In the 1970's the population td 1 tjiJ. growth levels increased rapidly but continued to fluctuate. During that decade the overall population of the Borough increased by ~ almost 200%. ~o~ -' n A number of different estimates have been used for the current .-:--~ population of the Matanuska-Susitna Borough. The 1980 census indicated a population of 17,776 in 1980. The State of Alaska o Department of Community and Regional Affairs has certified the population as of July 1, 1981 as 19,123. The Matanuska-Susitna o Borough has estimated the population of the Borough in July 1981 at 22,329. Other projections have had similar variance. o Even the lowest of these figures indicates a strong growth during the previous decade. Table 1 shows the percent of growth per c year between 1970 and 1981. It is based on the Matanuska-Susitna o Borough's population estimates. n,--- ~ '~ ~l LJ [ o R d i] d ,....,,~ lJ - 21- .,.. [ u [ TABLE 1 ANNUAL GROWTH RATES B 1970 - 1981 ~ Year Mat-Su Borough Population Percent of Change 1970 6,509 1971 7,293 12.0% --~, n~;·· 1972 8,310 13.9% 1973 8,586 3.3% C 1974 9,787 13.9% 1975 12,462 27.3% [j 1976 14,010 12.4% 1977 15,573 11.2% C 1978 15,400 -1.1% 1979 18,536 20.4% [~. 1980 23,177 25.0% .~ 1981 22,339 -3.7% G Sources: Overall Economic Development Program, Inc., n Volume II, 1980, p. 192; Overall Economic Development Program, LJ Inc., Socio-Economic Data Pamphlet for the Matanuska-Susitna Borough by CH2M Hill, July 1981, p. 1; DOWL Engineers, May rJ 1982. C R.~ [j 1 ~ ldf D [ - 22 - l c [l The overall growth trend shown in Table 1 indicates a strong underlying population base development while still allowing for o significant fluctuations. In the early 1970·s a strong growth of 12% and 14% per year probably reflected the overall growth in the ~.' lj southcentral region that resulted from anticipation of the pipeline development. As the pipeline was delayed for construction the growth declined in 1972 to 1973 period. Then, as the pipeline b1F1 construction began in full swing through the mid-1970's, pipeline associated growth in the Borough increased rapidly with a- peak of U growth being between 1974 to 1975 of over 27%. The total growth between 1973 and 1977 was over 81%. As the pipeline wound down C the population growth followed suite, and between 1977 and 1978 a decline in population was registered. This situation rebounded o rapidly in the late 1970·s, and in 1980 population growth began to increase although a small decline was registered in 1981 as general c economic activity within the state began to slow down. As indicated in the 1980 OEDP report, these population cycles are indicative of the Alaskan economy. Communities throughout the State have his C torically been characterized with boom and bust economies which has made it difficult for govermental planning and long term business B investments to succeed. However, the Borough's growth rate has been more on the plus side and less on the "bustll side. It will be o important in the future to try to stabalize the fluctuations so that services and goods provided by both government and business can be provided on a more uniform basis. n'-' C 2. PROJECTION SCENARIOS 5.< For the purposes of this projection, the population utilized as a - :; D1 base population in 1981 will be the Borough·s estimate of 22,339. Three projections follow. The first is a base case. It is a syn 8.d thesis of projections done by or for a variety of agencies. They ~ ~ ~ include the University of Alaska Institution of Social and Economic ~ Research, the Alaska Power Authority, the Borough, and the State - 23 - w f "'" of Alaska. It is a projection of population growth that assumes no -. major development projects will take place and growth trends will =:;3 continue as they have over the last few years. It must be remem h bered that as population grows at a steady rate, the percent of ~ =:j increase per year becomes less even if growth continues to be healthy. The Matanuska-Susitna Borough cannot expect to continue ""! ~ to grow between 15% and 20% per year. A long term stable growth ~ rate would generally be indicated by a slight decline in the annual =t percentage of growth while the numbers of actual population in creases each year. This base case makes that assumption. It also assumes that the Matanuska-Susitna Borough will continue to gain in population relative to Alaska as a whole and to the rest of South ~ central Alaska, including Anchorage. This is because of the ~ -' desirability of the living environment within the Matanuska-Susitna Borough and the reduced cost of living when compared to Anchor "":':'1, age. Other assumptions include: --.J ., o No Trans-Alaska gas pipeline within the planning period. ~_1 o No ,Knik Arm Crossing within the planning period. , o No capital move within the planning period. o ~;i No Susitna hydro projects within the planning period. o ~ A stablization of the previous fluctuating growth. This will in ~ d clude more agricultural development as a result of State land disposals, more tourism and recreational development to serve "-1 both the residents of the Borough as well as Anchorage resi ..J dents and residents of the rest of the State. It also includes a ~ continued strong influence of the Anchorage economy on the -0 -' Matanuska-Susitna Borough. This will involve more commuters ~'} -~ between Anchorage and the residential areas of the Borough. ;;] The high population scenario indicates a cumulative effect of the ~ ~ -1 major development projects that are facing the Borough. It assumes '='* , the following: -J J ....J - 24 - ~ =i c c o That the Capital move will begin in 1989. o That the Trans-Alaska pipeline will begin construction in 1988. o o That the Knik Arm Crossing will begin construction in 1989 and be operational in 1991. W o That the Susitna hydro projects will be built in accordance with the schedule indicated in the feasibility study. Q It is impossible to determine a suitable mix of assumptions that I;n could result in a moderate scenario. We could assume that there ~.J would be no capital move and noSusitna hydro projects but there would be a Knik Arm Crossing and there would be a gas line. Or o we would assume a mix of the Capital move with the Knik Arm Crossing and no Susitna hydro projects and no gas line. Obviously o a number of assumptions could be made. Rather than try to second guess which of these projects will or won't be developed, a reason [j able mid-line projection has been established. C 3. BASE CASE PROJECTION Table 2 indicates the base case population projection. It indicates l1 an increasing growth rate of approximately 4% to 6% per year be tween 1981 and 1984. The population between 1980 and 1981 J - ~ actually declined in the Matanuska-Susitna Borough. Based upon Od economic activity occurring in 1982 it is assumed that this will [] rebound to a steady growth rate. l.J There may be an overall slowing down of Alaska economy in 1983 c and 1984, but the Matanuska-Susitna Borough will still rebound due o to the growth pressures on the Anchorge area. Between 1983 and 1988 the growth rate should increase to a high of about 10% per year during 1987 and 1988. This will result from a B~ resurgence of the Alaska economy. Increasing world-wide oil prices will generate additional energy discovery and development through o out the state. At the same time, increasing cost of living in lJ - 25 - u I _CJ ,..... ~ _1 "1 .ft TABLE 2 MATANUSKA-SUSITNA BOROUGH POPULATION PROJECTION ~ j ._~ BASE CASE ::;i """1 Year Population Percent Change -~ c:J 1981 22,339 ~ 1982 23,232 4.0% 1983 24,394 5.0% 1984 25,857 6.0% D 1985 27,926 8.0% 1986 30,439 9.0% o 1987 33,483 10.0% 1988 36,832 10.0% ~ 1989 40,147 9.0% u 1990 43,359 8.0% 1991 46,828 8.0% ,-='r 1992 50,574 8.0% 1993 54,114 7.0% [ 1994 57,361 6.0% 1995 60,803 6.0% 1996 63,843 5.0% n~ 1997 66,396 4.0% !1 ~~ 1998 69,052 4.0% ~j 1999 71,814 4.0% -~ 2000 74,686 4.0% I . ~:! ~ 2001 77,674 4.0% Rw Source: DOWL Engineers, May 1982 r--, I I.-J - 26 - u C n:_---.1 Anchorage will continue to push people towards the Matanuska '1 Susitna Borough lifestyle and cost of living. Transportation be 11~ tween the Matanuska-Susitna Borough and the Anchorage employ ment centers will also improve, including additional road improve F1 ~ ments and mass transit facilities. q , Between 1989 and 1992 the growth rate will gradually fall back to d approximately 8% per year. Remember that this is a growth rate '1 relative to an increasing indigenous population. This growth rate -' is still considered very strong. The cost differential between living in the Matanuska-Susitna Borough and the Anchorage area will have o decreased. However, because of continued increases in population density in Anchorage, the lifestyle in the Matanuska-Susitna Bor ough will continue to be popular for a large segment of the com o munity. o Between 1992 and the year 2000 the rate will gradually fall back to 4% per year. This will represent the long-term growth rate o through the year 2001 for the Borough. It represents a steadily growing stable economy without major interruptions or fluctuations. C Obviously, this rate could change significantly depending on many unknowns. These long-term projections should be used for com parison purposes only. R(;.j G 4. HIGH POPULATION SCENARIO The high population scenario growth projection is based upon vir C tually all the major development projects facing the Borough being accomplished. As indicated earlier, thi~ includes the capital move, o the Susitna hydro projects, the Knik Arm Crossing, and the Trans Alaska gas pipeline. The population increases indicated in Table 3 (High Scenario) are a combination of population increases indicated n[J in the various impact studies coupled with a relatively high per ~ centage increase of indigenous population. In addition, the per- tl l= - 27 - [ f c-/ ,-" I; centage increase is varied by the Knik Arm Crossing. The scenario --, is described as follows: ~ o From 1982 the population increase is higher than the base case 1:j due to complementary effects of impacts from special projects. , o In 1983 the Susitna hydro projects is begun with a minimal in ~ crease in population. The percent increase remains the same ., with the numerical increment of the Susitna hydro population ~:i J activity added on to each year's new population figure. This is ~ true through 1986. ~ o In 1987 Capital move activities start in Willow and the Susitna 1 hydro project activity begins to increase. Again the numerical ~j increments from the Capital move and Susitna hydro projects are ..." added to the previous year's population figure after it is multi .,.; plied by the base case percent per year increase. ~ 'i ....; o In 1988 the gas line activity begins to increase population within , the Borough. The method is still the same. ~ o In 1989 activity on the Knik Arm crossing begins to occur and 'l -:..~ ;I the base case yearly increase changes. At this point we have ~ numerical. increments from the gas line, the Capital move and the ~1 Susitna hydro projects all being added to the previous year's -~ ~.i population. The percent per year increase from the base case is .-, changed to reflect an increase in permanent population in the ) Matanuska-Susitna Borough as a result of Knik Arm Crossing activity. ~ _ 1 ,J o By 1991 the percent per year increase is at 12%. Activity on -~ , the gas line is beginning to slow down as is activity on the ..j Susitna hydro projects. Th~ Capital move is continuing to add ~ population to the Borough. In 1983, the percent per year in '" crease will begin to decline to 10% per year. By 1995 the oJ - 28 - .J -" "J ~ _....J 1 TABLE 3 ~ MATANUSKA-SUSITNA BOROUGH POPULATION PROJECTION '1 HIGH POPULATION SCENARIO 1 -~ Gas Capital Susitna '" Year Pipeline Move Hydro Population %Change* -.J 1981 22,339 9 1982 23,679 6% -' 1983 28 25,128 6% ~ 1984 1 26,636 6% ~ 1985 60 28,827 8% 1986 24 31,445 9% "1 1987 76 457 35,123 10% ....i~ 1988 1308 1914 209 42,066 -, 10% 1989 2745 1600 97 50,714 10% ~:;J 1990 778 2011 226 58,800 10% -. 1991 -603 2635 -38 67,850 12% _:1 1992 -183 3148 -86 78,871 10% =., 1993 3023 -136 89,645 10% ~ 1994 3732 -56 102,286 10% -33 ~ 1995 110,436 8% J 1996 21 119,292 8% 1997 33 127,675 7% ~ 1998 39 135,374 6% ...J 1999 10 143,506 6% -. 2000 -22 152,094 6% -i 'v 2001 -66 161,154 6% ~, -1 -..J Source: Susitna Hydro Project Feasibility· Study, Volume II; Alaska Power Authority; Institute of Socio-Economic Research, ~ University of Alaska; North Aleutian Shelf Development Scenario; ~ j New Capital Site Population Projects; DOWL Engineers. ~ *Percent increase of base population not directly associated with j ~ special project influences. ~ .J - 29 - ~., =i r ~1 -1 Capital move is complete. Susitna hydro activity remains at a ~ fairly low level through the end of the decade. The percent per 00 year increase in the population gradually declines back to the long term growth rate of 6% per year. This growth rate is ~ ~ achieved in 1998 and continues throughout the planning period. :j '"'I As indicated earlier, the midpoint projections has been prepared ~ ;...j between the high scenario and the low scenario. Table 4 shows the ") mid-range scenario. It can be used as a suggestion of the actual growth rates which may occur within the Matanuska-Susitna Bor :::} ough. It is a reasonable number which should be used for planning 1 purposes. As major decisions are made concerning the development o..l projects that affect the high scenario, an actual growth rate projec ~ tion should be developed and maintained. As this is done, it will ...... i be possible to gauge the divergence of the actual projected growth ~ rates from the mid-range shown herein. This will be a valuable L;;.:j planning tool that can be used by residents and decision makers ~ within the Borough to gauge the effects of growth and make cor oJ responding decisions within their own area. ; .J ""I =--~ J --, ... J j "'". , oJ ~ ~j ;:j , :'1 ""'] - 30 - ~ n _i r> :::;..;1 ~ TABLE 4 J MATANUSKA-SUSITNA BOROUGH POPULATION PROJECTION 4 MODERATE SCENARIO :J (MID RANGE) "1 ., J Year Population % Increase ~ 1981 22,339 -~ 1982 23,456 5% 1983 24,761 6% ~ ~ 1984 26,247 6% 1985 28,377 8% '"? 1986 30,942 -i 8% ~; 1987 34,303 10% '1 1988 39,449 15% d 1989 45,430 15% 9 1990 51,080 12% ;...)' 1991 57,339 11% 1992 64,723 -:>. 13% 1993 71,880 11% .;:;I 1994 79,824 11% ~ 1995 85,620 7% d 1996 91,568 7% """"J, 6~ 1997 97,036 . 0 -~ ..J 1998 102,213 5% 1999 107,660 5% j 2000 113,390 5% 2001 119,414 5% ~ - ~ J ~ -'" ~ J ~ ~ .-' - 31 - lJ o [l ~ Q Matanuska-Susitna Borough POPULATION PROJECTION 1981 - 2001 B 170 160 U 150 --_Q HIGH GROWTH ·140 ~",y: o ---- MID-RANGE 9:-0 130 -_••_ BASE CASE x-(j o ~(j en "0 120 119,414.,p c: a:l en ::::l ,-"" 0 110 c .s::. ,/' -c: 102,286 /' en 100 c: -,,' o .2 0 " ••••# ,,,' ...•.., 40 ,,''J.....••R···· o ':ii~•••# o 30 20 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 2000 01 o Year [ Source: DOWL Engineers, May 1982 c Figure 3 I I I I I I I I CHAPTER III I RESOURCE SUMMARIES AND ISSUES I I I I I J \ ~ ~ --' '9 ~ III. RESOURCE SUMMARIES AND ISSUES ,." ~ § "1 :J The development of a competent comprehensive plan for the Matanuska ....1 Susitna Borough is largely dependent upon the availability and proper assessment of a valid body of background information. That body of infor , mation includes assessments of existing ownership and use, transportation ..J systems, public facilities, and physical land features. All of these will be ~ inventoried as part of the continuing Borough comprehensive planning proc j J ess. Of major importance as part of the Boro_ugh1s background information is an evaluation of the natural resource base. '""""\ -' Sufficient information is presently available to enable even the casual ob l server to conclude that the Matanuska-Susitna Borough contains a wealth of _J natural resources. However, much of the information to date has been J sketchy or incomplete. -j The Alaska Department of Natural Resources is producing significant amounts "1 j of data concerning the Borough1s resource base. Much of the existing in formation is mapped and described in DNR's Volume I, Land Use Issues and "1 Preliminary Resource Inventory. That information also provided the basis of -i. =" resource inventories contained in this report. The resource bases which have been researched and analyzed by DNR include: .oJ :J o Agriculture ~ ~ o Recreation o Forestry , ~ o Fish & Wildlife ~ o Settlement o , Subsurface Resources ;:...~ ~ , - 33 - ..). [ [ These resources are individually inventoried Borough-wide in Volume I, as r well as by management unit descriptions, of which parts are contained in U both volumes. This inventory provides not only a competent assessment of ~ the Borough's resources, it provides for the identification of issues which L j ~~J affect the utilization of inventoried resources. This inventory information is an integral part of the Borough1s Comprehensive Plan, as well as DNRls Area ~ '-'! ~ Plan. It is not reproduced here for the sake of brevity, but should be r.c;...J refered to in order to understand the basis of the plan. F'j --~ The identification of issues is a key element in the formulation of a planning document. A competent planning document must respond to the needs and u goals of the area considered.. The development of goals and needs assess ments is largely a function of citizen response to key land use issues. U Chapter IV summaries of management units in both volumes identifies issues related to land use and resource development. The issues are intended to portray to the reader what the writers of the report khow of the area, as 6 well as stimulating thought towards other issues or needs not addressed. n This input will be received during the schedule of public meetings to be I l..,j held in early July of this year. r, bJ The following chapter reviews land use issues and resources within the area of the Borough which is generally road-accessed and of significant public 9 J ownership. ~ ---.;;, ~~ ~J F'j ~, d g ~ ~ =3 ~ ",Jf - 34 - --3 I I I I I I I I CHAPTER IV I RESOURCES AND ISSUES BY MANAGEMENT UNIT I I I I I \ D D IV. RESOURCES AND ISSUES BY MANAGEMENT UNIT GJ J 1 ~ A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION "l 1. OVERVIEW n LJ For purposes of data collection and analysis, ON R divided their Susitna-Beluga analysis study area into geographic sub-units called ~ 1 d IImanagement unitsll (see Map 2). Management unit boundaries were established according to physiographic features such as drainage ------aasifls - afld -m(;>lmtain--ranges-,--and-existing--Iegislative-boundaries-of--- the Denali State Park and Denali National Park and Preserve. "l DNR's resource assessments and identification of issues by sub- -' areas are organized according to the established sub-unit bounda- ~ ries. ...J Although the Susitna-Beluga Area Plan of ON R considers the re ::! --~ sources and potential of state land within the study area, the en :J tirety of the Matanuska-Susitna Borough has received equal levels -::j ~ of inventory and analysis. A major emphasis of the Borough's .~j Comprehensive Plan is within areas of substantial private owner 5 ship. Those areas comprise the majority of three management ...J units "-- Parks Highway, Glenn Highway, and the Willow Sub-Basin. ., Coverage of these units' resources and issues is included in this .J volume due to increased relevancy of the data to private property owners in the more developed areas of the Borough, and for effi l "! cient use of existing information. Coverage of the remaining man ~ agement units in Chapter IV of Volume 1 is extremely valuable as an aid to understanding the development potential and related ~ issues within the Borough. This information will provide much - 35 - c o direction to regional land use and transportation in the Matanuska c Susitna Borough. It should be reviewed and carefully considered. ['1 r'i LJ B. PARKS HIGHWAY MANAGEMENT UNIT '1 1. OVERVIEW :d ""'l The Parks Hi9hway Management Unit (PHMU) encompasses the Parks Highway from Kashwitna to the Matanuska-Susitna Borough's north p ern boundary. It is physically divided into two sections by the u Denali State Park. To aid in description, the unit will occasionally be considered by sub-unit as delineated by the State Park. nu To some degree, the northern and southern sub-units are by character individually distinct. Land ownership in the southern C sub-unit is largely private and borough while state-owned or se lected lands predominate in the northern sub-unit. As private C ownership indicates, settlement activities are more evident in the ..-, southern sub-unit where Talkeetna serves as that area's social and I: ._", ~ commercial center. ~ -j Within the management unit, recreation and settlement activities are .3 presently the the predominate land uses. Agriculture will become -=l ~ more prevalent as state agricultural disposals in the Bartlett Hills =i and Talkeetna areas become accessable and future planned disposals' j come on-line. d Future development of the unit1s resource base will affect its char ""~.~ oJ acter. As the unit's settlement, recreational, agricultural, and forestry resources become more accessable and utilized, the area's d low-density, rustic characteristics could be substantially altered. Existing life styles valued by residents are sensitive and easily im ..., pacted by future development. d ~-~ ... - 36 - =---." .;,;..i [ r 2. BOUNDARIES /i [ The boundary £ak'ption which follows will define the two sub-units which togetheUombine to form the Parks Highway Management E Unit. Denali State Park provides the geographic separation between the C northern and southern units. The southern portion is bordered on the north by the Denali State Park and on the south by the Kash n witna River drainage. The east boundary is the Talkeetna Moun r--: tains, while the Susitna River and the Parks Highway combine to LJ form the west boundary. Denali National Park and Preserve and Denali State Park provide the west and south borders, respectively, U at the northern sub-unit. The Tal keetna Mountains and the Mata nuska-Susitna Borough northern boundary lines complete this sub C unit boundary. The northern sub-unit contains approximately 5-1/2 townships total C ing slightly over 126,700 acres. The southern sub-unit is com prised of 14 townships, or 323,500 acres. The combined area of C the PHMU totals 450,200 acres. l3F1 3. LAND OWNERSHIP In the southern sub-unit, lands in private and borough ownership lJ boarder the Parks Highway and Tal keetna cut-off. A large block of native-owned lands is located adjacent to Talkeetna, north of Montana Creek. State lands abutt the highway-accessed private t'I lands east and west of the highway. Private and borough owner ~ ship accounts for approximately 3/4 of the land tenure in this por tion of the unit, the remainder is state owned. U In contrast, the northern sub-unit is predominately state owned or ~ selected. Small in-holdings of private land exist along waterways and the Alaska Railroad. A massive concentration of federal land [ - 37 - :[ k ..• L U known as the Denali Block extends partially into the northern sub unit. State owned or selected lands account for nearly 70% of the C northern sub-unit land area. Private land ownership in terms of size alone, are fairly insignificant. Federal lands account for the 8 remainder of the total. "1~ Wf.. .. 4. ACCESS The presence of the Alaska Railroad and the Parks Highway extend o ing the length of this management unit provides lands within the unit with a fairly high degree of accessibility. When compared with [] other management units of the Susitna-Beluga planning area, this accessibility is significant in considerations of future growth poten n tials and pressures. o The Parks Highway is the major intrastate transportation corridor linking the interior to south central Alaska as well as accessing the state to the "outside." A major arterial by nature, the highway c provides direct access to individual properties it abuts. c The Tal keetna cut-off, a state maintained arterial, departs from the Parks Highway at mile 99 and continues north for 14 miles to Tal o keetna. It accounts for the balance of paved arterials within the management unit. o The Alaska Railroad is an important mode of transportation through out the management unit. Bush residents at Gold Creek and Chase C (north of Tal keetna) rely on the railroad as their primary means of transportation, as do other residents along its route. The railroad ill also provides important services to recreationalists and tourists, both as an individual attraction and in providing access to at:"eas of ··4'.~ -=3..' recreational value. 8~: Airstrips at Montana, Talkeetna, and Colorado, along with others o scattered throughout the management unit, provide an important [ - 38 - [ 6 C alternate access. Additionally, they serve as a primary means of transportation and commerce to residents located away from the rail C belt. 6 Access to lands from the road system is more available in the southern sub-unit where local roads, maintained through the aus pices of the borough's road service areas provide a fair degree of C accessibility to private and borough owned lands. Major local roads such as Comsat, Caswell Lakes, and the Petersville Road serve to o collect local traffic toward arterials and to access specific geograph 6 ic areas for residential, recreational, and other land uses. Significant undeveloped rights-of-way exist in the southern sub o unit where dedicated rights-of-way provide legal, but no physical, access to state land disposals intended for agricultural and resi o dential/ recreational use. In contrast of the southern sub-unit, road access in the northern c sub-unit is much lesser. Geographic constraints posed by the Talkeetna Mountains and the Chuitna River, combined with lesser o developmental pressures, render lands not abutting the Parks o Highway limited road access. 5. EXISTING LAND USES ! ..J D Recreation and settlement are currently the major activities within the PHMU. Generally, the area south of the Denali State Park C receives a much higher degree of activity than does the area north R of the park. B As a whole, the unit receives a high level of recreation use. River 7i: o crossings of the Parks Highway, particularly those at Montana Creek and Kashwitna River, are very popular fishing sites. Other recreational activities within the unit includes hiking, camping, swimming, canoeing, and white-river boating. Dog sledding, snow- u - 39 - ...... C tJ mobiling, and cross-country skiing, of excellent potential between Broad Pass and Hurricane, are the popular wintertime recreational [ activities. Additionally, several lodges operate in the unit to serve the recreational and tourist populations. Tal keetna has long served ~ LJ as the staging area for Mount McKinley climbing expeditions. Within the southern sub-unit, several registered big game guides C have exclusive guiding districts and aid the area1s many hunters. B Approximately 10,000 acres of land in the southern sub-unit are earmarked for agricultural usage. The Talkeetna and Bartlett Hills e state land sales have transferred agricultural rights of some 9,885 acres to private ownership. Lack of physical road access to much u of the agricultural disposal areas will hinder their immediate utiliza tion. Three additional state agricultural disposals are scheduled o during the next two years (Goose Creek, Rabideaux and Chase III). Recent mineral exploration and development within the management c unit has been minimal even though Talkeetna was historically the base for mining operations in the Yentna mining district. Existing [j mining operations consist of small scale placer mining northwest of Talkeetna and a large hard-rock gold mining operation near G Colorado Station (the Golden Zone Mine). Currently, forestry activity in the management unit is relatively C low. Existing activity is concentrated along the Susitna River in the southern sub-unit, where the Matanuska-Susitna Borough ad [ ministers three active borough timber sales of 40 to 80 acres. This area also supports several small sawmills which pr<:>duce rough-cut 1 lJR. lumber. D Throughout the management unit, population clusters, referred to here as community centers, are located along the Parks Highway, the Alaska Railroad, and the area's waterways. These areas are 6 defined as communities due to their concentrations of residents and, [ - 40 - L r L~ r-~ in some cases, services and facilities provided. Kashwitna, Sun ,~~ shine, Montana, Trapper Creek, Honolulu, and Colorado are repre sentative of the broad spectrum of community activities and per sonalities present. Settlement activities are much more apparent within the southern sub-unit where Talkeetna is that area1s largest community center. -- ~ = The Tal keetna area1s population is estimated at 640 persons. Its n colorful history makes IIBeautiful Downtown Talkeetnall a favorite stop for tourists and recreationists. 6 Several residential state land disposals have occurred in the south ern sub-unit during recent years. Tal keetna Bluffs, Tal keetna U Bluffs Addition, Bald Mountain, and Chase II subdivisions have created hundreds of residential lots. Many residents of the area are concerned about the impacts of these and future disposals on U local life styles. Further disposals in the area are planned and may C cause increased social and economic impacts. 6. RESOURCE BASE - POTENTIAL USE U' The PHMU offers substantial forestry, agriculture, fish and wild Flbj life, and recreational resources. Settlement in the unit can be accommodated physically, although social and economic conditions may slow population growth. nt,~ ~' A large potential for commercial forestry exists in much of the unit. l.~ Good mixed hardwood stands and sporatic spruce stands exist from 1 the units southern boundary north to Hurricane. Borough lands in [".;; the area have high forestry values. Medium values exist north of Hurricane along the Chulitna River. ~-.' ,.'~~ ..•. LJ According to the Department of Natural Resources, 180,000 acres of cultivable soils exist within the unit. They generally occur ad o jacent to the Talkeetna, Chulitna, and Susitna Rivers. An addi- [ - 41 - l r' ~ O;':J tional 20,000 acres of potential grazing land have been identified -." along the units eastern border. ...-J ~1 The Department of Natural Resources is currently scheduling the ~ -.::.J following agricultural land sales, Table 4, for fiscal years 1983 and ., 1984: d _? ., '1 J .... ~ ,:03 ~ JI 1 -i -, yJ .. ]", :3 -~ .,.;J ~ ~ ~, J ~ ~ ="1' ; --# ~..~ -:a. ::::::i J -' - 42 - ="7' r-;""!I .r-"'1Yi1\. ,..,..,.., ~ ,r-n r--;-, Ci,:j~ [:,JJ~IJ l.,;,.,.,~_·,,;LJ, ~ "~ ~'J L,J 4=J C,..D L«,-J· C::J .. l..,,,,,.. L,,,) \,:JL-J ([j] CtJJ ,., ,} t,,,,.: L;: ( ,,',I.J TABLE 5 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL! RESOURCES/DIVISION OF AGRICULTURE AGRICULiuRAL DISPOSAL SUMMARY . April 1982 AREA FISCAL YEAR NAME ACREAGE I PARCEL SIZE LOCATION Southcentral Alaska Fall '83 Goose Creek 360 200 and less 3 miles west of Montana along the Parks Highway between Sheep and Montana Creeks Fall '83 Little Susitna 600 160 and greater 7 miles west of Big Lake between the Little Susitna River and Papoose Twin Lakes Spring '83* Moose Creek 760 640 or less Along south s\de of Petersville Road at mile 10, timber sale now being offered but not sold yet Spring '83 Chase AG 7,000 320 and greater North of the Talkeetna River in the Chunilna Creek area Fall '83 Nancy Lake AG 160 40 and greater Near Nancy Lake area Spring '83 Delta Island AG 1,100 Undetermined Along Susitna River near Nancy Lake area Fall '84* Rabideux 2,480 160 and greater In the Talkeetna area between the Susitna and Chulitna River Source: Department of Natural Resources, May 1982. - 43 - As with. past agricultural land sales in the unit, access to the prop erties may be undeveloped; thus, agricultural production will not be possible until the necessary infrastructure is provided. ~ ----.f Outstanding fish and wildlife values, complimented with access make :.;J this one of the most heavily used recreational resources in the unit. ~ The southern sub-unit provides winter habitat for a population of 4,000 to 5,000 moose. With proper management and techniques, r. existing habitat could be enhanced to accommodate 150 to 300 moose ,_.J; ..... " per square mile. Presently, the area has an annual harvest of be tween 100 and 400 animals by approximately 500 to 900 hunters o annually. The annual bear harvest ranges between 1 to 4 brown o bears and 14 to 20 black bears. In this unit, streams and rivers provide spawning, rearing, and migration habitat for all five species of anadromous salmon as well o as resident species such as grayling and rainbow trout. Fish F""l produced in these streams are important to the Cook Inlet region u commercial and sport fisheries. The Susitna River is the major migratory waterway for fish spawned in this unit. Sheep, Clear c and Montana Creeks are the most important salmon producing streams in the southern sub-unit. In the north, Honolulu Creek ~ and Chulitna River are the important salmon producers. All O~. - streams also offer winter trapping and summer boating opportunities b in addition to recreational fishing. The scenic qualities of the Parks Highways corridor are substantial. C A drive on the highway provides the viewer many scenic vistas of mountain ranges, river valleys, arid artie tundra. A planning 8 report, produced by the Department of Natural Resources, identi fies the corridor1s significant scenic opportunities and makes recom lJ mendations toward their management. For purposes of this chapter, settlement resources will be viewed o from two perspectives; public lands physically capable of supporting C - 44 - [ n ~J ] ~ ~ "-..j settlement activities, and existing inventories of previously devel oped lands which are currently vacant. From this dual perspec tive, all lands that represent opportunity for further settlement can be assessed. :J .-1 ~71 Of the. lands physically capable of accommodating settlement within "1 the Matanuska-Susitna-Beluga study area, much is located within :d the Parks Highway Management Unit. In particular the southern '1 sub-unit is of sufficient soils and topography to sustain settlement -. ,...J activities. The area1s relatively easy access and proximity to population centers has emphasized the settlement resource of the southern sub-unit. This resource has not gone unrecognized. ~ Numerous private subdivisions and state land disposal subdivisions ..-J have been developed in the southern sub-unit. Some thirty-five Iir'J private subdivisions ranging from 10 to 240 acres in size offer t;",;..1 hundreds of vacant individual parcels for settlement purposes. Subdivisions of state land developed for residential/recreational disposals are significant. Nine state subdivisions, including Caswell Lakes, Talkeetna Bluffs, and Bartlett Hills, have been or are in the 1 .j, process of development for disposal through fiscal year 1983. Additionally, within the northern sub-unit, three subdivisions of :::'l j state land have been scheduled for disposal in fiscal years 1982-84. J --, { This inventory of developed lots is viewed as the most immediate of -.:1 the management unit1s settlement resources. The lots are physically ~ developed and accessed to varying degrees, yet remain substantially ~ vacant largely due to their inaccessibility to employment opportuni ties and lack of public facilities and services. ~ l .;;;} 7. LAND USE ISSUES Land use issues identified in the PHMU demonstrates classic land ~ use conflicts between settlement, natural resource utilization, and --~ .J recreation. These land uses are largely exclusive of one another. ~ - 45 - [ C Conflicts arise as the potential for more than one resource utiliza tion exists within the same parcel of land. r-" U As one use is developed, other uses may suffer. Caught between Q competing land uses are issue of local life styles, economic develop U ment, and the natural environment. With intelligent planning and A public land management, the PHMU offers an opportunity for accom o modation of all resource uses. B Identification of the following issues is intended to stimulate thought aimed at reaching optimal land use benefits. B a. Protection of Existing Low-Density Life Styles [J~ As development of the area's natural resource base and settle D ment activities increase, existing life styles may be threatened. b. Protection of Fish and Wildlife and Recreation Resources C Increased resource development may diminish existing fish and G wildlife habitat and recreational use of the land. Protection of habitat and recreational values revolves around the adequate 8 retention and management of lands in public ownership. c. State Land Sales nL3 Extensive state land sales for residential/recreational purposes I~ w has met strong protest from local residents and borough gov n ernment. While area residents fear its impact on existing life u style, local government has protested the sales due to the potential demand for and costs of providing public facilities and B services to a decentralized population. h 'v' - 46 - 1__ u [ Q d. Agriculture/Forestry/Settlement Conflict [ Lands suitable for agriculture often are suitable for forestry and settlement uses. Management of public lands should care o fully assess these mutually competing uses and plan for land uses which satisfy public demands while providing maximum 6 public benefit. 8 e. Transportation Reguirements for Land Disposal Areas Thousands of acres of state land has and will continue to be E sold to private individuals. However, the vast majority of these lands are unaccessed. At issue is whether or not this o practice is benificial and should continue, or if road access should be provided to these lands prior to sale. o C C. WILLOW SUB-BASIN MANAGEMENT UNIT 1. OVERVIEW G The Willow Sub-Basin Management Unit (WSB) has received much o attention in recent months. State land and certain borough lands were the subject of a joint land use planning effort conducted by the Alaska Departments of Natural Resources, Fish and Game, and C the Matanuska-Susitna Borough. The planning efforts culminated C with the adoption of the plan by both the state and borough. The plan inventoried and assessed WSB resources and made recom IJLl.I... mendations for their management on public lands. The resource inventory covered the total management unit and provides a very competent assessment of its existing resource base. These resource B assessments provided the basis for the resource information con B tained in this chapter. [ - 47 - l "" ~ __1 As the Willow Sub-Basin Land Use Plan has already addressed land use and land management issues relating to publicly-owned lands in the study area, this chapter will concentrate on issues relating to -J privately-owned lands. Private land holdings account for roughly ::J. 20% of the total land area in WSB. Although relatively small in ! ~~ number, they accommodate a majority of existing settlement activi '1 ties in the study area. Subdivision activity within the study area .~~ ~ has proliferated as a result of land speculation spurred by the past 'I oil pipeline economy and the possibility of the capital move to _-J Willow. ~~, ~ 2. BOUNDARIES ~ 1 This unit encompasses a hydrologic sub-basin of the Susitna River .:J Drainage Basin. The WSB is bounded on the north by the Kash i witna River drainage and on the south by Cook Inlet. The Susitna _-1 River is the west boundary of the unit, while the drainage divide "l of the Matanuska and Susitna Rivers delineates the east boundary. ...) Approximately 970,000 acres of state, borough, and private lands "l comprise this management unit. ...J C"j j 3. LAND OWNERSHIP j l The State of Alaska is the major land owner in the WSB with ap -' ...-.; proximately 619,740 acres (65%) under its jurisdiction. Large 1 blocks of state-owned lands are contained in legislatively designated ,.J areas such as the Susitna Flats area, the Nancy Lake State Recrea tion Area, and the capital site reserve. J, ~ The borough has received 138,830 acres of their state land entitle ~ ~ ment within the WSB. These borough-owned lands represent ap \ ,..1 proximately 14% of the total WSB land area. Large blocks of bor ough lands are located in the Point MacKenzie, Fish Creek, South ~ Big Lake, Willow Creek, and Red Shirt Lake areas. Small parcels of --. -' - 48 - , -' F i..-J- ~ ~j borough land are located throughout the greater Wasilla and Big Lake areas as well as along the Parks Highway Corridor. Private land holdings in the borough, which is the focus of this :d LJ chapter, are located primarily within the road-accessed areas of the d unit. Private ownership is predominate in the greater Wasilla area ~ between Houston and the unit's eastern boundary. In all, private :J land holdings account for 193,730 acres, or approximately 20% of the ., total land area of the Willow Sub-basin . ~ Other land tenures of note are the 13,300 acres of private lands C owned by native, regional and village corporations, and the 6,270 acres of land selected and owned by the University of Alaska. nl-.-1 4. ACCESS c The WSB has the highest level of accessibility of any of the study area's management units. Road, rail, and air provide access to the c majority of developed areas of the WSB. A largely undeveloped trail network serves non-road-accessed areas. The most notable" of the many trails is the historic Iditarod Trail. The area's many lakes and waterways provide other transportation opportunities. ~ j The WSB plan estimates that 60% of the unit is road-accessed. The existing system is comprised of roads in varying degrees of condi ,) tions and use. The Parks Highway serves as the major arterial through the WSB. The highway provides the principle overland transportation route 1I linking the area to Anchorage, the interior and 1I 0utside. Com pletion of the highway has markedly influenced the WSB. As the preferred route to the interior, traffic previously routed through Palmer, via the Glenn Highway, is now channeled through the WSB. ~ Since the opening of the Parks Highway the geographic center of ~ .J - 49 - -. rL_j r) borough population has been moving steadily westward, from Palmer towards Wasilla. Minor arterials such as the Knik-Goosebay Highway, Wasilla-Fishook ~ Road, Big Lake Road and Bogard Road provide for traffic circula 8 tion between sub-areas of the WSB. U ~ The local road network, almost totally unpaved, is largely the re sult of extensive private land subdivision activity during the early i nr~J...... ; and mid-1970's. Generally, the local road network is a mixture of standards and conditions typical of rapid and largely unplanned B development. These local roads provide the bulk of direct access to current borough residents and other vacant private lands. o The State of Alaska, the Matanuska-Susitna Borough, and the City of Wasilla share maintenance responsibilities for the road system. o While arterials and many major collectors are maintained by the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, the City o and Borough maintains the balance of streets through the Borough's Road Service Areas. 6 The nation's only federally-owned rail system serves the WSB. The Alaska Railroad provides passenger and freight service between nL=}..{ Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Seward. Summer tourism provides the bulk of the passenger business. Recent figures show that 75% of o the railroad's passengers visit Mt. McKinley National Park. Typi cally, the WSB has served as only a pass-through area for freight o traffic, as 95% of the freight travels northbound from Anchorage to Fairbanks. However, the railroad is playing an increasingly impor ·.·~; .•. .;J, tant role in the transportation of natural resources, such as sand D·:" and gravel, from the Matanuska-Susitna Borough to Anchorage. B Air transportation in the WSB serves a variety of functions. Rec reational flying is prevalent in the area due to its proximity to o Anchorage and the many strips and float plane landing sites avail- [ - 50 - l r""'. .. " able. Daily commuting to Anchorage and other areas of the state is a practice of some area residents. -J The Wasilla Airport, located just north of the Parks Highway in the ..... 'j city of Wasilla, provides for recreational and commuter flights as ::-J well as ready commercial access to bush residents seeking supplies. ~ Locations of other airstrips include Willow, Big Lake,and Houston. --~ -' The area1s many lakes provide additional opportunity for winter ski ~ and summer floatplane landings. -' -.. Several transportation projects of state-wide importance are cur rently under consideration by the Department of Transportation and J Public Facilities. Among the projects under consideration is the ~ ~ Fish Creek to Chuitna Road which is intended to provide access to J major commercial agricultural projects as well as the Beluga coal ~ fields. The Knik Arm Crossing is a major long-term consideration...... J The project, which is currently under study, will provide a direct link from Anchorage to Point MacKenzie and will shorten the dis -i' tance from Anchorage to Fairbanks by 30 to 50 miles. Other road, air, marine, and rail facility projects are under varying levels of ~ consideration. These projects are largely dependent upon develop ---} mental decisions made by state and local governments as well as j ~ input by private individuals. J ~ 5. EXISTING LAND USES - ~ -' -, This discussion of existing land uses within the WSB will, following \ an area overview, concentrate on the road-accessed, principally -'-' privately-owned lands which account for much of the current set :l j tlement activity within the WSB. =, _-=-3 Although the WSB encompasses 35% of the borough1s population, it 1 d still remains largely undeveloped. Recreational and settlement use , J ~ -' - 51 - r ~ t of the land are the most prominent activities with other activities in agriculture, forestry, and mineral resource development. [ Mining activities are concentrated in the Tal keetna Mountains where, in the Hatcher Pass area, millions of dollars have been reaped in o gold deposits. Past increases in the price of gold have once again F made gold mining attractive. tJ The relatively minor land uses in the WSB are agriculture and for nL~ estry. Agriculture, hindered by lack of regional infrastructure, marginal soils, and inadequate markets, has been a declining land E use in the WSB. The estimated 2,000 acres in production during 1980 was less than one-quarter of the acreage in production during the 1960's. Settlement activities have displaced agriculture on many D of the previously farmed acreages. Although a promising potential, the area's forestry resources have not been fully utilized. The o fourteen existing timber mills within the Sub-Basin have been hin dered by a restrictive market and limited timber availability. Their production during 1979 was less than 9% of total capacity at 1.1 million board feet. ~ Recreation is one of the area's major land uses. The WSB is the '9 , focus of much recreational activity on the part of Borough and ; - Anchorage residents and tourists. The area's abundance of surface =-l water is the single most important recreational feature. Fishing is ----; -, an important recreational activity, particularly along the Little --~ Susitna River and Willow Creek. Nancy Lake State Recreation Area ~ offers year-round opportunities for fishing, canoeing, cross-country skiing, snow mobiling, and camping. :l -:] -;, ,,;;J Settlement and related activities have been the dominant influence ~ , on land use patterns in the WSB during the last decade. Popula ~ oJ tion growth during the mid-1970's was dramatic. The Wasilla sta -, tistical area showed an 80% increase in population between the years .J 1975 and 1976. The 1960 u.S. Census counted 112 people in the - 52 - [ p immediate town of Wasilla. Since then the population has grown to a 1981 estimate of 2,168 persons. In total, the WSB accounts for [ some 8,000 of the Borough1s total population of 22,329, or roughly 35%. ~ Although population has increased markedly during the past decade, =: subdivision of land has greatly exceeded demand and large amounts -=-~ Cj of subdivided land now remain vacant. The WSB Plan estimates 17,350 vacant subdivided lots existed in the WSB in 1971. i P- ,~ Residential subdivisions form a fairly homogenous belt from the U unit's east boundary west through Wasilla and Houston. The Little Susitna River has limited the spread of development activities and ~" ~. forms the northern limits of the settlement belt which extends south D-, to the Knik Arm. It is this broad area which contains the majority o of the WSB population. Much of the commercial and services support for the area's popula c tion is concentrated within the city of Wasilla. A commercial strip c extends along the Parks Highway nearly the length of the city. lJ The strip, while sometimes creating local traffic congestion on the arterial and limiting the city's scenic appeal, is providing an ever n~j increasing range of services to its customers. The local business community is rebounding from a severe post-pipeline recession o which saw 65 businesses close their doors in a single year. Commercial enterprises are also springing up along arterials in all [ directions from Wasilla. The MeadWood Mall, located at the Big Lake Junction of the Parks Highway, was built in 1980 to serve the o growing Big Lake area. It demonstrates the extent of commercial development in the WSB. Other commercial enclaves along the Parks Highway provide services to local residents, and are oriented o to recreational or tourism trade during the summer. Businesses n within the city of Houston offer gas, meals, grocery, and boat b [ - 53 - [ p landing services for the many recreationists utilizing the Little Susitna River. rL...J 6. RESOURCE BASE -- POTENTIAL USE R C1 The WSB contains a diverse resource base. Settlement and recrea r tional development of the resources has been strong, although u agricultural and forestry development has lagged behind. Further ~ development of all the area1s resources will have marked effects on ---' the area1s economic and demographic character. o The WSB Land Use Plan identifies 80,000 acres of public lands on which forestry management is a primary use, although it is un certain whether the forests can support a sustained, advanced o forestry industry development. Potential for personal use of the c area1s forestry resources is substantial. There exists significant concentrations of agricultural soils on [ publicly-owned lands of sufficient quantity and quality to sustain large-scale farming activities. The WSB Land Use Plan identified five areas of significant agricultural potential. One, the Point MacKenzie Management Unit, contains approximately 16,000 acres of public lands, and is currently a planned agricultural project. Although delayed by legal proceedings, the project is expected to c-, 1 begin full-scale development this fall. _J ~, The WSB is rich in known and potential mineral resources. The ~ combined Matanuska and Susitna Coal Fields offer a hypothetical reserve of 14 million short tons. However, thickness of overburden n :~ j and the discontinuity and thickness of the coal seams appear to ~ make mining uneconomical. Gold, historically a mining staple of the ~ area, continues to be a valuable resource in the Tal keetna Moun cd tains. Other metallic and non-metallic minerals exist, however, --; their commercial potential is uncertain. Oil and gas has not been d •.....J - 54 - [ R found in significant quantities, although geologists familiar with the area believe a commercial potential may exist. [ Fish and wildlife habitat and recreational resources are significant Bfl in the WSB. liThe Willow Sub-basin, due to its particular combina tion of climate, topography, and vegetation, is an unusually good C area for a variety of fish and wildlife species .11* The management of fish and game populations will become increas o ingly more important as continued hunting, fishing, and other recreational endeavors become more pronounced with increased set B tlement in southcentral Alaska. As previously_stated, 17,350 vacant, subdivided lots existed within o the WSB in 1981. This land base offers a tremendous threshold for future settlement activities. Assuming the vast majority of these C lots are buildable, the existing residential land base can accomodate population growth for years to come. C The existing surplus -of residential land was recognized in the WSB C plan which recommended only 6,000 acres for settlement purposes. State and borough land sales are to occur as a demand arises. C The land surplus has furthered the Borough's role as a .lIbedroom community, II as well as the problems that accompany that function. D Today an estimated one-third of the Borough1s workforce commutes to other areas of the state for employment. As this trend con C tinues, pertinent related issues demand the attention of both the o public and private sectors of the community. u *Land Use Plan for Public Lands in the Willow Sub-basin, October, 1981. n HI; c;...:; l,~ - 55 - C Q 7. LAND USE ISSUES [ As resource management for most public lands is now a relatively settled issue with the adoption of the Willow Sub-Basin plan, the -·l -- ~ identified land-use issues will revolve around settlement activities B~=i within accessed, generally private lands of the WSB. The following M.,.! issues will concentrate on settlement and related public facilities and b service needs. o a. Impact of Settlement on Existing Lifestyles R U Population projections contained in Chapter II of this report predict a continuing population growth for the borough. How o ever, even the lowest expected population increase projects a near quadrupling of present borough population by the end of this century. With its existing land base and community infra C structure, a significant share of the population may locate within the WSB. The current low density lifestyle enjoyed by C many borough residents is, in many cases, the very reason they locate there. Large gains in population may affect the o existing low density lifestyles. , , b. Settlement Patterns 0~1 The relative compactness or decentralization of development C patterns strongly affects the cost of providing public facilities and services. As settlement continues its current decentralized C sprawl, the per capita cost of providing and maintaining roads, utilities, schools and other public facilities, and services in ~ 8 creases. B c. Protection of Natural Systems Settlement activities can directly and indirectly affect water D quality and other elements of the natural environment. As [ - 56 - <-' n R development increases with intensity and density, its potential affects on the environment will become more profound. C d. Retention of Recreational Opportunities D The provision of public recreational opportunities revolves around the retention and public ownership of adequate land and G the accessibility of the resources contained thereon. Large portions of land in the WSB is in private and borough owner Q ship. These private and certain borough lands will become developed as opportunities permit. The retention of state lands ~ w and public ownership and their subsequent management for fish and wildlife habitat and recreational usage may be important to o the quality of life in the WSB. o e. Economic Development Many current residents who are unemployed or who presently c commute to other areas of the state for employment opportuni ties want local jobs. These jobs result only from expanded C economic and employment base. However, the economic expan sion required to provide local jobs may also detrimentally alter N l~ the lifestyles currently enjoyed by borough residents. o D. GLENN HIGHWAY MANAGEMENT UNIT C 1. OVERVIEW fl.1 U The Glenn Highway Management Unit (GHMU) encompasses the Glenn Highway from Palmer to Eureka. This unit is defined by the Tal R U keetna Mountains to the north and the Chugach Mountains to the south. The unit contains the Matanuska River and its valley, a o well known agricultural area. [ - 57 - r~ b n R Increased development pressures have impacted the Matanuska Valley communities. Although it is still the most important of the o state's agricultural areas, a trend towards development of resi dential subdivision on productive farm lands has been established. ~ o State owned or selected lands which dominate the unit provide a wide variety of recreational opportunities for local and other south c~ central residents, as well as tourists. The land also holds a wealth n of coal resources in the Wishbone Hill and Anthracite Ridge areas !, north of the highway. c While the most notable land uses in the unit are settlement and agriculture, which exist primarily in its western portion. Recrea tional activities and small scale coal and gold placer mining activities o occur throughout the unit. ~ I; ~ 2. BOUNDARIES ~ __l The GHMU includes the Matanuska River drainage and parts of the Knik and Nelchina drainages. The unit is bourdered on the north 1 by the Talkeetna Mountains, and on the south by the Chugach .=J Range. The unit's western boundary is the drainage divide be -, - ~ tween the Matanuska and Susitna Rivers while the eastern limits of ;;;.:1 the unit extend through the Matanuska-Susitna Borough1s eastern 1 boundary to Tazlina Lake. The area encompasses over 478,000 -)" acres, with 305,280 acres contained within the Borough. ", ~ 3. LAND OWNERSHIP ~, ~j Within the Borough, the majority of lands in this unit are owned or selected by the State of Alaska. Sixty-five percent, or approxi 9 ~ mately 198,432 acres of the total land area is state-owned or se o..J lected. Private ownership accounting for approximately 70,214 , acres (23%), Borough lands of 30,528 acres (10%), and 6,105 acres ~ -' - 58 - E C (2%) of native-owned lands comprise the remainder of GHMU land ownership. within the Borough. C 4. ACCESS 6 Lands within the GHMU are accessed to varying degrees by an p array of transportation modes. The Glenn Highway provides road w access to the Talkeetna Mountains on the north, however, the Chugach Range foothills south of the highway is generally inac [ cessible by road due to the physical constraints posed by the Matanuska River. Air, railroad, and trail accesses supplement B roads to provide a comparably high level of accessibility. The Glenn Highway, a two-lane paved arterial, provides year-round U road access the total length of the unit. The highway was once the only route from south central Alaska to the interior and the lIout C side. II Construction of the Parks Highway to Fairbanks has since changed the complexion of the Matanuska Valley as much of the C traffic and accompanying trade now utilize the Parks Highway. The Glenn still remains an important transportation route to Lake ll o Louise, Glennallen and lIoutside , while providing local access. [J Numerous minor roads extend north from the highway. The major ity of these roads originated as access routes to mining claims in the Wishbone Hill mining area. A few of the roads, such as the c Jonesville and Buffalo Mine roads still serve mining claims as well as c permanent residents. Only the western portion of the Chugach foothills are road ac o cessed. The Old Glenn Highway, part of the original highway linking Palmer and Anchorage, accesses the areas south of the Matanuska and Knik River confluence. Roads provide access to the B western shoulder of the range from Lazy Mountain north as far as o Wolverine Lake. Cable crossings and winter ice conditions on the lJ - 59 - C '"' Matanuska River provide the only other access routes to the Chu gach Range. .~ An intricate network of trails traverse this unit. These trails once ~ provided the only overland access to the Willow Creek and Nelchina =:J mining districts. One of the most important trails, the Chickaloon, ~ extended northeast from Knik to serve gold mining claims. The ~ trails are now a valuable recreational resource. ~ Air transportation is utilized to the fullest extent allowed by the area's rugged terrain. Landing strips are located at Butte, Sutton, Victory, Sheep Mountain, Gunsight Mountain, Eureka and Tazlina. ..J These airstrips provide opportunities for recreational flying, com , muting, and delivery of supplies. The Palmer Municipal Airport, a -' Class III general aviation facility, provides the highest level of air -; service available in the unit. d ~ The Alaska Railroad provides cargo and passenger service to Palmer d with connections throughout Southcentral and the Interior. In the past, the railroad provided service northeast of Palmer to Sutton ..,." with spurs to Jonesville and Eska for transporting of coal to mili _:.i tary bases in Anchorage. Railroad service to the area ceased when "1 conversion from coal to gas power generation reduced the available --~ market by 80%. -=; -} 5. EXISTING LAND USES --, ;;,::.J Settlement is the most notable land use in the Glenn Highway area. Settlement activities are primarily concentrated in the western por ~ - ;: tion of the unit. Coal mining in the Jonesville-Eska area and ~5 recreational activites ranging from hunting and hiking to white --, ------3 water rafting comprise the balance of principle land uses within the ~ unit. ~ - 60 - ~ c n The City of Palmer is the area1s demographic, commercial, and local governmental hub. With a population of some 2,100 persons, Palmer G serves a broader population of some 4,000 more, including the Butte area. City residents enjoy a full range of public facilities and [dA services, including the Borough1s only municipal water supply and sewage disposal system (the City of Wasilla provides water service C to a portion of Wasilla). Other communities of varying characteristics occur along the Glenn D Highway northeast of Palmer. The first encountered, Sutton, is the largest of these communities with a population of some 500 per o sons. Other communities along the way, such as Chickaloon, Sheep Mountain and Eureka, accommodate a combined population of less D than 400 persons. Mineral resources spurred early exploration and development in the o Matanuska Valley area. The communities of Sutton, Jonesville r Eska, and Chickaloon originated as a result of coal mining activity. o Although several non-expiring coal leases exist in the Chickaloon and Wishbone Hill areas, only the Premier Mine remains in operation U9 producing some 500 tons of coal annually for home heating use. Although coal production currently plays a diminished role in the I area1s economy, geologists familiar with the area believe the Wish W- bone Hill District may become a major coal produceing area as coal r'l demand for home heating use increases. Ten coal prospecting per mits have recently been filed within the management unit. "'l -l As prospecting for coal and other hard rock materials continues in the Talkeetna and Chugach Mountains r the remaining mining activity within the unit results from gold placer mining claims concentrated along the tributaries of the Matanuska River. Significant yields. --t have been noted from the foothill streams northwest of Eureka. ~ Deriving from its history as an agricultural colony sponsored by the ~ federal government following the early 1930's depression r agricul- - 61 - . ~ c ~ ture has remained an important land use in the fertile lowlands of the western Matanuska Valley. Although declining since the 1960·s [ (due generally to economics of the small farm felt nationwide) valley farm production topped $6.5 million during 1979. During 1980, ~' agricultural activities included 10 dairies, 17 vegetable-potato l3--J farms, 7 grazing leases and other endeavors which produced 75% of ~ the state's farm products. An estimated 10,400 acres were planted 6 during 1980. U The areas only concentration of industrial activity is within the City of Palmer1s industrial park. Several light industries have located C there including a mobile home manufacturing plant. The valley1s remaining industry consists of a large sand and gravel yard south of Palmer which is accessed by the railroad, and several other small D gravel pit and sawmill operations. U The area's natural features and abundant wildlife make recreation a prominent activity in the Matanuska Valley. A broad spectrum of C winter and summer recreational activities are available in the area. o Travel along the highway affords spectacular views. State recrea tion sites along the highway at Moose Creek, King Mountain, Bonnie Lake, Long Lake, Matanuska Glacier and Little Nelchina River com o plement a scenic excursion. Several private lodges and restaurants c offer services along the highway. The Matanuska Glacier is one of the most accessible of the state's C glaciers. Through a private resort facility it is possible to drive to the foot of the glacier. nu The area's rivers receive significant use by kayakers and rafters. The Matanuska River is used by commercial rafters from Caribou D Creek to Nova Bend. G [ - 62 - u n c The Keplar-Bradley Lakes complex is a popular spot for fishermen as are many of the area1s lakes and streams. 0-,1 Hunting is a prominent activity along the foothills of the Talkeetna gtJ Mountains. Twelve registered big game guides have exclusive guiding districts in the unit and serve hunters for moose, bear, 1 'j sheep and caribou. The Alaska Department of Fish & Game esti , 0·'-.3 mates 200 to 250 moose are harvested annually from a resident population of 2,000 to 3,000 animals. The area's substantial popu C lations of small game including rabbit, ptarmigan, and grouse, make it the most heavily used small game hunting area in southcentral C Alaska. Trapping for wolverine, mink, fox, beaver and other fur bearing species is a popular activity of residents within the Glenn J· ~ Highway. O.;J o 6. RESOURCE BASE - POTENTIAL USE The GHMU offers a moderate potential for subsurface resources and L forestry development while a high resource development value exists l for wildlife, settlement and recreation. Although some 200,000 acres of mixed forest exist within the area, C location and topography may hinder large scale forestry operations. Present commercial activity is limited, however, the area offers a continuing source of firewood for local residence. Subsurface coal resources, historically an economic factor in the u area, continues to offer substantial promise. The Matanuska coal field extends from the Willow Subasin Management Unit eas~ into the r1 b.,j GHMU. The coal increases in quality eastward from a sub bituminous type in the Wishbone Hill area to a higher quality 9 anthracite type in the Anthracite Ridge coal mining district. Al .....Ji though the quality of the coal increases eastward the coal beds be come increasingly discontinuous, making coal extraction more ex- ...3 --' - 63 - = -" C G pensive. The coal potential of the entire Matanuska coal field has been estimated as high as 2.4 billion tons. C Additional mining resources in the area can be found in the unit's vast limestone and gravel desposits. High quality limestone de B posits exist in the Kings River drainage near Castle Mountain. The deposits are estimated to be of adequate quality and quantity to D meet the needs of the Southcentral region for years to come. D Historically a high agricultural potential has been demonstrated in the. western Matanuska Valley. The area's favorable soils and B climatic conditions, enhanced by long hours of summer sunlight, combine to make the Matanuska Valley one of the state1s most im o portant agricultural areas. The unit's diverse and accessible landscape offers a broad range of o recreational opportunities. The scenic value of the area is of par ticular note. A drive along the Glenn Highway is popular amoung c weekend recreationalists who can observe the scenery from their automobile or from a scaled mountain peak. The lowland and foot o hill areas contain populations of big and small game which offer con tinued harvest opportunities to hunters. Year-round activities such -l as fishing, rafting, hiking, skiing and dog sledding along with -~ D other recreational persuits identifies the area as a prime recrea o tional resource to residents as well as tourists. An estimated 35 percent of the entire Susitna Beluga Study Area c has a high moderate capability for settlement, as judged by the physical capability of the land to support settlement activities. The o majority of these lands lie adjacent to the existing road systems (Parks Highway, Glenn Highway and Denali Highway). The western D··~.t'.-J, portion of the GHMU, with its existing community infrastructure, abundance of vacant subdivided land and its physical ability to o [ - 64 - L C ntJ...: support increased settlement, provides the area a high settlement potential. [ Land speculation in the area, resulting from rapid population in R B creases, the past oil pipeline economy, and the proposed capital move, created a tremendous surplus of developed residential prop n erty. These subdivided lands can accommodate expected population ti increases in the area for years to come. Although Palmer and its environs are expected to share a smaller percentage of overall bor C ough population growth in the coming years, the area will continue to provide significant opportunities for the accommodation of settle o ment. o 7. LAND USE ISSUES D The foJlowing issues, addressing both public and private lands, are L oriented towards potential concerns and effects of increased settle ment activities in the Matanuska Valley area. These issues are c intended to stimulate public thought and reaction to perceived c community concerns. a. Preservation of Existing Life Styles ~ While developmental pressures continue to expand the Valley's population base, existing lifestyles of the area may become o threatened as increasing numbers and densities of population increase demands on the land as well as public facilities and c services. o b. Provision of Public Services and Facilities Continued residential expansion in the lower Matanuska Valley D will require expansion of necessary public facilities and serv ices. Without a proportional improvement of the local economy B and tax base, the area will continue to suffer the financial woes l - 65 - c w of providing necessary public facilities and services to an ex C panding II bedroom community". c. Protection and Enhancement of Recreational Opportunities 6 Continued developmental activities and the associated increased usage of' recreational resources will place pressures on the B ability to adequately maintain those resources for continued use. State lands in the area offer prime opportunity for con nG tinued use and enhancement of existing recreational resources. 8 d. State Land Sales [] State lands compose a significant share of the Matanuska Valley. Management of these lands will influence future land use pat C terns of the area. C e. Protection and Retention of Agricultural Lands Although valley farms still produce the bul k of thestate's agri C cultural products, competing land uses (most notably settle ment) has claimed many acres of once productive farmland. ~; Inflated land values and settlement demands have prompted many families to "sell the farm". o C G 'JR I.-d e w l> - 66 - ...... ii I I I I I I I I I CHAPTER V REGIONAL SETTLEMENT PATTERNS I I I I I \ I --! J I --1 \ c-:1 -,, J V. REGIONAL SETTLEMENT PATTERNS ~-J ~ - . J ,., 1 -J -..:l A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION "l ....A The Matanuska-Susitna Borough is vast in area and resources. Its physical characteristics offer opportunity while posing constraints. The ~ , j borough1s 23,000 square mile area accommodates less than 1 person per =-4 ... square mile. Although sparsely settled areawide, the majority of the i borough settlement occurs within private lands which comprise less then J 5 percent of the borough's total land area . .., J ~ During the 1970 l s both internal and external economic development contributed to a tripling of the boroughs population. As development pressures continue to stimulate population growth, the borough and its people will be confronted with situations requiring informed public and private decision making. This chapter will depict the existing distribu tion and intensity of settlement in the borough. Expected patterns of ""~] settlement resultant of potential growth inducers, such as the capital :j move and increased utilization of the boroughs natural resources, will be .., explored . .J ~) 1. OVERVIEW :J The need for planning in the Matanuska-Susitna Borough is prompt :":"'A ~ -J ed by the settlement of man and the resulting effects and influences ,.cd that this settlement creates. The immensity of the Matanuska ~1 Susitna Borough makes the task of areawide assessment of existing :J conditions and needs difficult. This assessment is the basis for 4 competent anticipation of and planning for the boroughs future. ~ ~ -' - 67 - C R The borough's agricultural, fish and wildlife mineral resources brought the first of white man's settlement activities to the area. C As the resources were developed and utilized, settlement of the borough continued. Within the past decade, however, external G influences have played a major role in establishing the settlement c patterns of the borough. u General economic conditions statewide, as a result of petroleum industry development, as well as the potential of the capital move to [J Willow have spurred substantial development activities in the bor ough. These influences, as well as the increased development of U the borough1s resource base, indicate a continuance of growth and o settlement in the borough. The location of settlement in the borough has historically been a function of its regional geography. Physical characteristics of the C land have posed major limitations to overall settlement. The bor ough'S vast mountain ranges are incapable of supporting typical [ settlement activities. Additionally, the Susitna River presents a Q physical deterent to accessing lowlands to its west. Existing settlement is confined to a relatively small portion of the 0, Matanuska-Susitna Borough. The lower Matanuska and Susitna River Valleys and "their communities of Sutton, Palmer, Butte, p Wasilla, Big Lake, Houston and Willow, accommodate the majority of current population and settlement activity within the borough. The cities of Palmer and Wasilla are the borough's major centers of population and commerce. Other relatively minor community centers are spread along the borough1s major road system as well as the D Alaska Railroad and waterways. An understanding of existing .....' settlement - its location, intensity, and its consequent needs -will i==j foster on understanding of potential settlement conditions and prob i=J lems. L.:i '-' - 68 - C n c This protrayal of existing settlement patterns recognizes the need to develop an understanding of the boroughs settlement on a broad C regional basis. This regional concept would necessarily transcend community by community identification and description. Moreover, fj tJ the identification of regional settlement should group together gen erally homogeneous areas of the borough under II regional cate ll gories • These categories address issues on a regional scale. To G gether they establish a concept of existing borough settlement as C well as expected settlement occurrances during the years ahead. An attached map and tables intludedin this text help to locate and f1lJ define settlement categories. The Regional Settlement Patterns map, accompanying this report in its back envelope, generally outlines -1. ,~ OJ the geographic distributions of regional settlement categories as 0.~ they now occur. Table 6 (page 72) graphically portrays the rela tive intensities of each settlement category according to existing o land use and activities. Table 7 (page 74) demonstrates the vary ing levels of public facilities and services which exist throughout c the borough. o The settlement areas outlined on the regional settlement map are intended to be general in nature. Also generalized for the purpose 1 .....: ..-,'; {, of this chapter is existing land use and public facilities and serv 0 ices. A detailed inventory of land use, public facilities and serv ices, and land tenure will be part of future planning documents of o the Matanuska-Susitna Borough Comprehensive Plan. The purpose of the map is to convey a basic understanding of the presence of C human settlement activites (land use) and the resultant demand for public facilities ·and services on an overall regional scale. b 1-'1 B. SETTLEMENT CATEGORIES d R Seven categories of regional settlement were developed for the purposes ~~; of this chapter. The categories range from extensively developed urban - 69 - ,C [ P areas to areas of remote mountains which accommodate little or no settle ment activity. The areas are categorized in descending levels of inten ~ .--... I lj sity as: 0 Urban B 0 Rural Suburban 0 Rural Rustic C 0 Rural Recreational p 0 Remote Bush 0 '=" Remote Mountains 0 Recreation ::j [J The definitions accompanying each of the land use categories are based ~;, [, on descriptions of the commonalities which bond communities and areas together as the defined regional units. Existing land uses, physical geography, accessibility, and the level and degree of existing public [1 facilities and services are among the factors considered in developing r~ representative categories of regional settlement within the borough. L...,J Each category is defined according to these characteristics. :'l The following text will define the regional settlement areas by composi ~ tion and location. Following the definitions, potential changes in exist ing settlement patterns resultant of general population and economic growth and the influence of special projects such as the Kni k Arm f-:"J Crossing and the Susitna Hydroelectric Project will be reviewed. -->; C. SETTLEMENT CATEGORY DEFINITIONS The following will describe by the definition and location the regional settlement areas which comprise the Matanuska-Susitna Borough. ~ 1. URBAN ~ -" The urban category represents the most intense of the defined ,.1 settlement areas present within the Matanuska-Susitna Borough. "- •.,i - 70 - .,.J [ B Residential, commercial, and industrial land uses are complemented ["1 by a full range of public facilities and services to identify this area U as the boroughs highest in the degree of urban characteristics. Ci Location and Description. The City of Palmer and portions of the :j b City of Wasilla are identified as the borough1s only urban districts. As the borough1s only first class city, Palmer provides a relatively c, '--'" dense population the full spectrum of typical municipal services. r~1 Palmer is the heart of the Matanuska Valley agricultural community. ,-::] In addition to farming, local government, and the region1s telephone and electric utilities provide the city with the most stable economic f~ ~ and employment base in the borough. The portion of the City of Wasilla provided community-wide supply service as well as areas within the city which contain a high degree of commercial develop o ment is also defined as urban. c Settlement Activities. Residential densities within the urban area range up to seven dwelling units per acre. The fu.ll range of C residential types provide densities at greater and lesser levels. r::! Within the City of Wasilla urban area the absence of a community sewer disposal system limits overall residential densities to two dwelling units per acre. Single family residents, multiple family ':1 ~ ~ dwellings, mobile home parks and transit lodgings offer a deverse 3 residential mix . •A~ The urban area's relatively dense population base supports a wide .-, range of commercial and retail businesses in addition to local con venience and service establishments. Other retail services of f~rm ~~ regional scope such as bui Iding materials, implements, apparel, -l and automobiles are accommodated within the urban districts. :~ , The Palmer urban district accommodates a large share of the Bor d ough's light industrial and manufacturing activities. The City of ~ Palmer's industrial park is the major concentration of industrial v' activity. It lies adjacent to the Glenn Highway and the Alaska --' - 71 - -" [ t TABLE 6 C Existing Land Use and Activities fA Rural Rural Rural Remote Remote t:J Land Use Activities Urban Sub Rustic Roc. Roc. Bush Mts. RECREATIONAL: D Hunting X XX XXX w Fishing X XXX XX X-C Skiing X X XXX X Fl Mt. Climbing X X X '-.) BoatingfKyaking XXXX XX RESIDENTIAL : Single Family XX XX X C Two Family XX XX Apartments XX 0 Boarding House X COMMERCIAL: C Local Service X X XX X X Lodges XX X Restaurant/Bar XXXXX Tourist Center X X X X C Service Station X X XX X X n Big Game Guiding X XX XX I; Agriculture XX X ~...J Trapping X XX Motel X n Hotel X 1\ w Indoor Amusement XX Auto Sales X ~~ Bank X U Equipment Sales &Rental XX ~ Furniture Sales X Offices X X Retail Stores & Services X Regional Retail X INDUSTRIAL: Junkyard X X X Fuel Yards X X ~=1 Sand & Gravel Extraction X X j Other Resource Extraction XX X X ~ :;J Light Manufacturing X X Lumber Yard X X ~, Concrete Batch Plant X io.,.1 Food Processing X Cold Storage X c', Public Utility Yard X c-! - 72 - , -' ._.-1 Railroad and currently houses several light industrial and manufac turing endeavors. Industrial activity within the Wasilla urban dis trict is non-existant, although a number of industrial uses exist near its periphery. Other than industrial uses relating to the ""t extraction of minerals, the urban districts accommodate the majority j of the boroughs industrial land uses. ~ -i Public Facilities and Services. As shown on Table 7, a wide range =1 of public facilities and services are available to the urban area1s ~ relatively dense populations. Within Palmer, public water supply -,. and sewer disposal systems provide services to the developed town -, _J site as well as enabling neighboring adjacent residential areas within <.~ the city to develop at urban densities. The community water sup ! ply system is currently available to a portion of the City of Wasilla . .,.:,; Additional services are provided within the urban districts under the jurisdiction of the borough government. Educational services , from kindergarten through grade twelve is provided to area resi .J dents through the borough as an areawide service. The borough's only hospital facility offering acute in-patient care to the regional 1 population is located within the Palmer urban district. ..j -, 2. RURAL SUBURBAN ~ ~ ~ '" Location and Description. As shown on the regional settlement pat ~ oJ terns map, rural suburban settlement occurs along and adjacent to the major transportation corridors in the lower Matanuska and - • ..1" Susitna Valleys. This area includes the City of Houston and the remainer of the City of Wasilla not contained within the urban dis 1 trict. The district1s economic and employment base is a mixture of -1 agricultural, residential, construction, local services, and real ~~ estate among others. The major employment opportunities presented oJ by the utilities and local government in the urban district are ~ absent. The ability and desire to commute has and will continue! to ~ play a major role in the settlement activities within the rural subur ~ ban area. It is estimated that over 1/3 of the boroughs work force .> - 73- :;; L_ i ) l., l",,, i .. } (L..,i~ ,.J tLJ c-J \:...... J (" ..·,S CJJ CD E::=J t.:) i•..LJ c=J TABLE 7 Existing Public Facilities and Services Regional Parks Settlement Local Road Public Facilities and Services & Areas Fire Protection Maintenance ---Police Solid Waste Water Sewer Power Comm. Acute Care Education Rec. Library Urban Local Local Local! Collect.! Com. Com.! Avail. Avail. Yes! R, J, H Local Branch Rural Sub Fire Svc. Area Road Svc. Area State Landfill Ind. Ind. Avail. Avail. Access. P, H, C Reg. Branch Rural Rust. Fire Svc. Area2 Road Svc. Area State Landfill2 Ind. Ind. Avail. 2 Avail. 2 -- P, H Reg. Branch Rural Rec. Fire Svc. Area3 Road Svc. Area3 State Landfill Ind. Ind. Avail.3 Avail.s Access. 3 P Reg. Remote Bush ------Ind. Ind. ------P Remote Mts. ------Ind. Ind. Recreation -- -- State Collect. Ind. Ind. ------Yes !City of Palmer only. P =Elementary School 2Noted area exceptions. J =Jr. High School 3Big Lake area only. H =High School C = College - 74 - [, t presently commutes to other areas of the state for employment, mostly to Anchorage. U Settlement Activities. A factor which above others is common o throughout the rural suburban area is the degree and type of resi dential subdivision activity present. As discussed in the Chap ter IV summary of the Willow Sub-Basin Management Unit, the 6 1970·s brought a proliferation of low density subdivision activity to r1 this area. Land speculation was high as the pipeline economy and i~ the capital move issue created artificially high demands. The major ity of the lots remain vacant. Lands subdivided during the 70·s o were developed largely at the 40,000 square foot minimum lot size established by state and borough regulations. Residential density o of the district is generally one dwelling unit per acre. Commercial land uses are oriented to providing local service to area c residents and providing services to the summer tourist populations. Commercial endeavors include lodges, restaurant/ bar, tourist cen [] ters, and general merchandise stores which provide essential com modities to the local population. However, more intense commercial ; uses such as equipment rentals and office spaces are present within 0:.:7 the rural suburban district. Q Industrial land uses within the rural suburban district range from light to medium intensity. Existing industrial endeavors include B fuel and lumber yards, a concrete plant, gravel extraction opera tions, and a steel fabrication plant. The majority of industrial uses c within the rural suburban district are located along the Glenn and Parks Highways. Off-highway industry is limited to several sand 8 and gravel operations. Public Facilities and Services. Public facilities and services within 1, 0 the rural suburban area are typical of low density suburban devel opment. Water supply and sewage disposal systems are generally U individual, on-site. Some specific residential areas have developed [ - 75 - t~ nLJ c~--) at greater than the typical one-acre/dwelling unit density and are provided self-contained community water supply and/or sewage dis posaI systems. :=J .~ Road maintenance and fire protection is provided by the Borough on -- 4 a service area basis. ~ ~-~1 ~ The area is provided, or is generally accessible, the balance of i public facilities and services detailed by Table 7. ~ 3. RURAL RUSTIC -,, .J , Situated distant from the Borough1s major concentrations of employ o ment opportunities within the rural suburban and urban areas, as :J well as the Anchorage employment base, the rural rustic areas of ""l the Borough are characterized by lower density populations which -} are generally self-employed. The rural rustic areas are further ""1 distinguished as the least settled of the Borough's road-accessed J areas. ; Location and Description. Four separate areas sharing the defined ~ characteristics are identified. The areas are generally located along "'1 -1 major road corridors north, south, and east of the urban and rural ~ suburban settlement concentrations. As depicted on the settlement J patterns map, their locations are: :j , 1) The Glenn Highway corridor extending east of Sutton to the ~ Borough's eastern boundarYi -" ~ 2) The Knik Road/Pt. MacKenzie Road area extending south of J Kniki J ~ ~ 3) The Parks Highway corridor and adjacent area extending north ~} of Houston to the Denali State Park, including the Jonesville ~ .) and Oilwell Road corridors; J - 76 - ":"- -.1 '] lc-\ 4) The Parks Highway corridor extending north of the state park to the Borough1s boundary. Settlement and employment activities revolve around the area1s re 4 source base. Communities such as Talkeetna and Chickaloon devel -j _,J oped historically as centers for mining districts. Other communities ~j within the rural rustic district include Caswell, Trapper Creek, :3 Willow, and Eureka. -, Although levels of public facilities and services vary within the four identified areas, their proximity to the major road system as well as existing settlement activities to a degree consistent throughout, .J" were the major determinates of their like categorizations. 1 .:.1 Employment within the area is based on its resources and attraction ~ to recreationists and tourists. Placer mining and trapping are .....; major income producing activities. Lodges and tourist centers .-,. which serve local and transient populations provide some employment ...J in commerce. ---. Settlement Activities. The population contained within the rural , rustic areas are fairly sparse and non-centralized. Only in com I munity centers such as Tal keetna and Willow are concentrations of ~ local commercial activities and populations present, which lend to ., their descriptions as small towns. . Populations within the unit gen -' erally range "between 0.2 and 0.5 dwelling units per acre, or one .., dwelling unit for every 2 to 5 acres . ""r~ Much of the lands contained within the rural rustic areas are pub [ , Iicly owned. The development of state-owned lands for subdivision ...-J disposals has been concentrated in the rural rustic areas. -, '-'-~ Commercial activities within the rural rustic district is limited to the " local service and tourist trade. Lodges, service stations, and ..i tourist centers dominate existing commercial activity. - 77 - ~ ~_-dJ ~ Mineral extraction comprises the areas· industrial activities. Placer mining operations, including one of the state's largest at Peters- -.J ville, are present on many of the area1s creeks and streams. ~ Public Facilities and Services. Public facilities and services within cj the rural rustic area closely approximate those available in the rural ~ suburban area. However, within portions of the rural rustic area :-l ~ more distant of the urban and rural suburban settlement concentra -, tion, certain services and facilities are not available. _..J -; The northern Parks Highway area, as well as the western one-half ..-J of the Glenn Highway area, are largely unsettled. Power, commu nications, fire protection, and local road maintenance is not avail ""1 able within these areas. The remaining areas of rural rustic clas .J sification are provided services and facilities as available within the "') rural suburban area. -/ , 4. RURAL RECREATION -.J ":""1: The rural recreation category is distinguished from other rural ~ classifications due to the influx of large seasonal populations on smaller year-round resident populations within the identified areas. ""I \ ~_-t ~..J Location and Description. Two areas have been identified within -; the rural recreation category. The Big Lake and Lake Louise areas -; -' both contain resident populations which receive a significant impact -, from the large numbers of recreationists and property owners who ~) utilize the recreational opportunities which the areas offer during the summer months. The impacts received from' this annual swelling 1 ~ 1 of population, although expected, place part-time demands on public ~ . and private systems for their accommodation . o-J , J =' The identified areas, although substantially differing in degree of existing settlement activities and public facilities and services, are .J similarly categorized due to their intrinsic recreational resources which are valued by both permanent and seasonal populations. -' - 78 - '"' ~ c '4- -' Settlement Activities, Public Facilities and Services. Although both areas share the basic characteristic of seasonal population fluctua tion and facility demands, the areas substantially differ in terms of existing settlement and public facilities and services. D ~J cJ The Big Lake area accommodates a steadily growing number of '3 permanent residents. In the degree of existing public facilities and services and settlement activities, the Big Lake area is of equal -, standing with the defined rural suburban area due to its close --' proximity to employment opportunities and its resultingly similar population density. The Lake Louise area, in contrast, is far removed from the eco nomic and demographic influences of the urban and rural suburban areas and Anchorage. This area1s smaller resident population and "'" lack of many of the public facilities and services available at Big J Lake, characterize it as rural rustic in general composition. --; ~ 5. REMOTE BUSH """":) d The remote bush category defines lands that are generally inacces sible by road, but are of sufficient character physically that cur 1 -i rent populations and the potential for future settlement exists. ;~ .--, Populations within the defined areas exist at low densities. Their .-' lifestyles are largely subsistent, although the degree of subsistence -, living varies. Location and Description. As outlined by the regional settlement ~) patterns map, the identified bush areas consist of non-mountainous lowlan9s inaccessible to the existing road system. The major body ~j l of categorized remote bush areas is the Susitna River drainage ~ basin west of the Parks Highway. Included are areas north of the ~. Petersville Road and Talkeetna River. '-' -" - 79 - -' [ r; Settlement Activities. Within the defined areas, individual bush communities can be identified among the generally sparse popula c tion. These communities include Skwentna, Chase, and Tokosha. Residents of these areas enjoy a remote and relatively subsistent lifestyle. BlJ f7 Trapping and placer mining activities provide the majority of the area1s commerce. Commercial and industrial endeavors in the con ventional sense are non-existent. Public Facilities and Services. Typical public facilities and services c are very limited in the remote bush areas due to inaccessibility and sparseness of population. Only Skwentna has a basic educational o facility, a converted building abandoned by the FAA. Educational correspondence courses to the remainder of the bush residents c rounds out the available facilities and services. 6. REMOTE MOUNTAINS The remote mountain category defines generally non-accessed areas n, ~ of mountainous terrain. Although the mountainous areas offer sub stantial fish and wildlife, mineral, and recreational resources, it is expected that the areas will remain roadless and undeveloped during the foreseeable future. Location and Description. The remote mountain areas include the majority of three mountain ranges within the Borough -- the Alaska , 'o;;=l." Range, the Chugach Range, and the Talkeetna Mountains. The ~ mountain ranges are heavily glaciated and current activity is limited 1-'- [ 3: ~ to mineral development and recreation. c,", Resultant of general inaccessibility and physical constraints, settle >d ment and related public facilities and services are non-existent. ~" ~..;; -; .d ..... - 80 - J [ [} 7. RECREATION C This category identifies areas which are legislatively relegated to recreational and wildlife management purposes. This legislation is of local, state, and federal jurisdictions. f~c1 Areas categorized as recreation include: n[] r"''') o Denali State Park 1-, o Denali National Park and Preserve o Nancy Lake State Recreation Area c o Susitna Flats Game Refuge o Goose Bay Game Refuge o o Palmer Hay Flats Special Use District o Moose Creek Reserve c Settlement Activities, Public Facilities, and Services. Typical settlement activities and related services within these areas are c prohibited. The areas are restricted only to activities which further the intent and purpose of the specified units. Public facil c ities currently include roads, cabins, and docking facilities within the Nancy Lake State Recreation area. A 8 CAPITAL SITE RESERVE r; L~ b--J The capital site reserve is identified but not classified. Depending upon the final decision of the voters on the November move proposition, this area could exert enormous or much less significant impact on existing settlement activities and demands for public facilities and services. If n H the capital move proposition is unsuccessful, the relatively accessible w state land may well be utilized for recreational/residential low-density public land disposals. If successful, the proposition would alert the Borough that the single most important of the potential impacts now looming in the horizon will indeed become reality. Q--.-. ;"'~ v - 81 - ;,..,j C b D. FUTURE GROWTH - IMPACTS AND IMPLICATIONS C 1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The above description of the settlement patterns describes primarily B existing conditions. It outlines the way in which the various areas of the Borough have developed from bush to urban. Chapter II of C this volume projects potential growth rates in the Borough through the end of this decade. At this point, we donlt know exactly how C the new growth will be distributed throughout the Borough. We can make some generalizations. We can assume the areas that cur o rently have high population concentrations will continue to be in the center of major population growth activity, and that the more re mote parts of the Borough will continue to be less sparsely popu u lated. However, those generalizations can vary significantly de pending upon the combination of major development projects that c might occur. Significant changes could happen in almost any part c of the Borough. The final determination of where population growth will occur and what growth rates will prevail in which parts of the Borough will be made by a variety of factors. This comprehensive plan can be an r important ingredient in making those determinations. If the resi lJ dents of the Borough express their desires, concerns, and needs in r; terms of future growth development, and if the comprehensive plan :c:;-,d successfully conveys those feelings, immediate actions can be taken -: that will help guide the geographic distribution of future population growth. The residents of the Borough playa key role. This section is a discussion of the potential changes that could ~ occur as a result of the population and economic growth in the =-~] Borough through the end of the decade. It outlines specific proj --i ects and activities that could change lifestyles and community char -, acteristics within the Borough, and makes comparisons of the exist .3 ing situation with the characteristics of growth that could occur. -' - 82 - ~, -, ::..-J ! , _.. ~ This comparison will highlight a number of issues. In June the public meetings that will be held to discuss this document, will --.J provide an opportunity to amplify and expand the apparent issues, discuss potential responses to the issues, and provide guidance to :'4 _1 the planners and alternately to the Borough assemblymen in devel j oping strategies to be used in responding to growth in the future. 9 This is a vital part in the comprehensive planning process. The J issues must be addressed by the public and the assembly in order -1 for the comprehensive plan to be useful in responding to future ~ growth. ] ~ 2. POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON EXISTING SETTLEMENT PATTERNS '1 j ....J The following is a discussion of various activities and/or projects ..., that have been discussed earlier in this volume that may have sig d nificant impacts on various parts of the Borough. These projects , or activities discussed in terms of the impact it may have in a par o;.J ticular area, or for an area-wide basis. At this point we do not have answers or responses to the impacts. A number of options "'"'1 ; are available. The purpose of this chapter is simply to outline the -) issues and present them to the public for their response. -1., -~ 3 a. State Land Disposals -J .J One of the results of the Department of Natural Resources, -'1 Susitna-Beluga area plan would be to develop benefit and dis J posal strategies for state lands. The state has in the past, and will continue in the future, to develop a program of land 1 1 disposals for residents for residential/recreational purposes. .J These types of disposals in rural rustic and remote bush areas C3 J can have significant impacts. They can: -i o Cause significant population increases and associated growth --1 d activities; j ..... - 83 - -, i ;:.:;;i c c o Impact existing lifestyles; o o Change the character of existing communities; o l=JfJ Increase demands for public facilities and services, including schools, roads, public safety, utilities, etc.; C o Increase the cost of government; nu o Create abnormal growth patterns, including isolated popula [J tion nodes of relatively high density. All of the above are not necessarily inherently bad. There [J are, however, potential changes which the various community residents should review in order to determine if they are recep tive for major disposals to take place. In some cases commu c nities may determine that some of these impacts are desirable for a variety of reasons. In other cases they may not be de C sirable, but may balance against some other public good that b makes them acceptable. In any case, public input is vital. b. Knik Arm Crossing Fl., W The Knik Arm crossing will provide immediate access to existing '1 rural rustic areas from Anchorage. This will: Lu o Dramatically increase settlement activities in demand for the I public facilities and services; ~ k-1 o d Create a transportation link from the crossing north to the Parks Highway that will become the most used transportation link from Anchorage to the interior of Alaska; e.i -:: o Traffic would stimulate commercial service development, light ..i industry, transhipment, etc.; ':--" ..- - 84 - -.-' c w o This type of development would draw activity from east of the area in the Wasilla and Palmer area where existing areas C are currently and bypass them; o Significantly impact areas that are currently either game re B fuges, recreational areas, or wilderness areas by changing o the character of adjacent lands. These are but few of the significant socio-economic impacts that o could occur from the Knik Arm crossing. They are the ones that relate most directly to the regional settlement patterns that o have occurred in the past. The Knik Arm crossing study is currently beginning and should address these issues in some Fi detail. However, this comprehensive plan offers the residents U of the area the opportunity to raise some of those issues early C on in that process. C c. Capital Move to Willow Obviously, a new capital at Willow would have significant im C pacts on the state and the Matanuska-Susitna Borough as a whole, but the most significant impacts would occur in the area R.: immediately surrounding the new capital site. It would: LJ o Create a third and most intense urban area within the Bor o ough; [ o A secondary "ripplell affect could cause significant change in some of the rural rustic and rural suburban areas in the ~. i o=~ western portion of the Matanuska Valley. This would be o characterized by increased suburbanization and commercial 9 f· ization of the area; ~ ~ o Significant intensification of development could spread north od into the Tal keetna area affecting the character of that and other communities. J - 85 - -J C B o Would dramatically change transportation routes and modes throughout the Borough. This would involve new highway o connections which could significantly change the character of existing communities, specifically Houston. If the main lJfl.] access point into the capital is placed as shown on the new capital site planning commission1s transportation plan, Hous ton would become one of the busiest intersections within the o state. n o Recreation activities as a result of the population increase from the capital move would significantly impact the recrea o tion areas currently existing within the Borough by dramati cally increasing user populations. o d. Resource Development c The Matanuska-Susitna Borough has been characterized as a ll II s leeping giant • It is an untapped storehouse of a variety of o natural resources that can be expected in the future to be developed. As this occurs a variety of changes could affect o existing regional settlement patterns. ----,1· o O~l Agricultural Projects. Development of existing and proposed agricultural projects in rural rustic and bush areas would interject population densities, commercial services and trans o portation facilities where now none of the above exists. This would include demands for additional public services o along with population increases. DC o Beluga Coal Field Development. In addition to the physical changes to the immediate area and the long-term and short fJ bJ term population increases resulting of such a significant coal development project, the Beluga coal fields could signifi fj cantly change transportation routes through the western part bJ of the Matanuska-Susitna Borough. The State Department of [ - 86 - I.r k. [ Q Transportation and Public Facilities has located a transporta tion alignment to Beluga from Point MacKenzie area. This [-Ji would open up a tremendous amount of land. It would change existing rural, rustic and bush areas significantly. o Depending upon the level of development that occurred in conjunction with the coal field development as well as ancil ~ lary development that might occur as lands were opened up, these existing existing rural, rustic and bush areas could change into rural suburban or even suburban areas during E the planning period. o o Additional Transportation Corridors. A variety of transpor tation corridors have been identified for access to forestry [J and agricultural areas. These would create easy access into present bush areas from Big Lake west, across the Susitna River. A number of potential impacts on hydrology, habitat c and lifestyles of the existing few bush residents could occur. The long-term impacts are hard to predict. The c only sure description of those impacts are that they would o cause significant changes to the character of these areas. e. The Susitna River Hydroelectric Projects o The Alaska Power Authority is studying the feasibility of devel Q oping two major dams on the Susitna River upstream from Tal keetna. These hydroelectric projects will have a number of significant impacts on the entire state. However, the impacts on the regional settlement patterns in this portion of the Bor ough are potentially even' more severe. The impacts will be I -1 both short and long-term. They could include: 9 o Short-term population increases in the magnitude of a II boom II • This could include an influx of literally thousands "', of people into the Trapper Creek/Tal keetna area on a short J term basis. This would obviously have a significant impact on the lifestyle of that area. - 87 - -' [ [J o Significant increase in land values. [J o A rapid subdivision activity and land tenure, as well as land status changes. Disruption of habitat and recreation areas 1 that are currently used by the residents of the area, as well Q~d as a relatively small number of tourists and recreation par ticipants in the area. A need for an immediate increase in 8 public facilities and services that could be short-lived. -j C o All of the other incidental impacts that a IIboom and bustll situation can create in terms of economic, physical and soci 0 ological changes within a community. f. Resource Development and Decisions on Use of the Denali Block 0 area by the Bureau of Land Management C Significant decisions should be made within the next year con cerning the Bureau of Land Management1s lands in the Denali C block, near the Denali Highway. These decisions could include major resource development projects. Should this occur, major impacts would occur to the regional settlement patterns within C that area. They would include: C o Rapid resource development; r-, o :::1 The opening up of transportation routes to existing remote areas; --~ -- -J o IIBoom and bustll economies; -, J ~ -' ...J o The development of short-term communities, as well as an in -, crease in long-term resident population; , ....i o A significant change in the remote mountain status of this 1 _t area that would change the character of the area to rural ._-,. rustic in nature. -.88 - --' C D 3. REGIONAL SETTLEMENT PATTERNS - FUTURE ISSUES r:' U The major impact generators described above could create a broad range of very specific and significant impacts within individual -.i- 1 areas. Many of them can be grouped into certain types of issues. -~ O· These issues need to be addressed by the public and by the ~ assembly in order to continue with this comprehensive plan. The issues that will be guiding the future of the Matanuska-Susitna o Borough include: o a. Increased Development vs. Preservation of Existing Lifestyles Change is inevitable. As development occurs lifestyles within a o given area will change. The Borough can, through its compre hensive planning program effect the rate of growth and the geographic distribution of growth activity to a certain extent. c The issue is whether or not those kinds of control should be exercised as a result of a comprehensive planning program in c an attempt to preserve certain identified lifestyles. At this point those lifestyles have not been identified, but through this c planning process there will be demands to retain certainele ments of the lifestyles within the Borough. This is a phil o osophical question that should be addressed by the residents of the Borough, as well as by the Borough Assembly. b b. Non-centralized Population Growth vs. Centralization o This is, again, a question of whether or not and to what extent growth activity should be controlled and directed. Non-central ized population growth IIsprawlil is costly to public services. Studies have shown repeatedly in Alaska and throughout the rest of the United States that low intensity, non-centralized population growth does not pay for in taxes the services that it ~ j demands. However, if growth is directed towards centralized .J areas then provisions of public utilities, services and facilities :::--.c. - 89 - lJ~ Q can be done in a more efficient manner. The overall cost to the public is less. Non-centralized growth requires subsida o tion, either from a higher form of government or through higher taxes. This is an important issue that the comprehen B sive plan must address. The issues described above are the most significant facing the o Borough today, in terms of decisions addressing future growth. These will be the paramount issues throughout this comprehensive o planning process. Your response to them will help dictate to the Borough Assembly what direction this plan should take. It is im o portant that you consider them not only in terms of the immediate area within which you live, but also in terms of the characteristics B of the entire Matanuska-Susitna Borough. o o o ~ o Q ~. o [J [ - 90 - I~ I I I I I I I I I I I I \