Isberg Rec ARea

We all hate it, but its forced upon us. Any local political issues we should know about ??

Moderator: john

Post Reply
User avatar
Posts: 2786
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2003 2:52 pm
Location: North Pole Alaska

Isberg Rec ARea

#1 Post by john » Wed Jan 09, 2008 7:33 am

I had thought this was a done deal, but once again it seems that the motorized community may get the shaft.

Please submit an email to supported "No Changes" to the master plan:

What I submitted ......

I have recently read an email stating that some folks have issue with the design of the Isberg Rec Area parking lot.

Why is it that certain folks wait until the 11th hour of the 11th day to submit their concerns and desired changes. The Isberg Rec Area has been under consideration and design for sometime now and was, or so I believed, approved for construction.

So my concerns are 2 fold, 1st that last minute changes that affect the whole community are being reconsidered without re-opening the community review and comment process again; and 2, why is it that the motorized community is again being the ones attacked.

As a motorized trail user, I find it disheartening that the folks that we (as a community) depend on would even consider making any changes at this time in the process. As a resident, it is expected that our representatives will be non-biased and fair in their dealings and decisions about the recreational use of our community resources

Please leave the master plan as it is and construct the isberg Rec Area in a manner that is fair and equitable to all the residents and trail users in our community. Or if major changes are to be considered, then re-open the review process, allow for additional public hearings and let the community speak as a whole and not just a minority few.

John Johnston

Posts: 434
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 9:03 pm
Location: Fairbanks

#2 Post by paulneva » Wed Jan 09, 2008 4:44 pm

Here is what I submitted to John Hass and the Borough Assembly.


"I have read your e-mail protesting the parking plan for the Isberg Recreation Area, and I want to disagree.

You want parking for current users only. When the IRA is developed it will attract more users than it currently does and the parking will be inadequate from the beginning. That is not good planning.

You are opposed to an ATV/snowmachine ramp. It was never proposed that this be a non-motorized-only recreation area. If it is to be a multi-use recreation area, a loading ramp will be appreciated by motorized users.

You are opposed to parking for trailers. If this is to be a multi-use recreation area, it needs parking not only for snowmachine and ATV trailers, but for horse trailers too.

You are opposed to a toilet. Having a parking area without a toilet is inviting everyone to use the woods for that purpose. That is not a good planning.

You claim to be representing the "will of the residents." I am a resident and I disagree with your positions.

The parking area at Oboe should be able to accommodate 40 or more cars and 12 or more pick-up trucks with trailers, and it should have a toilet. An ATV/snowmachine ramp would be nice but isn't necessary.

Paul S. Renschen

On Jan 7, 2008, at 7:32 PM, Mary Keelean wrote:

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <nate>
Date: Jan 7, 2008 5:43 PM

Please forward this to all persons you know who are interested in the
development of the Isberg Recreation area.

The Borough Assembly added more public comment for parking and traffic
issues  as it became clear to many involved in the process that the
phasing and development part of the master plan greatly conflicts with
the will of residents and with the Goals and the Objectives in the
master plan itself.
The IRA Master Plan calls for building a parking lot at Oboe and
Isberg rd capable of parking 40 cars or accomodating 50-100 trailered
snow machines.  The master plan also calls for a ATV/snowmachine
loading ramp and a 60 thousand dollar toilet ($60,000.00)!  This
despite the overwhelming amount of public response in favor of
maintaining a rustic/wilderness area and supporting minimal
development.  As a result an ammendment to the plan is being suggested.

In keeping with the majority of public comment recieved during the
public hearing phase of the creation of the IRA I support the
ammendment to the IRA Master Plan p.16 as follows:

Primary priorities include:
  -Construction of parking to accommodate current users (15-20 car max.)
  -Protection of existing trails
  -New trail development
  -Acquisition of new lands
Secondary priorities include:
  -Interpretive trails
  -Additional parking development as demand and road upgrades allow

The revised parking area at Oboe would be a one way loop similar to
the proposed secondary parking areas in the master plan however; this
one would be capable of parking 15 - 20 cars. With no lighting or
additional upgrades, this parking lot would immediately provide for
all current user parking and would be more in line with the sentiments
expressed by the residents during the public comment period.

please forward this to John Haas @  and he
will send it to Design Alaska for consideration.  Share your opinion on
this matter that greatly impacts the residents of Cripple Creek before
1/9/08 or send it to before 1/10/08 when
they will vote on the initial money to go to begin this project.
Thank you for your time and concern for our neighborhood
nate montgomery"

Paul S. Renschen

Posts: 434
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 9:03 pm
Location: Fairbanks

#3 Post by paulneva » Wed Jan 09, 2008 8:55 pm

I went to the Public Meeting tonight. There were maybe twenty people there. It was short and relatively uncontentious.

The background is that when the Master Plan went to the Borough Assembly for approval last month, the homeowners who live near the planned parking areas objected. The Assembly directed that the parking portion of the Master Plan be relooked.

Public comments tonight generally fell into three areas. One, ‘I am in favor of the IRA, but think the money would be better spent on land acquisition to expand the IRA.’ Two, ‘I am in favor of the IRA, but think the primary parking area should be somewhere else.’ Three, ‘I am concerned about the additional traffic this will generate in our neighborhood.”

There was only one individual who said anything that was anti-motorized, and she admitted as part of that comment that we had a right to be there too.

I was the only person who made a public comment who did not live in the neighborhood of the Cripple Creek-Isberg intersection.

I spoke to John Hass after the meeting. He said that the snowmachiner community was among the early supporters of the IRA and was really important in getting it going. But as the process moved on, our interest dropped off and the local interest increased. The Assembly has a lot of e-mails now opposing the Master Plan and few supporting it. He needs positive comments to the Assembly supporting the Master Plan.


Paul S. Renschen

Posts: 705
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2003 1:03 am
Location: Nordale Road area

#4 Post by Darrell » Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:38 am

This was in todays paper did the master plan pass?
"The ordinance also includes $350,000 for the new Ester Fire Station and sends money to upgrade the Warren G. Harding Rail Car and Riverboat Nenana at Pioneer Park, help develop the Isberg Recreation Area and support a handful of other projects."

Posts: 434
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 9:03 pm
Location: Fairbanks

#5 Post by paulneva » Fri Jan 11, 2008 11:13 am

Best to ask John Hass. It is his project. He should have a complete answer.

While you are at it, you might put in a line supporting the Master Plan.


Paul S. Renschen

Post Reply