Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ridgeview Subdivision Trails Alignment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Borough presents Ridgeview Heights plan; commission withdraws immediate support letter after public concerns
Summary
Borough staff presented a 214-acre Ridgeview Heights subdivision in Ester that includes routes shown in the borough trails plan. Commissioners and the public raised concerns about alignment, highway crossings, motorized uses and drainage; the commission withdrew a motion to adopt a draft support letter and will revisit after public comment.
Representatives from the Fairbanks North Star Borough Division of Natural Resource and Development presented the Ridgeview Heights subdivision proposal and draft language for a Trails Advisory Commission letter on Jan. 27; commissioners declined to adopt support immediately and withdrew the motion after discussion.
Staff described the project site as a roughly 214‑acre borough-owned parcel off Old Donnana Highway in the Ester area that would reserve a large outdoor recreation area and incorporate trails identified in the FNSB Comprehensive Recreational Trails Plan, including routes labeled as the Alaska Long Trail and the Alder Creek Hillside Trail.
Staff said the borough is gathering public feedback through an online open house (comments accepted through Feb. 17 at fnsb.gov/land) and that the displayed trail alignment in the subdivision packet used the comprehensive-plan routes as a high-level overlay rather than finalized alignment. Staff emphasized the project remains in early design and said detailed engineering and potential realignments would follow with registered professionals and additional public outreach.
Public commenters and commission members raised multiple concerns: some existing informal user trails in the area were not shown on the plan; several proposed segments appeared steep; people asked whether the Alaska Long Trail needed to cross Old Donnana Highway or could be routed to borough land north of the site; residents asked whether trails would allow motorized uses and whether dog-mushing teams would be permitted; and drainage and driveway impacts on proposed lots were raised.
Commissioners urged the borough to avoid forcing trails through private buildable lots, to consider reserving corridors or flag-stem borough-owned parcels so trail corridors don’t render lots unbuildable, to minimize driveways interrupting trails and to consider main circulation trails that skirt the outside of subdivisions rather than thread between lots. Staff said these are the types of design adjustments still under consideration.
A motion to adopt a draft TAC letter of support was made then later withdrawn; commissioners debated whether to postpone, revise or withdraw the draft letter so it could reflect public comments received through Feb. 17. The motion to withdraw was seconded and passed on a roll call of 7 yes, 1 no, removing the pending adoption from the agenda for further work.
Ending: Staff said it will continue outreach, summarize comments, and may return with a revised letter or a more detailed plan for the commission’s consideration; commissioners were invited to submit comments via the project portal or participate in a potential special meeting to review alignment details.
