Planning commission returns Seward Highway DSR for more work after public objections and planning concerns

The Anchorage Planning and Zoning Commission on Sept. 8 voted to return the Seward Highway Design Study Report (DSR) for Mile Post 98.5–118 to the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT) project management team for additional work addressing 13 topic areas identified by planning staff.

Planning staff told commissioners the DSR’s preferred 4-lane divided highway concept is inconsistent with municipal plans — including the Anchorage 2020, Anchorage Bowl comprehensive plan, the Anchorage 2040 land use plan and the Metropolitan Transportation Plan — and that the report lacks sufficient evidence to support the 4-lane concept in several material respects. Long Range Planning urged more detail on long-term maintenance, environmental and scenic-byway impacts, and on the rationale for a corridor-wide widening.

Daniel McKenna Foster of Long Range Planning summarized concerns that the 4-lane design could require significant land take along cliffs and watersides, potentially harming the National Scenic Byway and adjacent state park lands. He also cited a major cost escalation in project estimates, saying the project’s cost appears to have grown from roughly $600 million to about $1.5 billion and that funding and maintenance burdens should be examined in municipal budget context.

DOT project manager Chris Hughes said the corridor is a longstanding safety priority, reviewed a robust stakeholder and public-engagement process and explained that the project is being advanced through NEPA with a proposed 4-lane divided alternative and a no-build option. He described staged funding and safety-express spot improvements already implemented (signage, mile-post clarifications and targeted safety spot fixes) and noted the project had been reformatted in STIP to focus on funded segments after portions were removed from the local TIP.

Public testimony was mixed but included sustained opposition. Bike Anchorage executive director Alexa Dobson urged the commission to reject the widening and told commissioners that the State implemented a policy she called “difficult or impossible” for road diets on state roads; she said the policy would “kill” FHWA‑endorsed road-diet projects. Rabbit Creek Community Council testified that the design’s scale, cost and environmental footprint are disproportionate to benefits and recommended revisiting the 3‑lane alternating passing lane alternative.

Following staff and public input, Commissioner Jeff Ron moved to return the application to the project management team for additional work in accordance with department recommendations addressing topic areas 1–13. The motion passed. Commissioners said returning the DSR provides an opportunity for DOT to respond to specific long-range planning and public testimony rather than ending the project.

Next steps: The DOT project team is expected to revise the DSR and present additional evidence and design analysis addressing the topic areas cited by planning staff; the commission will consider the revised material when it next appears before the body.