Borough officials scrutinize Willow ‘pioneer road’

WILLOW — A “pioneer road” could potentially end in fines or citations or even court actions, officials say.

Local, state and federal authorities are investigating whether the about-six-mile route is potentially in violation of numerous laws relating to wetlands and salmon-bearing streams. In the process, officials are struggling to define exactly what a road is, according to borough planner Emerson Krueger.

“More accurately, what we have observed on the ground is a trail that is capable of handling street vehicles,” he said.

Krueger was among the state and local officials who presented an update about the road to a Dec. 1 meeting of the community council in Willow, known as the Willow Area Community Organization.

“Pioneer road” is the official term for a pathway with minimal improvements, like culverts over streams and trees removed, Krueger said.

Land use plans for the area show the trail as a winter trail, meaning its use is optimal when the ground is frozen or snow-covered. However, after local residents complained about improvements in the area, borough officials discovered that the road had been improved above the standard of a winter trail without permitting of any kind. Other nearby property owners also worry the road could raise road service area fees, effectively transferring the cost of maintaining the road to taxpayers without the approval of elected officials or voters.

Concerns about trespassing lead borough officials to bar portions of the trail that cross borough land in October, according to Krueger.

After protests from some users, borough officials now say gates placed there and originally locked will remain unlocked until regulatory issues surrounding the roads are resolved, Krueger said.

At least one resident had mentioned improvements as a potential violation within the last 10 years. However, officials apparently chose other priorities, Krueger said.

“We’re kind of like the State Department of Natural Resources and we’ve got thousands and thousands of acres of land to regulate,” he said. “We’re forced to prioritize where we’re going to spend our efforts.”

The trail in question connects a railroad crossing on a spur of East Kichatna Lane to a subdivision on the south bank of the Kashwitna River, across from the more developed Eagle’s View Subdivision, which runs along the north bank. Along the way, it touches on almost every prevalent borough land management issue. At various points, the road crosses borough property, a designated flood zone, a potentially salmon-bearing stream, and runs near some wetlands before ending near a subdivision known as Eagle’s Perch, according to borough property maps.

Donald Showers owns the southernmost lot in Eagle’s Perch, and is responsible for at least some of the developments along the thoroughfare by his own admission, though he claims he’s within his rights to spot-repair an existing trail popular with many, which he says is not a road. A property owner in the subdivision since 1983, Showers owns about $1.8 million worth of borough property, according to borough property records.

“There’s hundreds of people using it: cross-country skiers and horses and fishermen,” he said. “When trees fall down, we remove them, and we fill in a few holes. When it’s wet during the spring, we bring gravel in.”

Trespassing in this case was a victimless crime, since property owners were merely passing through state property and not defacing it, Showers said.

“It’s hardly anybody else’s business if we’re trespassing,” he said.

Showers said he was working with borough officials to establish a right-of-way for the property, and they had been helpful.

“The borough’s already done a GPS run on it and they said they’d like to make it a legal right-of-way, to work it out,” he said.

A holding company, Eagle’s Perch, LLC, owns the other lots in the subdivision, which contain about a half-dozen cabins. That company’s business license belongs to Anchorage real estate agent Jeffery Johnson, who said he was unaware of any improvements to the trail. Johnson last visited the area in summer 2013. Showers is a good neighbor, Johnson added.

However, a culvert was constructed across at least one stream, and the trail runs near some wetlands, meaning the Army Corps of Engineers — tasked with wetland management by Federal law — has also started an investigation. The corps confirmed the investigation, but declined to provide additional details about it.

Generally the corps has a range of options, depending on whether a landowner agrees to work to mitigate potential risks to wetlands, as well as the scale of potential effects on the wetlands, said Shannon Morgan, chief of the corps’s South Branch Regulatory Division in Alaska. Mild effects could result in a retroactive permit. Widespread effects could end with legal action, Morgan said.

“It really depends on the size and the details of the project as to what action we would take,” she said.

The corps conducts about 40 similar investigations in the average year, according to Morgan.

Alaska Department of Fish and Game officials are waiting for spring to test the waters for potential salmon rearing, in which case the unpermitted crossing is illegal under Alaska law. Officials won’t know until salmon hatchlings return or don’t in the spring, said Palmer Area Management Biologist Mike Bethe.

“We don’t really have a stick in this fire yet,” he said.

The culvert doesn’t prevent any potential salmon from moving up or down the creek, though it is the incorrect type of culvert for a stream crossing, Bethe said.

At least one property owner, Anchorage real estate agent John Lopez, is opposed to allowing the trail to remain as-is.

The trail is a road, Lopez said.

“The road development is impacting a stream and valuable wetlands, possible salmon habitat,” he wrote, in an email. “It also redirects ground water that impacts a spring that feeds two miles of wetlands. It is without controls on access and garbage and trash are being dumped.”

If the trail is a road, it needs to be upgraded to meet borough code and maintained, potentially impacting taxes in the area, according to Lopez. Only the owners of properties along the road would benefit, while taxpayers in the entire Willow Road Service Area would bear the cost of maintaining it, as well as the environmental toll, Lopez said.

“I believe the road needs to be closed, allowed to revert back to a trail for access by sled dog teams, snow machines, all-terrain vehicles, and skiers,” the email reads in part. “Habitat like this is too valuable and can’t be replaced once damaged or removed.”

Borough officials have asked the Willow community council to collect feedback and provide it to the borough by the March meeting, according to Kreuger.