Hello couplet, goodbye water tower

How it Started: The PUTS Public Notice, Aug. 22, 2007, stated traffic congestion is noticeable in Palmer, and vigorous development of nearby property is expected to increase the congestion. Wal-Mart, one of the nearby vigorous developments, would have increased congestion.

With only the presented alternatives, the city, MSB TAB, MSB and DOT chose the one-way couplet on both sides of the Wal-Mart property.

The notice listed three alternatives leaving out alternative 0. Alternative 0 was not a do nothing option, it is a watch and wait, allowing the relief of other slated Improvement like the Bogard extension, Palmer/Wasilla Highway and the Glenn Highway Improvements.

The couplet threatens our business through eminent domain. We’ve met and exceeded Palmer’s parking codes. We purchased property adjacent to our business for a catering hall. The city denied us that use of our property due to parking restrictions. We are now using that property for parking only. Conveniently, things changed and the couplet will take it and historic Palmer away.

Concerned? Go to meetings. Write letters and make phone calls to every city council member, mayor, manager, DOT management, engineers, governor, local and state representatives and attorneys. The city can use the allocated funds more logically for congestion relief.

A meeting will be held Tuesday at the Palmer Depot from 4:30 to 6 p.m. It is sponsored by Palmer Chamber of Commerce and the DOT.

There will be another meeting June 16 at the Moose Lodge starting at 6 p.m. It’s a special council meeting to listen to the ones they represent.

The couplet is one-way in and one-way out. On the Wasilla side of Hemmer Road, the Palmer/Wasilla Highway will turn into a three-lane one-way road going down Evergreen into the city with another 2-3 lanes going one-way out. Stop by the city to see how removing the railroad tracks gives continuation of the one-way couplet around the courthouse.

Who pays for the maintenance and liability of the couplet, pathways and sidewalks? Will it be you, the city, state or MSB? Does state/federal funding require bike paths? Who’s property are they seeking for that?

There are so many alternatives and solutions besides destroying the historic city of Palmer. Take alternative 0 and add congestion relief. Put a controlled light at E. Inner Springer Loop/Glenn Highway so it could be fully used as an exit to the Glenn Highway, allowing those leaving the MEA and MTA area a controlled, close and safe exit.

The city based its resolution on a July 31, 2007 review and an Aug. 22, 2007 presentation, excluding the businesses and the public from their decision. There was no due diligence on the lasting effects. The confusion and consequences of a one-way couplet were never addressed. The MSB TAB resolution # 07-08 passed the very next day after the depot meeting, accepting alternative 3 as their preference.

We wouldn’t be here today if the city council had given a decision of this magnitude the consideration it was due. We’ve been told all we can do is make the best of a bad situation by getting sidewalks, lighting, walking paths and other miscellaneous items where the city wants them. That is wrong. The DOT does not want to do a project that the community is against. Who can stop the couplet? The city council by resolution of objection, stating alternative 3 is no longer its preference. The MSB TAB and the DOT can and the citizens can.

Michelle Kincaid and David Kloep are owners and operators of Valley Hotel and Koslosky Center.