Header Image_v6

Open House

An online Open House for the Transit Center Study was held between September 20 and October 20, 2023. The Open House included information about the six potential sites being considered to function as People Mover’s main transit hub. It included a survey to gather public feedback on each site. 235 responses were received. This feedback will be used to guide the project to its next phase: narrowing the list of six (6) sites down to three (3) which will be examined in more detail. Below is a summary of the feedback received for each site, broken down by those in favor or against the site:
Existing Site:

The comments related to the existing site for a transit center, once redeveloped, indicate a mixture of opinions:

Against the Existing Site:

  1. Traffic/Congestion: Many express concerns about traffic congestion and the challenges of having buses on a busy 6th Avenue. Issues with people waiting on downtown sidewalks (in cold weather) and overcrowding the area were also noted.
  2. Safety/Security: There’s a concern about safety/security, noting the presence of persons experiencing homelessness, intoxicated persons, and people experiencing mental health issues.
  3. Layout: Some express a preference for an off-street transit center away from downtown. There’s no room for expansion in the layout’s current configuration.
  4. Perception: Some past negative experiences at the site have led many to the belief that it is not an effective facility/location and should be changed.
  5. Pollution: Noise and pollution from exhaust were also identified as reasons for not being in favor of remaining at the existing site.

 

In Favor of the Existing Site:

  1. Familiarity: The current location is well-known, understood, and is accessible.
  2. Location: Many note that it’s close to jobs, businesses, and services.
  3. Waiting Area: A remodeled facility with amenities like indoor waiting areas and customer service would improve the existing site.
  4. Location: There’s considerable support for maintaining a downtown transit center for ease of access to the city’s core.

 

While there are concerns about the existing site, a number of people believe it can work well with improvements, such as better amenities and security. Some also emphasize the value of maintaining a downtown transit center for tourists and accessibility to downtown businesses. There’s support for the maintaining the status quo.

ConocoPhillips Lot:


The comments related to the ConocoPhillips parking lot as a potential site for a transit center show mixed opinions:

Against the ConocoPhillips Lot:

  1. Traffic/Congestion: There’s concern about traffic and safety issues in the vicinity, including the Marriott Hotel intersection.
  2. Parking: There’s opposition to losing parking space in downtown.
  3. Costly: Cost concerns are present, with comments emphasizing the high expense of building a new facility on this site. There’s some opposition to the idea of building an entirely new facility.
  4. Location: Some believe it’s too far from various downtown venues or that it would pose risks with Anchorage drivers.
  5. Still Downtown: Many suggest to move the transit center away from downtown due to persons experiencing homelessness, intoxicated persons, and people experiencing mental health issues.
  6. Ownership: Some argue that the Anchorage People Mover should own the property and have concerns with being a tenant again in a different building with a different landowner.

 

In Favor of the ConocoPhillips Lot:

  1. Development Potential: There’s belief that it would be a good location with the right development and could help transform a surface parking lot into a more functional space. Respondents suggest exploring mixed-use development, including office complexes, parking, housing, and retail spaces. There’s potential to enhance area walkability, job access, and reduce the negative impact of surface parking lots in the downtown core.
  2. Accessibility: There’s support for the site’s accessibility/convenience and potential for off-street, on-street or underground site layout options.
  3. Location: The site’s proximity to points of interest, job access, and downtown shopping/activities were noted as positives.

 

Overall, opinions on the ConocoPhillips parking lot as a transit center site vary. Some argue for the potential benefits of transforming a parking lot into a more functional space, while others express concerns/skepticism about cost, traffic, and parking availability.

Chinook Lot:

The comments related to the Chinook parking lot as a potential site for a transit center show mixed opinions:

Against the Chinook Parking Lot:

  1. Seismic Concerns: Concerns about seismic risks and high costs associated with developing in a seismic zone were unique to this site.
  2. Safety Concerns: The proximity to homeless encampments gives many respondents concerns about safety and challenges for bus riders. Many felt the site has potential to attract negative elements like panhandling and crime.
  3. Not Centrally Located: There’s a commonly stated belief that it’s too far from downtown destinations, including jobs, shopping, and the central business district. Some suggest that the site would not be centrally located enough for a transit center. It’s viewed as on the outskirts of downtown.
  4. Accessibility: Issues related to pedestrian accessibility, especially considering hills and potential barriers were noted. Winter maintenance was a related concern with snow and ice.
  5. Public Events: There was concern about the loss of space for community events such as concerts, markets, or Fur Rondy.
  6. Traffic: Worries about the impact to the Railroad and the potential for crowding were stated. Additionally, there were also concerns about traffic, especially with bus-pedestrian conflicts and complex traffic systems (one-way streets).
  7. Still Downtown: For some, there’s opposition to having a transit center located downtown.

 

In Favor of the Chinook Parking Lot:

  1. Development Potential: Many believe that the location would be suitable for a transit center, with room for development. It provides opportunities for mixed-use and transit-oriented development. There’s support for the idea of having the transit center and housing in proximity. Respondents suggest utilizing the space for parking and transit-oriented development. Converting an underutilized surface parking to a better use was noted as a positive as well as the ease of developing the site as the municipality owns it.
  2. Transit Connections/Accessibility: Opinions were shared that it’s a good location due to proximity to the train depot, potential commuter rail, and tourism. It could enhance connectivity to the train station and provide better rail connections. There were positive remarks about its pedestrian accessibility and proximity to community services and the trail system. This location, closer to the center of downtown tourism, can attract increased ridership by tourists.
  3. Community Space/Asset: There’s some support for the idea of having a park with views of the Inlet. The addition of a transit center could be beneficial for tourism.
  4. Ample Space: The convenience of being off-street and not in the heart of downtown was commonly noted. There would be less impact to surrounding businesses/property owners, as well as less noise and exhaust pollution. The site provides room for People Mover to expand and could serve potential future commuter rail. Other bus services can co-locate.

 

Overall, opinions on the Chinook parking lot as a transit center site vary, with some expressing concerns about location and seismic risks and others highlighting the potential for development, connectivity, and tourism benefits.

5th Ave Garage:

The feedback on the 5th Avenue Garage as a potential transit center is mixed, with many respondents expressing concerns and objections:

Positive Feedback:

  1. Location: Some respondents believe that the 5th Avenue Garage is a good location because it provides easy access to various destinations in downtown Anchorage. It is considered a central location, making it convenient for commuters and providing access to job centers, businesses, shopping centers, and recreational areas downtown. It is near the current bus station, which is seen as a benefit, and it is next to the existing Easy Park garage, making it easily accessible.
  2. Existing Structure: The fact that it is an existing structure could potentially reduce the cost of moving the transit center.
  3. Shelter for Waiting: Some respondents mention that the site offers shelter for people waiting for buses.

 

Negative Feedback:

  1. Traffic and Safety Concerns: Many respondents express concerns about the heavy traffic in the area, especially around the intersection of 5th and C streets, making it unsafe for pedestrians and buses. They mention traffic congestion and safety issues, including accidents. It is criticized for being in a high-traffic area and considered a bad location for a transit center.
  2. Parking Issues: Some respondents argue that choosing the 5th Avenue Garage site would remove valuable on-street parking spaces, potentially impacting local businesses.
  3. Current Location Preferred: Some respondents prefer keeping the transit center at its current location and are unsure of the advantages of moving.
  4. One-Way Streets: The one-way streets in the area are seen as problematic for bus traffic, and some respondents suggest the need to change them. Buses can’t circle around the building easily.
  5. Vagrancy Concerns: Some respondents worry that moving the transit center to this location could increase vagrancy in Town Hall Park.
  6. Similar to Current Location: The 5th Avenue Garage is criticized for being similar in function and location to the current site, leading to questions about the need to move.
  7. Confusing Layout: Some respondents point out that the layout, with multiple streets and loading areas, might be confusing for passengers.
  8. Special Events:  Special events like Fur Rondy would substantially impact People Mover operations.
  9. Limited Space:  Some respondents noted the facility would offer limited space for People Mover buses.

 

Overall, the feedback suggests that while some believe the 5th Avenue Garage could be a suitable location for a transit center due to its central position and existing structure, many others are concerned about traffic, parking, and safety issues, as well as the similarities to the current location. The one-way streets are also a point of contention among respondents.

Old DMV Site:

The feedback regarding the old DMV building site as a potential transit center is also mixed, with some respondents expressing support for the location and others raising concerns. Here is a detailed summary of the comments:

Positive Feedback:

  1. Building Infrastructure: Many respondents see the advantage of repurposing the existing building, which was formerly used by the government for motor vehicle services. They appreciate the cost-saving aspect of using an already existing structure.
  2. Off-Street Location: The fact that it’s an off-street location is viewed positively, with some respondents emphasizing the importance of providing indoor space for bus riders while waiting for buses.
  3. Room for Expansion: The site offers plenty of space for buses, which is seen as an advantage.
  4. Spenard Area: Respondents highlight that the location is in the Spenard area, which is considered bus-friendly, pedestrian-friendly, and suitable for cyclists. It’s also described as an area with good walkability and improved traffic conditions. There has been considerable redevelopment in the area.
  5. Community Support: A few respondents mention that the Spenard area has supportive community councils and residents who favor better public transportation and walkable, bikeable streets.
  6. Proximity to Amenities: Some respondents note the proximity of the location to small businesses, restaurants, retail stores, and grocery stores, making it convenient for bus riders and staff.
  7. Connection Points: The location is seen as a good connection point due to its accessibility to major roads, including Minnesota Drive, Northern Lights/Benson, and Spenard Road.

 

Negative Feedback:

  1. Downtown Preference: A common theme in the feedback is the preference for a downtown location for the transit center. Respondents believe that the bus center should be downtown.
  2. Pedestrian Infrastructure: Concerns are raised about the lack of pedestrian-friendly infrastructure, especially for crossing busy roads like Northern Lights, Benson, and Spenard. Pedestrian safety is a significant issue, and the traffic conditions are considered fast.
  3. Rerouting Challenges: The location may require significant changes to the existing transit system, which some respondents find inconvenient or not worth the effort.
  4. Distance from Essential Destinations: Some respondents believe that the site is not close enough to essential downtown destinations, courthouses, and businesses.
  5. Safety Concerns: The area is seen as having security and safety concerns, with concerns about increased crime with a transit center located there.
  6. Lack of Amenities: It’s noted that the location lacks critical amenities, and jobs in the area can already be reached by existing bus routes, reducing the need for a transit center.
  7. Not Close to Downtown: Several respondents argue that the location is not downtown and is not a walkable distance to downtown.
  8. Traffic Congestion: The area may experience traffic congestion, and some respondents express worries about the ability to accommodate buses.

 

Overall, while some respondents see the advantages of the old DMV site, such as its existing building and off-street location, many express concerns about the lack of pedestrian-friendly infrastructure, security, and the need for a downtown transit center. The site is also seen as potentially requiring significant changes to existing routes.
Final Thoughts:

Many comments offered in the “Additional Comments” section of the survey call for both a Midtown and Downtown location. Additionally, other comments expressed concern that a transit center could effectively be implemented in Anchorage and that perhaps People Mover should consider not having one at all.

Recent Project News

Anchorage Daily News story posted (4/19/24).
Open House (4/3/24– 5/3/24).

Summary of Alternatives added (4/11/24).

Three sites selected for further study (12/12/23).

Open House (9/20-10/20)
Alaska’s News Source story posted (10/9/23)

Site Selection Criteria documents added (9/19/23).

Public Outreach Calendar has been added (9/7/23).

Operational Requirements Memo has been completed (7/24/23).

Sign up to receive project email updates!

© 2023 Kinney Engineering, LLC