1

TO: Girdwood Trails Committee

FROM: Christina Hendrickson, Girdwood Board of Supervisors Parks and Recreation Chair

RE: Girdwood Trails Plan Synopsis

DATE: 4 November 2019

PURPOSE: To summarize actions to date on behalf of a Girdwood Trails Plan.

BACKGROUND: The monthly descriptions are only highlights and not full details of each action.

March 2019: Heritage Land Bank (HLB) hosted meetings to determine how to enter into agreements with applicants such

as the Girdwood Nordic Ski Club (GSNC) and Girdwood Mountain Bike Alliance (GMBA). HLB expressed concern about

how to approve an applicant without an updated planning document citing Girdwood’s vision for recreation and supporting

infrastructure. These applicants undergo a local process in Girdwood and then a municipal process that includes a review

by the Urban Design Commission (UDC). Michelle McNulty of the Municipality of Anchorage (MOA) cited that applicants

may be able to avoid the UDC process if the proposal were cited in a Girdwood Trails Plan.

I met with the US Forest Service (USFS) to gauge interest and availability of in-kind geographic information systems (GIS)

staff time to support a future Girdwood Trails Plan effort. USFS expressed interest in supporting. I met with Holly Spoth

of HuddleAK to explore continuity of working with her knowledge base on the Cemetery Planning outreach and Girdwood

Area Plan update. The synergies aligned, demonstrating no need additional time and resources to bring up to speed a

contractor on the nuances and recent information from Girdwood residents and businesses.

April 2019: I attended the Alaska Trails Conference and produced a memo on funding opportunities, bike and pedestrian

projects, and the outdoor recreation economy. The following week, during my update to GBOS, I summarized the trails

conference and first stated I was working with Holly on a scope of work and budget for the Girdwood Trails Plan. I met

with MOA Planners, Maeve and Steve, to discuss the Russian Jack Park Master Plan and way-finding along existing trails.

We discussed my recommended approach in the Girdwood Trails Plan scope of work and verified that a subcommittee

ensures that all user groups have an opportunity to plan. At the end of the month, residents in Girdwood advocated for

recreation during Girdwood Area Plan’s (GAP) “Imagine Girdwood” public meeting.

May 2019: I presented my Trails Conference memo to Girdwood Trails Committee (GTC) and asked for user groups to

form a subcommittee for the Girdwood Trails Plan.

July 2019: During the first Budget meeting, I articulated the priorities of the Girdwood Trails Plan and a potential master

plan for the moose meadows and soccer field. GTC hosted work parties in lieu of June and July meetings.

August 2019: GBOS voted to allocate an additional $10,000 in recreation grants for the 2020 grant cycle. GBOS opted to

not pursue a ballot initiative that would have created a separate fund for capital projects to pay for master planning (e.g.,

aforementioned soccer field) and maintenance on existing infrastructure. GAP presented that they were onboarding a project

manager/stakeholder engagement lead to establish the literature review and elements of the Plan. Kyle Kelley confirmed

availability of funds to support the Girdwood Trails Plan.

September 2019: HLB confirmed that the UDC would approve a future Girdwood Trails Plan, and that GBOS could request

a fee waiver from the Assembly (when the time comes). I presented a short summary on the Girdwood Trails Plan to the

Girdwood Trails Committee Co-chairs and HLB Commissioners on 10 September 2019. I attended Confluence in Talkeetna

and drafted a memo regarding the outdoor recreation economy, lessons from other gateway communities, and resources for

bike-able communities. I began working with Kyle on additional contracting options to hire HuddleAK. HLB expressed

interest in providing some funding toward the Girdwood Trails Plan.

October 2019: I confirmed USFS desire to support the Girdwood Trails Plan. I summarized the Girdwood Trails Plan scope

to the GTC. With Kyle Kelley, I confirmed that the funding denoted that this effort would not be like GAP, which is

considered more grassroots; the Girdwood Trails Plan would benefit from a subcommittee. GAP updated GBOS that it

began stakeholder meetings with its monthly meetings - focusing on recreation, transportation, housing, and economic

development.

2

DISCUSSION: Without a Trails Plan in 2020, we risk placing decision makers in the same situation as March 2019. GAP

is creating a framework for the future of Girdwood. Its chapter on Recreation will reflect the input community members

gave in April and in subsequent monthly meetings. A Trails Plan will augment this Recreation chapter and provide specific

guidance to land owners and decision makers. In embarking on a well-facilitated engagement in Winter 2019-2020, using

the same contractor as the GAP, applicants seeking to do more in Girdwood would benefit. In publishing a Girdwood Trails

Plan in 2020, this community defines the vision for its trails and supporting recreation infrastructure. It provides the basis

for planning and augments the existing GAP process for Recreation. Further, it empowers non-profit entities, local

government, and small businesses to plan, fundraise, and raise awareness for trail-specific initiatives. My two conference

memos to GTC cite the need for planning and awareness to successfully pass bond initiatives. With a vision, a Plan, and

excitement around Recreation and Trails, Girdwood could further fund our outdoor recreation economy to benefit our work-

life balance and profit from guests to our community.

RECOMMENDATION: GTC vote to support the allocation of $48,500 and award a sole source contract to HuddleAK to

facilitate and compose the Girdwood Trails Plan.

Municipality of Anchorage Public Transportation

MEMORANDUM

DATE: October 18, 2019

TO: Ron Hadden, Purchasing Officer

FROM: Kyle Kelley, Service Area Manager

SUBJECT: SOLE SOURCE CONTRACT AWARD WITH HUDDLE AK FOR GIRDWOOD TRAILS PLAN

Girdwood Board of Supervisors (GBOS) hereby requests approval to enter into a sole source contract with Huddle AK for an amount of $48,500.00. Huddle AK will facilitate the public involvement and compose the draft and final Trails Plan. This Plan will augment existing planning in the Girdwood Valley Service Area, including but not limited to the Girdwood Area Plan (GAP) update. A sole-source award will maintain continuity with Girdwood’s current planning efforts. In 2018 and 2019 Huddle AK facilitated the public involvement for the Girdwood Cemetery Schematic Report and is currently engaged with the GAP update. Through both of these projects, Huddle AK has proven expertise in the facilitation and engagement with Girdwood’s residents, and have earned the trust of the community to document and reflect a comprehensive view of Girdwood’s input in these plans. Trails are an integral component of Girdwood residents’ quality of life and economy. Trails are featured components in the Cemetery and GAP planning efforts. Public input at project-specific meetings provided land managers, such as the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and the Heritage Land Bank (HLB), with a clear need for a Trails Plan that further connects trail networks and public facilities. A sole-source award will yield additional costs savings for Girdwood. To ensure that the scope was right sized for Girdwood, Supervisor Hendrickson obtained in-kind support from the USFS and HLB. These agencies recognize the value a well-facilitated vision and plan for Girdwood’s trails. To maintain institutional knowledge and provide continuity between the existing planning efforts, it is desirable to use Huddle AK for this additional work. Huddle AK will not require a significant kick off or familiarization with stakeholders; these costs savings, combined with in-kind support from other Girdwood land owners provide a lean, streamlined approach to the Trails Plan. This will decrease the scope’s timeline, providing the community and decision makers with a final Plan in 2020. A sole-source award is required because private groups are planning to request use of public assets. There are active private groups in Girdwood who want to invest in infrastructure and additional trail building. Land owners, such as the HLB, are making decisions on applications without a Trails Plan outlining the community’s vision. Other

stakeholders, such as the USFS are similarly disadvantaged in their assessment of proposed trails and their impact on USFS assets. Finally, without a Trails Plan to work off of, trail building organizations, most of which are non-profits receiving funding through federal grants and/or private donations, are unduly burdened with the additional costs from additional permitting processes, such as the Urban Design Commission (UDC). Without a Trails Plan, there is a perceived need for UDC review because of the potential for significant public input. Thousands of dollars of public funds can be saved and time of the UDC can be spared to work on other projects by completion of the Girdwood Trail Plan by Huddle AK. For the reasons listed herein, GBOS requests permission to enter into a sole source contract with Huddle AK for $48,500.00. Vendor contact information is as follows:

Vendor Contact Name Contact Phone No. Address

Huddle AK Holly Spoth-Torres 907-223-0136 721 West 1st Ave, Suite 100

Anchorage, AK 99501

Funding information is as follows:

406 800 GR16001 $48,500.00

cc: Maury Robinson, Manager PW

Girdwood Trails [TBD] Plan Scope of Work

DRAFT 1 2019-10-21

1. General Introduction The Girdwood Trails Plan would provide a comprehensive planning effort, inclusive of all relevant trail and recreation disciplines, and result in a Plan for the Girdwood Valley. Especially important will be establishing the vision and objectives for land owners to connect existing trail systems. A long-term plan will expand the recreational capacity in Girdwood. Among the primary goals for the Plan project will be multiple, extensive stakeholder meetings for every user group identified. Among the primary goals for this planning project will be the development of schematics and mapping the trail network of the Girdwood Valley. [placeholder for subcommittee details] 2. Scope of Work Task Descriptions TASK A – Project Visioning The foundation upon which the Plan will be based is the performance of a Project Visioning process to establish the context for the objectives to be incorporated into the plan. Visioning will begin with an existing condition assessment by reviewing available sources on recreation demands, modes, and flow in the Girdwood Valley area and relate those to the existing trail systems. The consultant will also collect and review available data related to anticipated growth and changes in recreation demands in the region to be used for forecasting opportunities and needs for the future when compared to the baseline existing data. This baseline and future demand data will be used to develop meeting and charrette materials for use in public meetings, as well as meetings with local political leaders and key industry stakeholders. The data will provide a common point of discussion for what presently exists, but also a basis for what additional types of opportunities are potentially available. Input from the public and local stakeholders will be used to identify common goals that are shared between the landowners and the local community such that a more unified effort can be made to identify the local infrastructure investment required to accommodate potential growth beyond what would otherwise occur organically. This critical step will define the bounds of land use designations used to evaluate current/future trail plans. The work shall include, but not be limited to the following activities: Activity A1 – Methodology The consultant will develop a methodology to collect qualitative and quantitative data. This may include surveys, data bases, group exercises, and an overall strategy for gathering information from users. This methodology will be applied to both internal and external stakeholders. Key deliverables shall include but are not limited to:

• Annotated Outline for the Methodology

• Draft and Final Methodology

• Lists or groupings of stakeholders, including contact information Activity A2 – Existing Condition Assessment The consultant will complete an existing condition analysis by conducting a Literature Review of Girdwood’s trails through archived publications and recent studies completed by the area’s land owners, including but not limited to the U.S. Forest Service, Heritage Land Bank, and the Girdwood Board of Supervisors and its Committees. Recent park and trail design studies completed for the Municipality of Anchorage shall be included in this Literature Review. Deliverables may be completed in conjunction with Task B.

• Existing Trail Network Map with Access

• Demand Analysis

Girdwood Trails [TBD] Plan Scope of Work

DRAFT 2 2019-10-21

Activity A3 – Stakeholder Meetings The consultant will apply the Final Methodology at Stakeholder Meetings. These meetings will focus on input from key stakeholders. The consultant will prepare a standard meeting agenda that will be used for all meetings. The consultant will prepare a report from each meeting that thoughtfully arranges information collected and synthesizes it for key indicators. Key deliverables shall include but are not limited to:

• Draft and Final Meeting Agendas

• Plan and Facilitate all stakeholder meetings

• Draft and Final Meeting Notes

• Report Outline

• Draft and Final Reports

Activity A4 – Report Workshop The consultant will host a workshop to present the Reports’ Findings. The goal of this workshop is to convey key indicators to [GTC Subcommittee] members. The consultant will develop and provide guidance packets. The intent of these packets to provide [GTC Subcommittee] with a quick reference of qualitative and quantitative data and sources. Key deliverables shall include but are not limited to:

• Draft and Final Meeting Agenda

• Draft and Final Meeting Presentation

• Draft and Final Guidance Packets Activity A5 – Visioning Statement The consultant will assist [GTC Subcommittee] in composing the Visioning Statement, which will set the outline for the Plan. Using the deliverables from Activity A4, [GTC Subcommittee] and the consultant will develop a draft and final Visioning Statement. Based on input, this may include a branding which may be carried forward; thus, conveying a consistent and specific message in engaging stakeholders. Key deliverables shall include but are not limited to:

• Draft and Final Visioning Statement Task B – Mapping [Placeholder depending on what USFS SCA in-kind contribution] The work shall include, but not be limited to the following activities: Activity B1 – Activity B2 – Task C – Plan, Concept Development, and Estimates The consultant will compose an outline, draft and final study based on the deliverables from Activities A & B. Activity C1 – Plan Outline The consultant will develop a preliminary draft, draft, and final outlines that are inclusive of Tasks A & B deliverables. This outline directs development of key sections, including, but not limited to cost estimates, environmental considerations, land use, design concepts, trail management, and implementation strategies. Key deliverables shall include but are not limited to:

• Preliminary Annotated Outline for the Plan

• Draft and Final Annotated Outline for the Plan

• Lists of key sections to be developed further

Girdwood Trails [TBD] Plan Scope of Work

DRAFT 3 2019-10-21

Activity C2 – Public Meeting(s) The consultant will assist [GTC Subcommittee] in preparing for and hosting up to two public meetings in Girdwood. This public meeting will be in a Workshop Format to obtain stakeholders’ input on the Draft Plan’s priorities. For each major component of the Plan, there will be a station at which stakeholders can learn more about the alternatives considered and the cost analysis completed. Input from stakeholders will be collected qualitatively and quantitatively. The consultant will provide a comment summary report, similar to a public scoping document. Based on recommendations from the summary report, [GTC Subcommittee] will direct final edits to the Final Plan. Key deliverables shall include but are not limited to:

• Venue Reservations

• Draft and Final Public Notices

• Draft and Final Visual Aids

• Event Staffing

• Data Collection and Synthesis

• Public Meeting Summary Report Activity C3 – Final Plan The consultant will incorporate comments into the Draft Final Plan based outcomes from C3 and submit it for review to the [GTC Subcommittee]. The consultant will incorporate their edits and distribute at least one week before a planned workshop. [GTC Subcommittee] will host a one day review workshop to review the Final Plan with members of key decision makers. The goal of this workshop is to sign off on the content prior to publication. The consultant will develop and provide a Summary Report of Edits and a tracking matrix. Key deliverables shall include but are not limited to:

• Draft Final Plan

• Draft and Final Review Workshop Agenda

• Draft and Final Visual Aids

• Edit Summary Report and Comment Tracking Matrix Task D – Project Management The success of this planning process is cohesiveness among [GTC Subcommittee] members. Project management is a critical path item and will be weighed heavily in the selection process. The consultant shall be an extension of [GTC Subcommittee] and should integrate seamlessly with the nomenclature, schedule, and other commitments on-going during this timeline. Respectful and effective communication is essential. Each deliverable will be used to further the permitting, design, and funding process for the Final Plan. As such, all deliverables shall be in an approved Municipality of Anchorage Style Guide format and have signed off by the consultant’s technical review team. Work that does meet these standards will be returned. The work shall include, but not be limited to the following activities: Activity D1 – Communications Protocol The consultant will compose a Communications Protocol that clearly outlines each team member’s roles and responsibility and lines of communication. This Protocol will provide a basis for exchanging comments on multiple deliverables. This Protocol will include nomenclature for electronic communiques; this supports Task G, Administrative Record. Key deliverables shall include but are not limited to:

• Draft and Final Communications Protocol Activity D2 – Schedule and Reporting The consultant will prepare and maintain a Master Schedule of all deliverables. This schedule shall be a format that is trackable and easily referenced in weekly meetings; this is a living document and will be updated regularly. The consultant will be expected to keep track of deliverables and inform ARRC of impacts to the

Girdwood Trails [TBD] Plan Scope of Work

DRAFT 4 2019-10-21

Schedule. The consultant will use a standard template for monthly reporting. This monthly reporting will accompany each invoice and shall cross reference the level of effort to date, expenses, and budget. During each monthly meeting, the report will communicate areas of concern, critical time-sensitive issues, and corrective actions, decisions to be made, a schedule update by task for key milestones, and any out of scope requests. Key deliverables shall include but are not limited to:

• Schedule

• Monthly Reports Activity D3 – Meetings, Reporting, and Interfaces The consultant will prepare and maintain a Master Template for a biweekly meeting agenda. This meeting will be no more than 30 minutes and include [GTC Subcommittee members]. This meeting will focus on Red, Amber and Green Priority Items. Using the Schedule and the previous report, the meeting will review requests for information and issues of concern. Issues of concern will be tabled and scheduled for separate meetings with the appropriate participants. This meeting will be telephonic and hosted by the consultant.

• Weekly Meeting Agenda

• Tracking Matrix of Red, Amber, Green Items

• Request for Information Template

• Weekly Meeting Notes, including Action Items Activity D4 – Quality Assurance and Quality Control and Style Guide The consultant will prepare and maintain a Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QAQC) Protocol to be adhered to for each deliverable. This ensures [GTC Subcommittee] reviews focus on substantive content rather than editorial remarks. With as many deliverables that rely on each other for qualitative and quantitative information, it is critical to maintain consistent format and level of detail. Each deliverable will be used to further the permitting, design, and funding process for the Final Plan. As such, all deliverables shall be in an approved Style Guide format. Work that does meet these standards will be returned.

• Draft and Final QAQC Protocol

• Draft and Final Style Guide

• Draft and Final Deliverable Templates Task E – Administrative Record Each deliverable will be used to further the permitting, design, and funding process for the Final Plan. From public scoping to content within the Reports and Studies, this planning effort should be recorded and queriable. The ability to quickly reference meeting notes, design drawings, and electronic correspondence assists [GTC Subcommittee] in ensuring compliance with the Open Meetings Act. The work shall include, but not be limited to the following activities: Activity E1 – Administrative Record Plan The consultant will compose an Administrative Records Plan that evaluates alternate methods for record keeping; protocols; and suggested content. Key deliverables shall include but are not limited to:

• Draft and Final Administrative Record Plan

Expenses  Notes

Holly Interior Trails

Principal Trail Expertise

$135.00 $100.00

Tasks Phase Subtotals

$ 1 4 ,2 9 0 .0 0

A1‐Methodology 8 8 Draft and Final

A2‐Existing Condition Assessment 1 6 2 0 Existing Condition Report, with Map 

Created by USFS In‐Kind. Holly will 

communicate & coordinate with USFS.

A3‐Stakeholder Meetings 4 0 $100.00 Assumes 10 stakeholder meetings.

A4‐Report Workshop 1 6 $25.00 Assumes 1 meeting in Girdwood with 

meeting prep.

A5‐Visioning Statement 4 $25.00 Assumes attendance at one GTC 

meeting to accomplish this task.

T a sk  B :  Ma pp in g $ 1 ,0 8 0 .0 0

Some Coordination, Review, & Project Management 8

$ 2 5 ,2 8 0 .0 0

C1‐Plan Outline 2 4

C2‐Public  Meetings 2 4 1 6 $200.00 Assumes 2

C3‐Draft Final Plan 4 0 2 0

C3‐Draft & Final Review Workshop Agenda 1 2 Assumes attendance at workshop

C3‐Draft & Final Visual Aids 2 0 3 2

C3‐Edit Summary Report and Comment Tracking 8 1 2

$ 6 ,8 7 5 .0 0

D1‐Communications Protocol 4

D2‐Schedule & Reporting 4

D3‐Meetings, Reporting, and Interfaces 4 0 $125.00 Assumes 5 in‐person and 10 telecon.

D4‐QA/QC 2

$ 9 4 0 .0 0

E1‐Draft and Final Administrative Record Plan 4 4

Total Hours  2 2 8 1 1 2 $ 4 7 5 .0 0

$ 4 8 ,4 6 5 .0 0T o t a l  F e e

HUDDLE FEE: GTMP

T a sk  D :  P r o je c t  Ma na g em e n t

Hours

T a sk  A:  P r o je c t  Vis io n in g

T a sk  C :  P la n ,  Con c e p t  D e v e lo pm e n t ,  a nd  E st im a t e s

T a sk  E :  Adm in i s t r a t i v e  Re c o r d

10/21/2019

A2012

4

A201

STEEL FRAMED SAFETY NET - SEE STRUCTURAL

CHAIN-LINK FENCING

8' -

0"

13' - 0"

4"

7' -

4"

4"

4" 7' - 4" 4"

8' - 0"

3' -

6"

4' -

0"

3"

FASTEN CHAIN-LINK TO OUTSIDE OF TUBE STEEL

TUBE STEEL BRACE - TYPICAL OF (3) - SEE STRUCTURAL

TUBE STEEL PERIMETER - SEE STRUCTURAL

CHAIN-LINK FENCING

4" 7' - 4"

2-INCH FRAMING MEMBER - TYP

3' -

6"

4"

8' - 0"

8' - 0"

6"

2"

7' - 8"

FIELD VERIFY

5' - 4"

1' - 4" 4' - 9" 1' - 4"

2' - 2"

FIELD VERIFY

3' - 0" 2' - 2"

A202

2

1

STAIR CONFIGURATION VARIES

BUMP GATE

FACE OF JOISTS BELOW

"COPE" (N) POSTS INTO EXISTING DECKING

SHEET NO:

REVISIONS:

DRAWING TITLE:

PROJECT:

CHECKED:

DRAWN:

DATE:

A201

PLAN, SECTION &ELEVATION

1718.41

DJD

11/1/19

CL

IEN

T N

AM

E

GIR

DW

OO

D H

AN

D T

RA

M

IMP

RO

VE

ME

NT

S

WIN

TE

R C

RE

EK

TR

AIL

DR

AF

T

3/4" = 1'-0"1NEW SAFETY NET PLAN

3/4" = 1'-0"2SAFTEY NET - ELEVATION

3/4" = 1'-0"4SAFETY NET - SECTION

3/4" = 1'-0"3NEW RAILING PLAN

(N) GUARDRAIL - BOTH SIDES

(N) CAUTION STRIPING - OMIT AT WALK INTO TRAM

1' - 4"

3' -

8"

TRAM BUMP GATE

4' - 7" 1' - 4"

SPEED-RAIL GATE(DO NOT INSTALL LATCH)

INDICATES #3 ELBOW

INDICATES #48 FLANGE

INSTALL EXPANSION ANCHORS @ CONC

PLATE CATCH, INSTALL AT TRAM DOOR

INDICATES #5SR TEE 12-INCH POLY WHEELS

(E) WOOD POSTS

4' -

4"

4' -

8"

3' -

8" 2' -

0"

SPEED-RAIL GATE

INDICATES #3 ELBOW

INDICATES #48 FLANGEINDICATES #5SR TEE

(E) WOOD GUARDRAIL

POLY TAPE BETWEEN ALUM & STAINLESS

STAINLESS STEEL U-BOLT

INDICATES #65 PLUG

(E) ROPE ELEVATION

INDICATES #52E FLANGETHROUGH-BOLT TO DOUBLED JOISTS BELOW. "COPE" EXISTING DECKING AROUND NEW POSTS

ORDER (2) TWO EXTRA #48 FLANGESEXACT DIMENSIONS OF THE #48 FLANGE AND THE STEEL RAILING WAS NOT MEASURED. CONNECTION MAY LOOK LIKE OPTION BELOW. HAVE 2 EXTRA ON HAND, PLUS ADDITIONAL 2X FURRING

THIS IS PREFERRED

2' - 11" 1' - 9 1/2"

SHEET NO:

REVISIONS:

DRAWING TITLE:

PROJECT:

CHECKED:

DRAWN:

DATE:

A202

PHOTOS &ELEVATIONS

1718.41

DJD

11/1/19

CL

IEN

T N

AM

E

GIR

DW

OO

D H

AN

D T

RA

M

IMP

RO

VE

ME

NT

S

WIN

TE

R C

RE

EK

TR

AIL

DR

AF

T

3/4" = 1'-0"1ELEVATION @ NETTING

3/4" = 1'-0"2ELEVATION @ ROPE

ADD HANDRAIL TO THIS SIDE - MATCH ADJACENT

REPLACE ANY DAMAGED WOOD MEMBERS - FIELD VERIFY

4300 B St., Suite 302 Anchorage, AK 99503

Phone: 907 562-3439 - www.reidmiddleton.com

Corporate License #AECC598

© Copyright Reid Middleton, Inc. 2018

SHEET NO:

DATE :

PROJECT NO :

DRAWN BY :

CHECKED BY :

COPYRIGHT :

SHEET DESCRIPTION:

DR

AF

T

S1

DRAFT

GIR

DW

OO

D H

AN

D T

RA

M IM

PR

OV

EM

EN

TS

WIN

TE

R C

RE

EK

TR

AIL

10/17/2019

19.075

DT

GENERAL NOTES

TRANS Transverse

TYP Typical

UON Unless Otherwise Noted

VERT Vertical

W/ With

W/O Without

W Wide-Flange, Wide

W/C Water / Cement Ratio

W.P. Work Point

WWR Welded Wire Reinforcement

SCH Schedule

SIM Similar

SQ Square

STL Steel

T&B Top and Bottom

T&G Tongue and Groove

T.O. Top of

T.O.B. Top of Beam

T.O.S. Top of Steel

T.O.W. Top of Wall

OC On-Center

OH Overhead

OPNG Opening

PL Plate

PLS Places

PSF Pounds-per-square-foot

PSI Pounds-per-square-inch

REQ'D Required

RO Rough Opening

SBN Shearwall Boundary Nailing

IBC International Building Code

INT Interior

LAG Lag Screw

LOC Location

LONG Longitudinal

MAX Maximum

MEZZ Mezzanine

MIN Minimum

MFR Manufacturer

(N) New

(E) Existing

EA Each

ES Each Side

EW Each Way

EXP Expansion

FDN Foundation

FF Finished Floor

GALV Galvanized

GLB Glue-Laminated Beam

HORZ Horizontal

HSS Hollow Structural Steel

BLKG Blocking

BM Beam

BOT Bottom

BTWN Between

CL Center-Line

CLR Clear

COL Column

CONC Concrete

CONT Continuous, Continue

DBN Diaphragm BoundaryNailing

@ At

AB Anchor Bolts

BLDG Building

ARCH Architect

AR Anchor Rod

ALT Alternate

AHJ Authority Having Jurisdiction

AFF Above Finish Floor

ADH Adhesive

ADD'L Additional

GENERAL

THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AND COORDINATE ALL DIMENSIONS AMONG THE DRAWINGS BEFORE STARTING ANY WORK OR FABRICATION. IN CASE OF DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN DRAWINGS, REFERENCE STANDARDS, SITE CONDITIONS OR GOVERNING CODE, THE MORE STRINGENT REQUIREMENTS SHALL GOVERN. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OF DISCREPANCIES AND OBTAIN DIRECTION PRIOR TO PROCEEDING. NOTES ON INDIVIDUAL STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS SHALL TAKE PRIORITY OVER GENERAL STRUCTURAL NOTES. NOTED DIMENSIONS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. TYPICAL DETAILS MAY NOT NECESSARILY BE INDICATED AS TYP ON THE PLANS, BUT SHALL APPLY AS SHOWN OR DESCRIBED IN THE DETAILS.

ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL COMPLY WITH THE 2012 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE (IBC) AS AMENDED AND ADOPTED BY THE MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE (MOA).

SAFETY - THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MEETING ALL FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL SAFETY STANDARDS. THE CONTRACTOR IS IN CHARGE OF ALL SAFETY MATTERS ON AND AROUND THE JOB SITE.

STRUCTURAL DESIGN DATA

STRUCTURAL DESIGN IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE IBC AS AMENDED AND ADOPTED BY THE MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE. OCCUPANCY CATEGORY IS II IN ACCORDANCE WITH IBC SECTION 1604.5.

REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR RAILINGS, NETS, DEMOLITION, FINISHES, ETC.

THE STRUCTURE HAS BEEN DESIGNED FOR THE FOLLOWING OPERATIONAL LOADS ON THE COMPLETED STRUCTURES. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORARY SHORING AND BRACING DURING CONSTRUCTION.

LIVE LOADS: UNIFORM LOAD OVER AREA OF SAFETY FRAME = 40 PSFPOINT LOAD AT ANY POINT ALONG UPPER RAILS = 5000 LBS

EXISTING CONDITIONS

CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL EXISTING DIMENSIONS, MEMBER SIZES, AND CONDITIONS PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY WORK. ALL DIMENSIONS OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS ARE INTENDED AS GUIDELINES ONLY AND MUST BE VERIFIED. EXISTING CONDITIONS SHOWN ON DRAWINGS ARE BASED EITHER ON ORIGINAL DRAWINGS OR WERE ASSUMED BASED ON EXPECTED CONDITIONS. IF EXISTING CONDITIONS DO NOT CLOSELY MATCH CONDITIONS SHOWN ON DRAWINGS, OR IF EXISTING MATERIALS ARE OF QUESTIONABLE OR SUBSTANDARD QUALITY, NOTIFY ENGINEER PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY WORK.

SPECIAL INSPECTION

CONTINUOUS SPECIAL INSPECTION IS REQUIRED FOR POST-INSTALLED ANCHORS.NO OTHER SPECIAL INSPECTION IS REQUIRED.

POST-INSTALLED ANCHORS

INSTALLATION SHALL CONFORM TO MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS AND REQUIREMENTS OF ICC-ES REPORT. ALL POST-INSTALLED ANCHORS SHALL HAVE A CURRENT ICC-ES REPORT AND BE AUTHORIZED FOR USE IN SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORY D. CONTINUOUS SPECIAL INSPECTION IS REQUIRED FOR ALL POST-INSTALLED ANCHORS, UON.

THREADED ROD SHALL BE ASTM A307, UON (OR ISO898 CLASS 5.8), TENSILE STRENGTH OF 60 KSI MIN, AND GALVANIZED WHERE EXPOSED TO THE WEATHER.

EXISTING BASE SHALL BE SCANNED PRIOR TO DRILLING HOLES. EXISTING REBAR LOCATIONS SHALL BE MARKED, AND NEW ANCHOR LOCATIONS REVISED TO AVOID EXISTING REINFORCING. NO REINFORCING BARS SHALL BE CUT TO INSTALL ANCHORS. ALL DEFECTIVE ANCHOR HOLES SHALL BE GROUTED AND A NEW HOLE DRILLED A MINIMUM OF 3 BOLT DIAMETERS AWAY.

ADHESIVE ANCHORS FOR THREADED ROD AND REBAR SHALL BE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING (OR AN APPROVED EQUIVALENT):

-DEWALT “PURE110+” (ESR-3298)-HILTI "HIT-HY 200 SAFE SET" (ESR-3187)-EPCON "A7+" (ESR-3903)-SIMPSON “SET-XP” (ESR-2508)

STRUCTURAL STEEL

MATERIALS: STRUCTURAL STEEL TUBES (HSS): ASTM A500, GRADE C ALL OTHER SHAPES & PLATE: ASTM A36 BOLTS, WASHERS & NUTS: ASTM A307

ALL DETAILING, FABRICATION AND ERECTIONS SHALL CONFORM TO AISC SPECIFICATIONS AND CODES, LATEST EDITION.

ALL WELDING SHALL BE DONE BY QUALIFIED WELDERS AND SHALL CONFORM TO THE AWS D1.1 AND D1.8, LATEST EDITIONS. ALL WELDING ELECTRODES SHALL BE PROPERLY CONDITIONED 70 KSI MINIMUM TENSILE STRENGTH, WITH DIFFUSED HYDROGEN LEVELS OF 16ml/g (H16) OR LESS IN ACCORDANCE WITH AWS A4.3.

WELDS NOT SPECIFIED SHALL BE SHOP-PERFORMED CONTINUOUS OR ALL-AROUND 3/16" FILLET WELDS.

THERE SHALL BE NO FIELD CUTTING OF STRUCTURAL STEEL MEMBERS FOR THE WORK OF OTHER TRADES WITHOUT THE PRIOR APPROVAL OF THE ENGINEER.

ALL BEAMS, JOISTS AND TRUSSES SHALL BE FABRICATED WITH THE NATURAL CAMBER UP. PROVIDE CAMBERS AS INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS.

THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONTROL OF ALL ERECTION PROCEDURES AND SEQUENCES. CONSIDERATION SHOULD BE GIVEN TO TEMPERATURE DIFFERENTIALS, ESPECIALLY WITH RESPECT TO STRUCTURAL STEEL FRAMING INTO EXISTING CONCRETE.

ALL STEEL SHALL BE HOT-DIP GALVANIZED PER ASTM A123 OR POWDER COATED. TOUCH-UP AND REPAIR GALVANIZATION SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A780. FASTENERS SHALL COMPLY WITH ASTM A153.

THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS TO THE ENGINEER FOR REVIEW. THESE DRAWINGS SHALL BE CHECKED BY THE CONTRACTOR BEFORE SUBMITTAL AND SHALL SHOW SHOP FABRICATION DETAILS, FIELD ASSEMBLY DETAILS, AND ERECTION DIAGRAMS FOR ALL STRUCTURAL STEEL. ALSO SUBMIT WELDERS QUALIFICATIONS.

GENERAL STRUCTURAL NOTES

3"4'

- 0"

S2

5

S2

9

S2

6

HSS3x3 STRUT

HSS8x8 SIDE RAIL

(E) CONC FDTN

OUTSIDE RAIL

INSIDE RAIL

8"

MIN

7"

8"

(E) CONC FDTN

HSS3x3 STRUT

EDGE OF (E) CONC FDTN

2"8"

2"

3/16

PL1/2" x 12" SQw/ (4) 3/4" X 6" EMBED ADH ANCHORS

(E) CONC FDTN

HSS3x3 STRUT

1' - 6"1' - 6" 2' - 0" 2' - 0" 2' - 0"

5S2

3/16SIDE PL, ES

INSIDE RAIL

SIDE RAIL (E) CONC FDTN

3"3"

PL1/2" X 6" X 9'-7"w/ (4) 3/4" X 6" EMBED ADH ANCHORS

HSS8x8 INSIDE RAIL

3/16PJP

1' - 10"

1' -

10"

10" 10"

9"6"

8"3"

4"4"

2"

BOLT SIDE STRAP TO BACK OF HSS8x8 w/ (2) 3/4" WELDED THREADED STUDS

HSS8x8 INSIDE RAIL

(E) CONC FDTN

9" 6" 2' - 5"

STIFF PL 3/8"

2' - 0" 9' - 0"

13' - 0"

8' -

0"

3' - 7" 3' - 7"

HSS8X8X5/16 INSIDE RAIL

SIDE STRAP, TYP ES

(E) TRAM FDN, CONC

HSS8X8X5/16 OUTSIDE RAIL

HSS8X8X5/16 SIDE RAIL, ES

HSS3X3X3/16 STRUT BELOW, TYP OF (3)

S2

11

S2

4

1S2

6S2

OUTSIDE RAIL

HSS3x3 STRUT

SECTION ELEVATION

(2) 3/4" WELDED THREADED STUDS

L6x6x5/16 X 0'-9"

3/16

1 1/2" 6" 1 1/2"OUTSIDE RAIL

HSS3x3 STRUT

HSS8X8

PL 3/8" T&B w/ (1) 3/4" DIA BOLT IN EA LEG

3/16TYP

1 1/2"

1 1/2"

1/2"

INSIDE RAIL

(E) CONC FDTNSIDE STRAP

STIFF PL 3/8"

4300 B St., Suite 302 Anchorage, AK 99503

Phone: 907 562-3439 - www.reidmiddleton.com

Corporate License #AECC598

© Copyright Reid Middleton, Inc. 2018

SHEET NO:

DATE :

PROJECT NO :

DRAWN BY :

CHECKED BY :

COPYRIGHT :

SHEET DESCRIPTION:

DR

AF

T

S2

DRAFT

GIR

DW

OO

D H

AN

D T

RA

M IM

PR

OV

EM

EN

TS

WIN

TE

R C

RE

EK

TR

AIL

10/17/2019

19.075

DT

PLAN, SECTIONS &DETAILS

1/2" = 1'-0"S2

1 FRAME SECTION

1 1/2" = 1'-0"S2

10 STRUT ELEVATION1 1/2" = 1'-0"S2

9 STRUT SECTION

1/2" = 1'-0"S2

2 INSIDE RAIL ELEVATION

1 1/2" = 1'-0"S2

5 INSIDE RAIL SECTION

1/2" = 1'-0"S2

3 SIDE STRAP

1/2" = 1'-0"12SAFETY FRAME PLAN VIEW

1 1/2" = 1'-0"S2

6 FRAME TO STRUT

1 1/2" = 1'-0"S2

11 MITER CORNER FOR RAILS

1 1/2" = 1'-0"S2

4 SIDE STRAP TO FRAME

Girdwood Trails Committee Financial Report

October 31, 2019

Account with Girdwood Inc. $32,393.62

September 30, 2019

Expenses Paid (7,450.00)

Deposits to Account 0.00

Account with Girdwood Inc. $24,943.62

October 31, 2019

Deposits/Grants Pending $0.00

Reserve for Trail Signs (500.00)       

Reserve for Forest Fair Fund (80.03)         

Reserve for Further (7,000.00)   

Trails Publication Costs

Reserve for Volunteer Prizes (500.00)       

Balance Unreserved Funds $16,863.59

10/31/2019

TO: Girdwood Trails Committee

FROM: Christina Hendrickson, Girdwood Board of Supervisors Parks and Recreation Chair

RE: Confluence in Talkeetna, September 2019

FINAL 1 2019-11-04

The following are excerpts from the Confluence, a trails conference hosted in Talkeetna. The Alaska

Outdoor Alaska forms an agenda “dedicated to diversifying the economy, improving lives and stimulating

local economies through strengthening Alaska’s outdoor recreation sector.” Additional event information

can be found at: https://alaskaoutdooralliance.org/agenda

Economic Report. New numbers show that the Alaska Recreation Economy is 4.2% of our GDP,

accounting for 1 in 15 jobs in the state and $1.03B in wages earned. Top activities are wildlife viewing,

fishing, backpacking, boating, and hunting. Based on national data, the main demographic is upper income,

educated white males.

Gateway Towns. Chris Beck once again called for a coalition to form and feed into policy and actions to

promote gateway towns. He would like to see more “middle of the road” options that enable guests to

embark on big adventures yet return to a nice warm bed at night. He referred to Queen Charlotte Track in

New Zealand as an example. The policy and actions may spur infrastructure to support these efforts.

Underserved Areas. Some participants spoke up about being more remote and not having a large role in

the advocacy for improvements. They referred to the funds being spent on improvements along the road

system and at major attractions. This places smaller communities at a disadvantage because they cannot

support nor solely fund capital projects that would yield economic benefits.

Organizing. USFS recommended recreation groups become more organized and present a common

agenda. An example was the Timber Industry and their successful lobbying re: Roadless Rule. In contrast,

when bikes wanted access to wilderness areas, advocates on both sides lobbied so hard that decision makers

opted to do nothing because they did not want to be the ones seeking compromise. Groups with opposing

view points need to sort out their differences behind closed doors and then present a united front to decision

makers.

Anchorage Trails. Anchorage seeks to connect the Chester, Campbell, and Coastal trails through

additional park bonds. Expect to see proposals for separate pedestrian and bike lanes; bridges; and habitat

improvements (e.g., stormwater runoff). When connected, the three trails’ outline looks like a moose head.

The Anchorage Parks Foundation plans to brand this as “Let’s go get on the Moose” to encourage

participation and yield “yes” votes on future bonds.

Funding. The State General Obligation Fund could lend funds to those projects that are truly “shovel

ready” and demonstrate an “economic gain.”

Case Study: Zion Forever

Springdale, Utah, is home to ~800 residents and hosts 4M visitors each year. Zion Forever embraces

working beyond their jurisdictions to find solutions. They host an annual conference and community event

that focuses on protecting the integrity of the park’s experience (e.g., Box Canyon). Funds raised are

invested in projects across all adjoining land owners, including private. The idea of “NextGen Tourism”

molds “the visitor” to “the guest”. It is a model that “integrates, embraces, and expects stewardship

responsibility from those who come to our public lands.” These guests become stewards, not consumers.

TO: Girdwood Trails Committee

FROM: Christina Hendrickson, Girdwood Board of Supervisors Parks and Recreation Chair

RE: Confluence in Talkeetna, September 2019

FINAL 2 2019-11-04

National Park Service: Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance Program

Offers assistance to form non-profit entity and can help with funds for historic preservation.

US Forest Service

Articulated that their budget is 40% lower than a decade ago, and now fires are eating that budget. USFS

needs help from partners to provide recreation opportunities and lauded the outfitters and guides who use

permits to access the local forests.

Panel with ARRC, CLIA, and Premier

New average age of a cruise is 47. This new “type” of cruiser seeks adventure, and CLIA wants gateway

towns to capitalize on meeting this niche adventure traveler. The Alaska Railroad reported 531K cruise

ship guests on the railroad, moving these guests from the highway.

What can gateway communities do to partner with ARRC, CLIA, and Premier?

A. ARRC: Example of leased property to build winter domes near Sheldon Chalet. 2.5% of

current ridership is winter tourism, which will continue to increase in the Asia demographic.

B. Premier: know the cruise ship and bus schedule to staff your businesses accordingly with extra

provision and make recommendations to enhance the guest experience, and cross promote other

local businesses.

C. CLIA: Provide exemplary service to anyone in need.

Biking: Creating Accountability

The National Park Service has facilitators who can structure a dialogue to resolve user conflicts. This helps

define the community, the experience, and provides accountability. Having institutionalized planning

documents and partnership agreements helps advocates and decision makers plan. Consider jurisdictions

when creating a coalition.

Case Study: North Shore Cyclery in Talkeetna

Wanted to increase local user groups and visitors’ experience. It takes time to involve more people in the

process, but it helps select and build trails and fund the supporting infrastructure. Owner approached

specific businesses about installing a bike rack on their properties and then connected with welders for

designs. For example, in Valdez, businesses bought bike racks from welding students. Elsewhere, hospitals

funded bikes for kids programs out of obesity program.