Loading...
BELLS FLATS TR D-1 OF TR A - Supplemental InformationROYAL V. LARGE 2321 Spirit Lake Highway - Castle Rock, Washington 98611 - 360/274 -9958 May 1, 2003 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 6898 Elmendorf AFB, Alaska 99506 -6898 • RE: FEMA # 9303838851445 COE # 4- 910208 ADF &G # FG -91 -11 -0419 Stream #259 -22 -10010 Habitat Permit FG -91 -11 -0419 Dear Sirs, During the last twenty years, I have been attempting to work with the Corps, as well as the State of Alaska, to resolve an errosion, problem on Sargent Creek, with little response. The problem, as I have laid out many times and on which 1 have spent significant money trying to work out a solution, is severe erosion of my property and others along Sargent Creek. The stream bed is located on U.S. Coast Guard property, but regulated by the Army Corps of Engineers. There have been some haphazard efforts to control the problem, but none have been effective. My tenants have been advised not to store their equipment on the portion of land that faces Sargent Creek because I could not guarantee that the bank would not give way. Over the winter they have moved out and cancelled their lease. However, I cannot sell, re -lease or plan for this useless portion of my property until the bank is stabilized, but the taxes still go on. I have been given a pile of paperwork for the permitting procedures to begin the solution that I have proposed, but it is both emotionally and financially draining. Reportedly the file on this issue is, already three inches thick. The Kodiak Island Borough and I have jointly shared the cost of rechanelling in a project that was doomed to fail. It worked for a short time. One would hope that we could learn from past mistakes. As a result of my contact with FEMA on December 18, 2002, the following resulted: 1. Erosion was so prevalent in Alaska they could not possibly address and fund every problem; 2. FEMA, to their credit, found that I had been trying to work to get the ADF &G to address the issue of Sargent Creek, but that their program didn't fit my situation. I was urged by Bill Lokey of FEMA to reapply for the permit, as he felt the Corps of Engineers would now approve it. What I am requesting now is for the powers that be take my plan and help make it work with the appropriate entities in the most efficient manner possible. Royal V. Large, page 2 A couple of ideas are: 1. Regrade the bank, excavate the channel to realign the stream within its historic channel. 2. The resulting spoils from realigning and deepening of the channel area would provide the materials for reinforcing the eroding banks with natural creek material, as well as providing a good source for fine quality gravel. The sale of gravel provide incentives for the private sector in completing the project. The area I propose to work is known as Navy Tract 2 (Lot 7, US Survey 2539), and is now under the control of the Coast Guard. According to a letter to Frank Murkowski who was then a Senator, from Rear Admiral John L. Parker, "...the Coast Guard has identified Sargent Creek Aggregate site as excess property. Under federal fiscal laws, we are prohibited from expending approriated funds for properties slated for disposal." Admiral Parker also stated that "...we would be happy to work cooperatively with him to issue the necessary real estate agreements to allow access to Coast Guard property." The original intent of this area was for strategic reserve of aggregate development. I would like to contract the removal of aggregate from the stream bed, which would be done at no cost to the govern- ment. In these uncertain times, the development of a viable aggregate rock source would benefit all entities, including the Coast Guard and their readiness policies. The project would pay for itself. With the Corps of Engineers "One Stop" potential to approve this project, I would like to ask that you help me take this plan and make it work with the approrpiate entities in the most efficient manner possible. According to'Rob Combellick of the DGGS, the project is "low risk". Once approved, the final details can be worked out. Royal V. Large