As Alaskans, we have all heard about building a bridge over the Knik River to connect Anchorage to Point MacKenzie over the years. A recent arcticle in the Anchorage Daily News states estimates somewhere between $400 and $600 million with only $229 million in federal monies. That's alot of money to be made up by state and local agencies, plus these are only estimates and will most likely run over those amounts.

First off, I feel they should work on Anchorage's traffic patterns BEFORE they think about building a bridge. Anchorage could use a bypass expressway that allows you to drive in on the Glenn Highway and exit south on the Seward Highway. Going downtown on the Glenn turning on Gambell before you get on the the Seward Highway is terrible. Taking Muldoon/Tudor is not better either.

Secondly, I think the bridge should be a toll bridge. The users that benefit the most from it should be willing to pay to use it. I have heard that it would not cut down the commute time from Anchorage to Wasilla, but rather just open up more land at Point MacKenzie for Anchorage to expand. Yes, Anchorage does need more land to expand. With all available land pretty much developed, there is no room for new construction. It is hard to bring new businesses in because they don't have room for offices or even homes for employees.

I am sure there are a lot of good reasons for and against a bridge and I'd love to hear your feedback. Please vote on the poll.

 

Well you have to get something out of congress. $229 million is lot of pork, but Anchorage needs some place for the daily workers to live. About the only ones who will be able to call Anchorage home thanks to ridiculous exclusion (zoning) laws, is Section 8 welfare cases and those who blessed with lots of old money.

 

What will it do to the local economy along the Glenn when the tourists start taking the bridge to get north to the park and Fairbanks? How many motels, restaurants, and any other business the depends on tourist traffic will suffer.
Although, it will mean jobs for a while at least.

Also, as a biologist (*yet not a tree-hugger) what environmental impact will it have? I am sure that has all been hashed out already though.

It would be nice to have a more direct route and maybe it could relieve some traffic congestion, too.

Make it a toll bridge with large fees for out of state vehicles and lower rates for locals.

 

Our N and S bound Glenn highways need to be widened first. I live in Eagle River and drive a tractor truck back and forth to Anchorage and one of the worst hangups for traffic is the Eagle River bridge. N and S bound at that bridge is horrible.. The state needs to add another lane both directions then Raise and straighten out the bridge/lane. That is such a bottleneck, especially in the winter. If you commute than you know what Im taking about. Rush hour can be hell at the ER bridge. Plus Ive heard the "proposed" bridge wouldnt cut your commute time by much anyway.

Anyway just my $.02

 

The only section of the drive from Valdez to Anchorage that I usually dread is from Palmer to Anchorage. I would like to see better road maintance of existing roads then a bridge but thats a bias opinion on my part. I am sure those that live west of Wasilla and commute to Anchorage would love the bridge and I can see why.

If it does happen I think a toll is a good idea.

 

I couldn't agree more. Anchorage needs a bypass first. All "heavy" traffic, and thru traffic would benefit greatly from a bypass. Then they need to add an additional N and S lanes all the way to the Palmer-Wasilla cloverleaf. At the same time they need to totally redo the ER bridge. Then lastly they need to do a Knik Bridge. But who knows, it might be a pet project of our great governor. It might even be built big enough to land his JET on !!!