The Bridge Lives. Sort of.
A team of white coated emergency room personnel run down the hall at top speed. They are pushing a gurney. Double doors fly open down the hall, and sounds of beeping machinery are heard. Someone holds up a bag of liquid which is being dripped into the patient, as people flatten themselves against walls to keep from getting hit as the emergency team flies past.
That patient needs life support STAT! The patient? Alaska’s newest bridge to nowhere. Only this time, instead of “Nowhere” being in Ketchikan, it’s across Cook Inlet to a sparsely populated area of the Mat-Su Valley.
Arguments rage about the bridge. One side sees a vision of progress, and infrastructure building that will connect densely populated Anchorage to virgin land that has until now been unreachable by any means except a really long pain in the neck car ride that goes up the Inlet and wraps around and down the other side. It looks tantalizingly close, and so very out of reach. They don’t care if it costs gobs of money now. It’ll only cost more later, and think of the jobs and the excitement of the technological challenge.
The other side says things like, “How bout a ferry?” and “We don’t have the money!” and “Can’t this wait?” They complain that we’ve already spent millions pushing papers and thinking about this. They wonder about who owns the land on the other side, and they wake up in the night in a cold sweat when they hear reports it may be called “Don Young’s Way.” We just don’t have the means to do it right now, they say. You might call them “fiscal conservatives.” A ferry is nowhere near as fun as a bridge but matters of spanning a body of water with massive tidal currents and endangered whales, and all sorts of challenges become moot.
I have to say it was refreshing to hear a contentious debate in front of the Assembly that didn’t have to do with the non-discrimination ordinance. But, there’s no doubt that opinions about the bridge run hot, and testimony is….passionate. My personal feeling is that we need one of those little trap doors right in front of the podium where people testify, and as soon as someone points their finger at the Assembly and shrieks, “Shame on you!” whatever side they’re on, the Chair pushes a little red button that opens the trap door dispatching the offender and sending them through the floor into a big black pit. But that’s just me.
At the end of the meeting, the Assembly voted for life support. They’ll keep the project alive for another couple years and deal with it later. Some are happy. Some think it’s more years of moving papers and paying money for a Boondoggle Bridge that may never happen in our lifetime.
The unanimous vote followed a five-hour public hearing with passionate testimony from both sides of the issue: people who believe the bridge should be built as soon as possible and others who believe it is a waste of money that will hurt downtown Anchorage and other neighborhoods.
As proposed, the bridge between downtown Anchorage and mostly raw land on Point MacKenzie is estimated to cost about $680 million.
The Assembly’s vote was only advisory. The real decision on whether to kill, keep or delay the controversial bridge is to be made today by a joint state-city transportation planning committee.
Sarah Palin is a bridge to nowhere.
Wake up Alaska and America.
amen to that, rocket
I’ve commented on this at ADN. My impression is that the discussion is to Way Way too immature, and the ‘plans’ to vague.
Being ‘pro growth’ is not a plan.
I said I don’t know the specifics, but – on one hand New Jersey has too much low density sprawl, and here on the Island, with 2/3rds the pop of Alaska in 64 sq miles, there was grossly insufficient planning.
Two ends of the spectrum, same problem, insufficient planning, and realizing it too late.
Considering that there is still debate about what to do, insufficient details about how to do it, tells me that the paper pushers need to work long and hard to come up with a viable well thought out plan.
And if they heed my warning and plan thoroughly through the next 50 years, it probably will not be enough.
We have an area in need of a bypass. It connexts the south to the north on the east coast (in the middle of PA, where routes 11,15, I 80 and 80 connect) Total cost, 330 mill. They haven’t been able to get the fund for 30 years of trying.
$20. bucks says Alaska will get $680 mill for another brdge to nowhere (and then use the money for a new road to SPs house, if it’s good enough for Ted…).
oh yeah, and then there’s the relentless danger of developers wanting to develop, and politicians with grand ideas.
Watch out for them !
What’s wrong with a ferry? Haven’t these people ever heard of Martha’s Vineyard, Block Island or Nantucket?
I vote for the ferry if it doesn’t impact whales and such. We have a ferry that runs from Staten Island to Manhattan and it’s quite nice (and free also. too.) for commuters and tourists. We have an expressway that runs down the center of the island connecting New Jersey to the Verrazano Bridge to Brooklyn where there was once a ferry. It has brought lots and lots of traffic and pollution, overdevelopment, and terrible congestion to what was, only a mere 40 or so years ago, a very quiet, rural piece of New York City. Now we have the ubiquitous Home Depot, and Taco Bell and strip malls all over the place. Crikeys, how much shopping can people do? Yuck. For those persons pushing hardest for this development of the road or the bridge, I would definitely follow the money as to who is likeliest to benefit from it. Before you know it that island will be covered in McMansions and Pizza Huts. JMO.
A ferry ride across Cook Inlet in December might not be as much fun as the Staten Island ferry, but it sure beats a drive across a bride any day. Cheaper, more relaxing, provides more long term jobs. What’s not to like?
I remember reading about this bridge a few months ago.
I understand the people who are agitating for the bridge are the very people who own substantial tracts of land in the “virgin territory” — and whoo!boy, will they ever stand to make a big profit if the voters cooperate and give away their hard-earned money, or are forced to give it away…
I remember stuff like this happening in the county hubby and I moved from a few years back. Landowners who had some political “pull” managed to force hubby’s family off their land through devious county zoning restrictions, permit delays in developing property and raising property taxes, then they lobbied successfully to change all those rules and restrictions to benefit themselves.
Bainbridge Island does just fine with ferry service. Coffee, makeup stations in the bathroom, bets on whether the docking will be smooth, or bumper-licious. The occasional teddy-bear thrown overboard for rescue practice.
The real question was buried in your story. “They wonder about who owns the land on the other side.” That is indeed the axis of the deal.
As for appearing to set the question aside — it isn’t set aside as long as money continues to be spent. This isn’t the PTA, which managed over the years to set aside so many educational questions that it became complicit in the failed school system it was intended to monitor.
@ 9 KaJo Says:
June 25th, 2009 at 1:15 PM
I remember stuff like this happening in the county hubby and I moved from a few years back. Landowners who had some political “pull” managed to force hubby’s family off their land through devious county zoning restrictions, permit delays in developing property and raising property taxes, then they lobbied successfully to change all those rules and restrictions to benefit themselves.
——————
That’s a blast from the past. Orange County, CA drove out the agricultural land owners 30-40 years ago, using the exact same tactics. In three generations, they went from a mix of orchards, business and homeowners in a pastoral setting, to a concrete heck. The quality of life, of air, of weather — all ruined by unqualified land development.
I can only hope that when (not if) the island is turned into a new city, the planning involves a respect for natural landmasses, and far better design and construction than — say — Wasilla offers. I’ve seen less attractive places during my travels, but — whoa.
Building that bridge would make as much sense as building a road to Nome. What a waste it would be if they decide to build it. If Alaskans don’t like the commute from Wasilla to Anchorage they ought to come enjoy the lower 48 traffic.
As I recall, some of that land is owned by relatives or friends of Young, maybe Murkowski, maybe Stevens, prob. some other “prominent” pols in the state.
The greedy politicians and others who want this bridge to enrich themselves have a long and glorious tradition of getting what they want.
Transportation committee agrees with Anchorage Assembly –
http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=10592268
Wasilla and Houston (Alaska, not Texas
) are suing. Something about lack of due process.
It’s always about follow the money.
Boston had it’s Big Dig and Alaska has it’s never-ending supply of bridges to nowhere. … it will cost way more than 680 mill. Count on it.
And the wind during winter might make it near impassable.
I don’t know about this bridge, one way or the other. But I do tire of hearing about our “bridges to nowhere”. I was offended the first time I heard it, and who would have thought the life it has taken on. By many standards that are relevant in the lower 48, ALL bridges in Alaska are bridges to nowhere. We have only 10 state highways TOTAL. All of which go “nowhere”. Certainly, some make more sense when you are spending the public’s money than others. My town is accessible via only ferry, boat and air. We also have a bridge. It goes across a river and ends there. It drives people crazy that that road doesn’t connect to “anything”. I personally don’t think we need anymore road connected to it at all. The truth is, there is limited private developable land where it ends, and that is why it is so called “nowhere”. I think it connects to a beautiful place.
I don’t know about this bridge, one way or the other. But I do tire of hearing about our “bridges to nowhere”. It bugged me the first time I heard it, and who would have thought the life it has taken on. By many standards that are relevant in the lower 48, ALL bridges in Alaska are bridges to nowhere. We have only 11 state highways TOTAL, 12 if you count the only one that actually connects…to the lower 48. Most of which go “nowhere”. Certainly, some make more sense when you are spending the public’s money than others. My town is accessible via only ferry, boat and air. We also have a bridge. It goes across a river and ends there (and it was built 100 years ago, repaired a couple years ago for a cool 10 million–the repair was to save the river-and the salmon in it- from the bridge. True story). It drives people crazy that the road doesn’t connect to “anything”. I personally don’t think we need anymore road connected to it at all. The truth is, there is limited private developable land where it ends, and that is why it is so called “nowhere”. I think it connects to a beautiful place. And, it is a very cool bridge.
oops! AKM Please feel free to remove first post and this one. My internet hiccuped and it looked as tho the first post didn’t take. Sorry.
AKM said: “a really long pain in the neck car ride that goes up the Inlet and wraps around and down the other side.”
not from AK so this is outsider opinion, my first choice anytime would be do the least environmental impact project, plan ahead and plan smart but preserve what is unique, don’t cave, question oppositions motives, follow the money. To build an expensive bridge, which will spred urban sprawl, smacks of money, who will $ benefit by it, who had this vision, who put themselves in place to benefit by it…….. my gut would be go with a ferry.
Keep your uniqueness and pristine wonder. Don’t let commercial development go unchecked. Look to previous models for your future outcome. Plan carefully, it’s worth it. Don’t let big money bully for something you’ll regret later. Kinda reminds me of mining impacts.
Would someone please explain driving inconvenience, the time span, some pics perhaps.
First off, the highway from the valley to Anchorage resembles a pair of tire stud cut canals, or ditches, which are deadly dangerous and need repair …and then to think that will also be the situation going down the already deadly Knik-Goose Bay road to the potential bridge. Lessee, bottomless bouncy clay for a foundation, shifty silt. earthquakes, high winds, ice and so forth…are they serious? When on paper, in 2 dimensions, anything is doable…the real conditions are not taken into consideration…I would never want to be caught in that middle of that bridge in a winter wind and ice storm. And then to consider whose land is that bridge is going to end up on, you can bet it’s some high falutin’ entity…AND THEN we could’ve built a dozen bridges or more for the money lost in bad permanent fund investments last year…It’s time for Alaskans to take a LONG look at it’s follies and start making the best use of it’s possibilities, high speed rail(mag-lev), ferries, alternative energy projects…quit wasting time and money on feasibility studies and big pipe dreams and go local, appropriate technology and projects for a cleaner, saner, safer, future. (LOTS of jobs there)