Download this page as a MS Word Document

What is the Knik Arm Bridge? The Knik Arm Bridge mega-project would consist of a toll bridge across Cook Inlet’s Knik Arm from Anchorage to Point MacKenzie and numerous miles of access roads on both sides of the bridge. To avoid passing through military land, the Knik Arm Bridge and Toll Authority (KABATA) chose a bridge access route through the historic Government Hill neighborhood of Anchorage. To keep costs down, KABATA picked a bridge design consisting of an 8,200 foot bridge attached to a mile of gravel-supported, offshore causeway (rather than a longer bridge and little or no gravel-supported causeway).  The Knik Arm Bridge likely will cost $639 million for its first phase and $504 million for its second phase,¹, i.e., vastly more than most Alaska road projects. Currently the state is contracting for a third-party cost estimate.

KABATA currently is soliciting private investors to pay for the unfunded portions of the Knik Arm Bridge.  These investors will make money from the toll revenue ($10 roundtrip), while the state would receive toll revenue only with extraordinarily high traffic counts even though it would fund substantial portions of the bridge and its access roads.  To date, KABATA has spent over $40 million and it is extremely unclear if tolls alone will be able to fund the building of the bridge and its access roads, especially given national and international reductions in available credit.

What is Needed?  The Palin Administration should not support the Knik Arm Bridge until the Administration and the legislature assess fiscal and other concerns related to the project, and ensure that the proposed Public-Private Partnership contains adequate protections for the state, affected communities, and the public.  This requires:

1) A technical and financial audit of KABATA’s cost estimates including rigorous analysis of bridge trip estimates.  Wilbur Smith Associates showed that for current residents, only those living in the sparsely-populated area west of Wasilla and in rural areas near Point MacKenzie (i.e., not including the Mat-Su population centers of Wasilla and Palmer) would experience time-savings using the bridge².

2) Legislative hearing(s) to analyze the financial trade-offs (i.e., for other transportation projects) and other concerns associated with the Knik Arm Bridge project including the use of a cheaper, multi-modal non-bridge alternative to connect Anchorage and the Mat-Su Borough, the impacts the bridge may have on beluga whales, the US Army Corps of Engineers’ concerns about Port of Anchorage siltation due to the bridge, impacts on the Government Hill neighborhood, potential property tax increases, likely increases in construction costs, etc.

3) Modify KABATA’s statute, AS 19.75, so it:

i.    Allows the public to comment on investor submittals and requires the legislature to vote on the Public-Private Partnership contract before it is finalized (similar to the AGIA statute);

ii.    Limits the concession length to 30 years; and,

iii.    Specifies toll increases via an inflation-based formula.

What is a Cheaper, Multi-Modal Non-Bridge Alternative?  To connect the Mat-Su Borough and Anchorage and alleviate traffic congestion on the Glenn Highway, a less expensive alternative consists of commuter / cargo rail, ferries from Anchorage to Point MacKenzie, increases in carpooling, vanpooling, and traffic management (e.g., congestion pricing, faster accident response, bus rapid transit during peak hours) on the Glenn Highway, and improving public transit within Anchorage to ensure adequate transportation capability exists within the city.

Downloads:
The Knik Arm “Bridge to Nowhere”: A High-Risk Investment Choice-March 2, 2007: A Report Developed by the Alaska Transportation Priorities Project

Endorsed by: Alaska Center for the Environment, Alaska Conservation Alliance, Alaska Public Interest Research Group, Cook Inletkeeper, Government Hill Community Council

Abstract: The proposed Knik Arm Bridge project poses a serious risk for private investors, with large uncertainties in project costs, funding, permitting, and liability. This report documents those uncertainties.