The struggle to connect Alaska’s Capital City to the North American road system has been underway for decades. Proposals to link Juneau with the highway grid have included all possible extremes — from a highway up the west side of Lynn Canal, to routes over the mountains into British Columbia to the one that was sensibly arrived at several years ago by the Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF) as the best option.
The Lynn Canal Highway would travel up the east side of the main waterway north of Juneau to a point on the Katzeheen River, where a ferry would take cars, their drivers, and walk-on passengers to either Skagway or Haines. This route was chosen after years and years of studies, public testimony, and careful consideration of the relative costs and benefits of all alternatives. The formal document that chose this route was the Record of Decision issued by the Federal Highway Administration (FHA) in April of 2006, and two months later the necessary permits were issued.
Despite the excruciatingly lengthy and meticulous process undertaken to arrive at the point of beginning work on the Lynn Canal Highway, all along some have continued to argue that this route isn’t the right one. These critics say that it doesn’t make sense to build a highway north to a ferry terminal, and I agree that it is not the ideal plan. The ideal plan would be to build the road right on through into Skagway, so drivers could easily come and go from Juneau without having to bother with even a short ferry ride.
Unfortunately, residents of Skagway who are adamantly opposed to the idea of a road to Juneau allied with other die-hard opponents of ground access to the Capital City, and used the recreational designation of small amount of land south of Skagway to frustrate the inclusion of a highway’s passage across this acreage in the plan that stands before us today. I have a hard time believing that most who say they just don’t support a Lynn Canal Highway that runs north to Katzeheen don’t want any road connecting Juneau to the rest of the world, anywhere, anyhow, or at any time in the future. They can’t use this argument in legal briefings, but it’s what informs their actions and constitutes their true agenda.
The forces that want Juneau to remain eternally unconnected to these communities that are just not that far away filed a federal lawsuit to stop work on the Juneau Access Project in the U.S. District Court for Alaska. Their argument was primarily procedural, that DOT&PF and the FHA ought to have more thoroughly considered the possibility of the alternative of not building the highway, and instead just allocating more Alaska Marine Highway System (AMHs) ferries to shuttle Alaskans and other travelers up and down Lynn Canal. Sadly, the District Court bought this flawed argument; perhaps in the context of the complex web of federal legal requirements for this project the ruling could make some shred of sense. But in the cold hard light of day and simply using one’s common sense, it was the wrong decision, because DOT&PF and the FHA did consider all the alternatives fully and completely.
The only way to allocate more ferries to Lynn Canal routes would be to take them away from the rest of the Alaska Marine Highway System route-map. More ships and sailings to allow for more frequent and convenient access to Juneau, Haines, and Skagway would mean fewer sailings to other communities elsewhere. These might be Valdez, or Unalaska, or Petersburg, but in order to make Juneau more accessible, some other towns are going to have to sacrifice the use of big blue boats if we’re to have more.
The state appealed the district court ruling to the 9th Circuit, and unfortunately two of the three judges that heard the appeal decided to uphold the lower court. Once again, the false argument that enough effort was not put into picking the present Lynn Canal route carried the day. It must be extremely frustrating for DOT&PF that its extraordinary efforts are rejected for not being adequate, but the state isn’t giving up.
In June, Alaska’s Attorney General formally petitioned for review of the erroneous decision of the three-judge panel by the full 9th Circuit Court of Appeal. The 9th Circuit is widely known as the most frequently reversed appellate court in the nation, and this is very much an instance where it was mistaken once again. The state’s Petition for Panel Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Review is extremely well-written and ought to convince any reasonable person that more than enough consideration and description of non-construction alternatives took place to satisfy every applicable federal law. If the state doesn’t get the full 9th Circuit to make the right choice, I trust that the matter will eventually will go the U.S. Supreme Court, where one can only hope logic will prevail.
• Brown is an attorney who lives in Juneau.
Comments (31)
Add commentUntil we can force the
Until we can force the regresives to the back bench, we are not likely to see PROGRESS on the road out, on high paying PRIVATE sector jobs, or a accountable education system. With the statist (welfare worshipers) in charge, it is little wonder our economy is a disaster
All The Same Folks
The same folks who want a road to nowhere also want to go to Mars. Don't forget your space helmet!
The Ultimate Pork Project
I'd imagine that the dollars spent per projected user mile on this route would set a new world record. Such a road wouldn't " connect us to the rest of the world", it'd be a hostile intrusion into a tiny community that is also extremely isolated by distances.
The billion dollar road
Ben Brown says : "The only way to allocate more ferries to Lynn Canal routes would be to take them away from the rest of the Alaska Marine Highway System route-map."
Yet somehow he and the DOT magicians can conjure up $1,000,000,000 to build the road, and then an absurd amount of money to maintain a road that will transit many geological hazards and slide zones.
Think what will be taken away from the rest of Alaska for that- and think how many ferries could be built and operated for the same amount of dough- or less.
very well explained
Good job Ben. The AMHS does a very good job of providing the transportation it can in all areas it serves but cannot simply serve the demand to and from Juneau. Ratfish, you are relying on bad information and should read the purpose and need of the eis.
People are not exactly chomping at the bit to come here.
Coming to Juneau for other Alaska residents is a punishment not a pleasure. It is people who want to get OUT without spending too much money who want the road.
How does this road help people who do not have cars to drive 100 + miles to get to the ferry terminal? Oh, wait, never mind them, this road is for the haves, not the have-nots.
The people have voted. Everyone who does not agree with you is WRONG and not even SENSIBLE.
Those of us opposed to THIS road may or may not agree that a road out of here in some form is wanted. I am opposed to this particular road mainly because it is a road to nowhere.
Just build the damn thing!
It's never gonna get any cheaper
the 9th Circuit
Courts are to uphold the law. A bunch of activists misrepresenting the legal system needs to be abolished. Any judge acting in official duty purposely using their position to stop legal activities needs to be accountable. Any judges decisions that are overturned must pay the cost and punitive damage of fighting their misrepresenting the law.
Never Cheaper
With what money? The nation is broke.
In any event, the odds of the Alaska Legislature appropriating the funding for the partial road up the east side of Lynn Canal is about the same as the US Supreme Court accepting cert of this case and deciding that the federal judge was wrong.
Road
All the commenting to the courts, and all the complaining by those that want the road is futiel! The road will never happen!
The Law
Is it possible the judge in this case (a conservative judge who, BTW, was appointed with the approval of the Republican Senators from Alaska), got it right?
Is it possible that the 9th Circuit, in upholding the conservative judge's decision that DOT mucked up the decision making process related to ramming the road through, based their decision on facts, law and reason?
Could the author of this "opinion" piece be playing to emotional sentiments and skipping over obvious financial reality here?
This is the modern world so everyone is entitled to an opinion even if disconnected from reality but magical thinking and rhetoric based on emotions will not likely make the road go.
Shame on you, Ben Brown.
The benefits of the road will never come close to justify the cost. We are approaching the end of cheap oil, the country is seriously broke, and a few clueless people want the government, who is just two weeks away from financial devaluation, to spend a billion bucks on a road so they can spend $500.00 or more on fuel this weekend so they can take their family on a road trip. I think most people who want the road are just plain bored. These were the same people who wanted to spend $100,000,000.00 on a North Douglas Crossing so they could take 15 minutes off their commute to the ski area about 10 times a year.
What is wrong with this picture?
Part of the problem is, there are many people in Juneau, raised on entitlements, who think the Government is just another word for free money. Many of these people are actually employed by the government. Boy, do you have a lot to learn. You cannot wake up fast enough, pal. The house is burning down and you are asleep in the top floor bedroom.
Nothing new in this argument.
Nothing new in this argument. It's the same old rhetoric couched in Ben Brown's florid adjectives. There's still a mountain in the way. Eloquently blaming the opposition isn't going to move it.
This is ridiculous
The ferry system discriminates against the middle and lower economic wage earners as it is too expensive to be practical.
The ferry works for high wage earners without families and out of state residnets on a vacation.
It's shameful that those opposed to the road don't care about the real workers in our community. Try to take a ferry with a family of four on the salary of a restaurant worker, box store emplyee or laborer.
Of course those that oppose the road probably just expect us to fly to Hawaii like they do with a "let em eat cake" attitude.
Build the road!
I'd rather drive 100 miles north and spend 15 minutes on a ferry to get to Skagway instead of driving 10 miles north to the Auke Bay ferry terminal and spending 6 hours (and twice the money) to get to Skagway.
Driving there would be cheaper than a ferry.
Tunnel under the glacier/slide areas, and you will NEVER have to worry about them getting ya! Problem solved.
The road could be built at the same cost of adding about five new ferries. Once the road is built, the only costs are routine maintenance. Once we buy new ferries, they will die sooner or later, and we'll need more ferries.
Build the damn road.
Make Juneau a better place
Build the road....
Move the capital
Concerned & Jo
Take a deep breath. This isn't about your personal preference or individual finances.
The issue of whether the road is to be or not to be essentially revolves around whether the Alaska Legislature is willing to take a huge amount of federal highway funding that comes from places like Ohio and New York and spend those federal dollars on a road part way up Lynn Canal instead of Anchorage, Fairbanks, Palmer, Soldotna, Bethel and a number of other places in our state.
It is increasingly clear that the folks in Ohio, New York and most of the other states that pay the vast majority of federal highway taxes are tired of supporting Alaska. Fill in the blank here _______________________ with any number of factors for why the folks in Ohio, New York and many other states are tired of shipping off their dough to Alaska in disproportionate amounts. Plus the country is broke if you haven't noticed and there is a lot less federal highway floating around for the politicians to spend willy nilly.
It is also pretty obvious to anyone that spends more than 15 minutes during any given legislative session that the Senators and Representatives from almost all parts of Alaska have figured out better ways to spend the diminishing federal highway dollars than on a road that runs part way up Lynn Canal and stops. You can fill in the blank
here _____________________ with your favorite theory on why most elected officials in most areas of Alaska are more interested in building or fixing highway projects closer to their homes. I have found that many elected officials in other parts of Alaska actually have rational reasons for not thinking a partial road up Lynn Canal is the greatest thing since the construction of the Appian Way. Some of them believe, (believe it or not), that putting scarce funding towards roads with huge safety issues is a priority. Ever drive down to Seward from Anchorage? Give it a try someday and you'll get a feel for why some folks think safety issues in other parts of Alaska might take priority over a inconvenient partial road in Southeast Alaska that is very expensive and has low economic potential is in play. Some legislators are convinced that there are road projects with significantly better cost/benefit ratios than the Lynn Canal partial road. Sure, some of them are just interested in building projects closer to home but most understand the Lynn Canal partial road is Juneau's annual tempest in a teapot.
Where is the money going to come from to build this project? Can Alaska afford to pay for the road? Is there political will to appropriate the costs to build the Lynn Canal road at the expense of many other projects throughout Alaska? And who would really benefit to a significant degree from construction of a partial road up Lynn Canal, anyway? Sure, it might be marginally cheaper for folks with cars that want to travel out of Juneau but is that enough to justify spending hundreds of millions on a partial project?
The tooth fairy isn't going to drop 300 or 400 million bucks on the Lynn Canal partial road anytime soon. Until then, see you on the ferry.
The road to prosperity, trade...reversing population decline
The Department of Labor predicts another 10,000 folks will leave Southeast Alaska in the next decade and we will have another round of redistricting. Sad fact, sad trend...see below
http://www.labor.state.ak.us/trends/dec10.pdf
If we continue to do the same...stall by study...promote anti-development attitudes and promote economic stagnation behavior...we should not expect a different result from our SE continuing population decine. Unfortunately, we have many in our midst who would welcome the lost economic opportunity and a wholesale drop in their home values (check out home prices in Wrangell for comparison) that result with population declines. These same anti-road persuasions believe that with our continued SE loss of population that up north legislators will continue to subsidize ferries for our dwindling population and pay for ever increasing fuel increases (52% increase in last 5 years)...quite a foolish risk with less SE representatives and senators to support our dying SE population.
Further, a transmission line from Juneau to Haines could help drop the rate of power in Haines and Skagway since their electric rate is twice what Juneau pays...another economic benefit of the road based transmission line that is never discussed.
There is always a pending "move the capital" fight. Bank on it and with less SE legislators...it will be harder and harder to kill in committees.
If we build the road, we take away a good argument from the move the capital mafia. We also free up existing ferries to serve other SE communities (improve their service...how nice), and help reverse our population trend by creating new economic opportunities in tourism, trade and transportation services.
Ben has got it right. Consider that we even have sitting CBJ Assembly members leaving town and contributing to our regional population loss.
Road is a psycho boomer project
Yeah that's a real national priority to add another half a billion in red ink give you another ferry terminal a hundred miles out the road. What for? To connect to the middle of nowhere on the Alcan ?
Crazy.
A railroad might make sense if (If!) it connected with another existing railroad but the Canuks have never built one west and I don't think 'commerce' with a socialist on the teat government town is going to be enough of a draw to make one now.
This is just another fool idea that government workers and environmentalists are paid from their socialist keepers to waste their time making paper on.
Really?
Lets be frank, this project will be a short term boom to a few construction companies (maybe local, maybe not), equipment sales and lease companies (maybe local, maybe not), and the State DOT. Is that worth a half billion dollars in both Fed and State funds given the hole we're in as a country?? I don't know. I'm having a had time saying yes to that question.
Thanks
Thanks to Joe Geldhof for the doses of common sense. Mr. Brown is a nice fella, but his grasp of reality is questionable. Also, he should reveal that he's a member of the Parnell Administration and let us know if he's speaking for the governor.
joe geldhof
does not equal common sense. hes the marine union guy and is supporting their view that the road would take union jobs. Brown isnt a member of the parnell administration. Yeah, lets build a railroad, a ferry system on wheels. Lots of rhetoric and misinformation, read the record of decision for the eis and become informed.
No one wants to come "TO" Juneau.
Building the road will not have any effect on the capital move issue. I would not be opposed to building a road down the Taku River if we have need for a road at all, although the argument that the cost isn't justified still exists.
Juneau just isn't a travel destination if you're not on a cruise ship, and having a road is not going to make people want to come here.
I don't even think Haines and Skagway residents would drive down here to shop at Costco, you do have to pay to shop there, and you don't know what they will or will not have when you get there, and the cost of gas can be put towards shipping charges to buying exactly what you want, how much you want, and exactly when you want it, online.
And what, exactly, would attract Alaska residents to drive to Juneau besides shopping at Costco? People who LIVE in Juneau don't want to drive to Juneau unless they absolutely have to.
The road is for people, who have good running cars that they can afford to own and maintan, to have a cheaper way out of town. NOTHING MORE.
Maybe some land can be developed out there and give a reason to the road's existence, but it seems to me if our population is dwindling at this time we don't exactly need this road right now.
Why spend a billion bucks to drive to Juneau?
Wow - I never thought I would say this -but I agree with -Ich Rauche-
Who would come to Juneau, and why? There are not any superior shopping opportunities...
I feel that very few Juneau people would actually use the road if it was built. Everybody has to be back to work on Monday morning and to spend more than 500 bucks on fuel just to drive all weekend seems futile. The people who would enjoy it the most would be the most destructive - the roughnecks who want to go drinking, driving, and shooting in a area where the law is far away.
Record of Decision in the EIS
Channelview------Sure, read the ROD and the entire EIS, for that matter. I have. I also read the entire decision dated February 13, 2011 by John W. Sedwick, the federal judge that found the State of Alaska's EIS and ROD in violation of the law. Did you??
Reading all the documents it is obvious why the judge found the State of Alaska's decision making inadequate as a matter of law. A conservative judge, based on the facts and law, found that the State of Alaska made a hash of the economic and environmental review process required by law. The ROD was nothing more than wishful thinking in support of a politically preordained result. No surprisingly, the judge decided to follow the law instead of the political hatchet job embodied in the ROD.
That the judge's decision was a disappointment to the road true believers is not surprising. We live in a culture where being able to jump into an automobile or truck and toodle around at will is practically a default setting. Plus we live in a political era where magical thinking and hopeful rhetoric routinely pass for genuine analysis, which is one of the reasons the country is broke. Pick your poison here, whether it is WMD magical thinking or the poltics of hope offered by the next guy. It's all pretty much a horror story anymore from the poltical caste.
The hard reality is that the entire pretext for building a very expensive road part way up Lynn Canal is probably not even true at this juncture, even if it ever was. The supposed justification for building the expensive road part way up Lynn Canal was a vast unmet demand for access on the part of the public. As a matter of fact (as the judge pointed out in the decision), shifts in deployment of the ferries have apparently meet some of the demand. And the supposed demand (both present and anticipated future demand for traffic in the Lynn Canal corridor), is not increasing. In any event, the ferries sailing in Lynn Canal are not packed with vehicles and passengers; there simply isn't a genuine demand for increased access. The shift in how people travel, the price of fuel, changes in demographics and other factors probably mean there will never be sufficient economic justification to build a road part way up Lynn Canal.
To be sure, individuals who think utilization of roads are "free" will continue to agitate for road construction. In that sense, there is a huge political demand by a discreet group of potential transportation users for a "free" road into and out of Juneau. If money were free and the United States didn't have any environmental laws, building a road would be easy. But even if money was not an issue and we had no environmental laws, construction of a road wouldn't fundamentally alter Juneau's transportation use patters. Most people and items that require fast transport would still arrive in Juneau via airplane. And most heavy objects, including fuel and food from Outside, would still arrive by barge. Juneau is fundamentally and will likely continue to be a barge and aviation community even if a road were magically built tomorrow. Really, who's going to shove the 4 kids in the Vista Cruiser and travel down to Seattle for the weekend with mom and the dog anymore? Who even has 4 kids or the same spouse anymore, not to mention the time to travel via road anymore? Sure, folks would like the option of cruising out of town a little bit further and at no personal cost (other than gas and wear and tear on the personal vehicle), but that doesn't change the fundamental economic & political equation that is working against a partial road up Lynn Canal.
As it turns out, there probably isn't sufficient demand to justify road construction, there isn't political will to fund the road & there certainly isn't enough money to build the road. In the end, it isn't even America's environmental laws that doomed the road -- it's lack of financial resources, straight forward economic analysis and politics that have doomed road construction. Of course, in the way of modern politics, a small set of true believers will continue to argue that a road makes sense and toss rocks at anyone offering a different view point or commonsense.
Read the decision and the ROD. Reality still trumps rhetoric, even in Alaska, land of the midnight sun and magical thinking during the era of oil wealth. It turns out that even with stupendous amounts of oil wealth, expensive projects with no genuine economic return are not affordable, even via the political appropriation process.
See you on the ferry.
Since 1959
My grandpa used to have one of those picture maps of Alaska in his house with little cartoons of people, animals, plants, etc found in the regions they were homed. What is most interesting to me is that this map had all of the major roadways on it, PLUS all of the proposed roads. Guess what? The Juneau to Skagway route was one of the proposed roads. The map's copywrite date was 1959.
Not a lot of progress has been made on the road issue so far, huh?
Daffy
Not on the Lynn Canal road. Other roads have been built in Alaska since 1959. Some, like the proposed road to Nome will likely never be built.
Kudos to All of your comments.
I have to say that each and everyone of you have made valid points and as an outsider I can see the dilemna there ... I reside in Taxachusetts and we're still paying for the Big Dig which was a essentially a shorter drive to the airport via a tunnel and there's been some imperfections that have cost a few lives and it cost more than a fortune what with overcosts and the like and I can just imagine what would happen there when the government funds dry out .... and if the proposed road takes you too short where you have to grab a ferry anyways ... then why build it ??? Someone else mentioned putting that money to other uses around Alaska. I agree with that ... And what about the afore mentioned road to BC ???
I read no details about that. I can appreciate your thoughts on being able to "Get out of Dodge" now and then as long as it's affordable for everyone ... that should be the bottom line ...My plans are to retire in Juneau relatively soon and I look forward to discussing this issue again amongst My New and Old Friends .... Later Ron :-)
@chipthoma
as usual, you are truly out of touch.
build the road
all you non-raoders or greenies can just stay put. if say build the road and when the natural disaster happens, the pro-roaders can drive out and you can stay here. this road would help in many ways, i.e., shopping in canada or other places and to build another ferry just for the short run trip is insane and would cost a lot more than the road itself. it is too bad there are so many selfish, self-serving people here that do not look to the long term and only short term instead. we are going to loose the capitol in the next election if this road is not built. the cost of air fares alone due to the gas nonsense is out of site for many on fixed or low incomes. having a road to drive on in and out of juneau makes a lot more sense with campgrounds along the way or places to pull off and enjoy the southeast scenery. whether the road be up taku river or wherever it is built - i say let us proceed with it. some of you narrow-minded people are what hold progression up. no new things would ever be made with your attitude.
there are more benefits to having a road, even if it meant making a tunnel several miles long through a mountain to prevent the avalanche dangers than not having one and having to depend on the blue canoes which are not always reliable - sorry ferry people - but the truth is the truth.
also in emergencies, death in the family, etc., the only way out is airplane and we are held hostage as a one airline town and i am sure the airline takes great delight in charging higher prices to get in and out of here since there is no competition. i think alaska air is responsible for driving Delta and other competing airlines out of the competition. as juneau grows, there is certainly need for another airline who is welling to lower prices to also drive alaska air's prices down.
we all need to be more positive about the road and the many benefits it will afford. think about it???