AARoads Forum

While I encourage more individual threads about Alaska projects, this thread can also be used for ease of access and discussion, particularly of statewide/regional importance.

M7.2 (now M7.0) quake near Anchorage this morning; KFQD reports that at least one on-ramp along Minnesota Expwy. has "collapsed," but no details yet.

There's apparently also a collapse on the southbound Glenn Hwy., which is closed.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.graytvinc.com%2Fimages%2F810%2A544%2Fearthquake%2Bzoom.PNG&hash=aab87d5351d0079165bd2a10c4dfafb353e2e6cb)

Mod note: non-roads related earthquake discussion is here (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=24026).

Alaska DOT&PF's website has a page reporting updates on how the earthquake has and hasn't affected major roads:

http://dot.alaska.gov/earthquake2018/

Main items:

-- Seward Highway (AK 1 south of Anchorage) briefly closed several miles south of Anchorage due to rockslide, though it has since reopened. No mention of detour, so for a time there may have been no alternate route between Anchorage and the Kenai Peninsula

-- Glenn Highway freeway (AK 1 northeast of Anchorage) closed in at least one direction at Eagle River, detour available on local roads in Eagle River

-- One ramp of Glenn (AK 1)/Parks (AK 3) interchange closed, with detour to Palmer; other major damage to interchange

Highways more distant from Anchorage seem to be largely unaffected.

Some damage to Anchorage International Airport and closures of some roads to airport, but a reduced schedule of incoming and outgoing flights has resumed.

OSM intimates that closures on Minnesota Dr and AK 1 are still in effect; the link in Oscar's post updates to Dec 13. Any further updates since?

Anchorage Daily News reports on the start of work to build more than 600 miles of winter roads on the North Slope -- not just for drilling and mining, but also for public use to link several isolated communities to Utqiagvik (Barrow) or the Dalton Highway.
https://www.adn.com/business-economy/energy/2019/02/02/companies-stretch-frozen-roads-across-alaskas-north-slope-as-hunt-for-oil-ramps-up/

QuoteIn a separate effort, the North Slope Borough plans to connect four remote communities by snow road to the state's highway system, expanding last year's program, officials said.

Once the snow is packed down enough, pilot vehicles will guide trucks and cars through a wintry moonscape subject to blinding whiteouts and 40-below temperatures.

The borough-maintained roads will give residents an alternative to costly flights, and access to cheap big-city stores.

(https://www.adn.com/resizer/LBPSmNyYcnbc9wsYaTWaSpUDErE=/992x0/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-adn.s3.amazonaws.com/public/4AUREFU6HVGVBCTP3CTRSQ4II4.jpg)

Anchorage Daily News has this look at building this season's 200-plus-mile ice road in and around Bethel, for use by the general public. Thanks to improved technology, there is speculation that this season's road could reach all the way to the Bering Sea.

https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/rural-alaska/2019/01/27/ice-road-along-kuskokwim-river-a-blessing-for-villages/

(https://www.adn.com/resizer/YTZGqG2-0cQyQd-15WGTBxQgCkM=/992x0/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-adn.s3.amazonaws.com/public/FYABJR4OJRDA3EZ3JBRTE6ULV4.jpg)

Quote from: Bickendan on February 03, 2019, 08:34:58 AM
OSM intimates that closures on Minnesota Dr and AK 1 are still in effect; the link in Oscar's post updates to Dec 13. Any further updates since?

Alaska 511 (more reliable than OSM, IMO) shows no closures anywhere on those routes, just varying degrees of winter driving conditions (from "good" to "difficult", but mainly "fair" in the Anchorage area).

Alaska DOT is implementing "lighting curfews" on relatively urban segments of some major highways, to use less electricity (conversion of lights to LEDs is also in the works):

http://dot.alaska.gov/comm/pressbox/arch_2019/PR19-0017.shtml

The plan is not novel, but the term "lighting curfew" is new to me.

^^^ Is this because they simply can't afford it or are they trying to conserve to be environmentally friendly?

In either case, I am surprised we haven't seen at attempt from any city to install a network of motion sensors along streetlights to active them as they detect movement. I don't know how viable it would be but it doesn't seem like it would take all that much. With the smart technology they could "talk"  to each other and detect a car traveling activating lights along the cars predicted path in the sight line of the driver for safety.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 16, 2019, 09:38:11 PM
In either case, I am surprised we haven't seen at attempt from any city to install a network of motion sensors along streetlights to active them as they detect movement. I don't know how viable it would be but it doesn't seem like it would take all that much. With the smart technology they could "talk"  to each other and detect a car traveling activating lights along the cars predicted path in the sight line of the driver for safety.

Even with a vehicle moving at ~25 mph, the distance ahead that you want the driver to be able to see for safety is going to be greater than the range of a typical motion sensor. So this won't work without a more complex (read: more expensive) system to turn on lights further away from where motion is being detected.

As for "smart technology" and predicting the path of cars... no. Ordinary motion sensors, be they of the infrared variety or the ultrasonic variety, are not capable of determining what direction something is moving in. All they do is trigger when they detect a change in the feedback signal that exceeds a set threshold. To do something like this would require more advanced hardware and software that would be expensive... more expensive than the energy savings could justify, certainly if the lights have already been changed to LED.

You also have the issue that lights turning on and off in the driver's field of view presents a potential distraction, which of course is bad for safety.

Not to mention that street lights continually turning on and back off again over the course of the night may disrupt people's sleep.

Quote from: Duke87 on April 18, 2019, 12:37:51 AM
Even with a vehicle moving at ~25 mph, the distance ahead that you want the driver to be able to see for safety is going to be greater than the range of a typical motion sensor. So this won't work without a more complex (read: more expensive) system to turn on lights further away from where motion is being detected.

Not that it's exactly the same thing, but part of the Union Pacific Railroad multi-use trail in Henderson NV has lighting that's activated by motion sensors. The lights aren't completely dim when nobody's around, but when a cyclist approaches at night, the next few lights get brighter until the cyclist (or, presumably, pedestrian) has passed. It works because there aren't many different paths someone can take.

Quote from: Kniwt on April 18, 2019, 12:45:17 AM

Quote from: Duke87 on April 18, 2019, 12:37:51 AM
Even with a vehicle moving at ~25 mph, the distance ahead that you want the driver to be able to see for safety is going to be greater than the range of a typical motion sensor. So this won't work without a more complex (read: more expensive) system to turn on lights further away from where motion is being detected.

Not that it's exactly the same thing, but part of the Union Pacific Railroad multi-use trail in Henderson NV has lighting that's activated by motion sensors. The lights aren't completely dim when nobody's around, but when a cyclist approaches at night, the next few lights get brighter until the cyclist (or, presumably, pedestrian) has passed. It works because there aren't many different paths someone can take.

Another similarity: The University I work at has retrofit lighting in the parking garages to LED with individual motion sensors. The lights are usually dim when turned on, then each fixture brightens for a time as it individually senses motion.

With the garages at my work, the light fixtures are about 10-12 feet off the ground. I looked at a couple of spots along the above-mentioned trail in Street View, and the light poles seem to be no more than 15 feet tall. Both seem to be well in the range of typical motion detection. I'd guess an overhead motion detector on a street light fixture would be closer to 30-35 feet off the ground, which seems like it'd take a more sophisticated unit.

This is an odd tangent for Alaska but I can see this working in tandem with connected vehicles. The lights will know you're coming.

Any recent news about the Mid-Region Access who was planned to link Ketchikan, Wrangell and Petersburg with BC-37/Cassiar highway? http://dot.alaska.gov/sereg/projects/mid_region/index.shtml

Quote from: Stephane Dumas on May 21, 2019, 02:48:52 PM
Any recent news about the Mid-Region Access who was planned to link Ketchikan, Wrangell and Petersburg with BC-37/Cassiar highway? http://dot.alaska.gov/sereg/projects/mid_region/index.shtml

The state's current fiscal crisis probably means this project is even deader in the water than it already was.

Quote from: oscar on May 21, 2019, 03:03:56 PM
The state's current fiscal crisis probably means this project is even deader in the water than it already was.

"Than it already was"

So... is the issue that the communities in question don't necessarily want it (a la Cordova)? Or that it'd be too expensive to be worthwhile even if the state had the money?

Quote from: Duke87 on June 04, 2019, 12:42:07 AM

Quote from: oscar on May 21, 2019, 03:03:56 PM
The state's current fiscal crisis probably means this project is even deader in the water than it already was.

"Than it already was"

So... is the issue that the communities in question don't necessarily want it (a la Cordova)? Or that it'd be too expensive to be worthwhile even if the state had the money?

More like British Columbia has been uninterested in and/or hostile to its part of the project.

Quote from: oscar on June 04, 2019, 01:51:25 AM
More like British Columbia has been uninterested in and/or hostile to its part of the project.

Well it'd cost them money while providing little to no benefit to them, so... that's understandable.

Wonder how many miles you could shorten the ferry ride to Juneau by for the same price tag. That'd cut BC out of the picture, thus resolving that problem.

Quote from: Duke87 on June 04, 2019, 04:52:16 PM
Wonder how many miles you could shorten the ferry ride to Juneau by for the same price tag. That'd cut BC out of the picture, thus resolving that problem.

The Federal courts have been hostile to that idea (unjustifiably, IMO), which is was a major factor in the decision to pull the plug. No telling how they'd react to a new highway to BC, especially if it logically followed a river.

Quote from: oscar on June 05, 2019, 06:41:51 PM

Quote from: Duke87 on June 04, 2019, 04:52:16 PM
Wonder how many miles you could shorten the ferry ride to Juneau by for the same price tag. That'd cut BC out of the picture, thus resolving that problem.

The Federal courts have been hostile to that idea (unjustifiably, IMO), which is was a major factor in the decision to pull the plug. No telling how they'd react to a new highway to BC, especially if it logically followed a river.

So... point of clarity, I'm not speaking of the ferry ride from Juneau to Haines/Skagway. Rather, I'm speaking of the ferry ride from Juneau to Wrangell/Petersburg/Ketchikan.

Something like, say, building a road spanning the height of Admirality Island - that'd turn what's currently a 130 mile ferry ride to Petersburg into one 60 mile ferry ride, one short ferry ride only a few miles long, and a road between the two. Build a road on Kupreanof Island and you could get that 60 mile ferry ride down to under 15.

Was this actually considered as a potential alternative before deciding to try to build a road to BC instead?

Quote from: Duke87 on June 05, 2019, 07:35:04 PM
So... point of clarity, I'm not speaking of the ferry ride from Juneau to Haines/Skagway. Rather, I'm speaking of the ferry ride from Juneau to Wrangell/Petersburg/Ketchikan.

Something like, say, building a road spanning the height of Admirality Island - that'd turn what's currently a 130 mile ferry ride to Petersburg into one 60 mile ferry ride, one short ferry ride only a few miles long, and a road between the two. Build a road on Kupreanof Island and you could get that 60 mile ferry ride down to under 15.

Was this actually considered as a potential alternative before deciding to try to build a road to BC instead?

Don't know. I'm not sure planning got that far along.

My hunch (not having dived into the historical records) that you have several scattered segments of AK 7 between Haines and Ketchikan (including in Juneau and Petersburg) because the original pave-the-earth-era plan was to build highways linking them together. The ends of the Petersburg AK 7 segment (especially the south end, in the middle of nowhere) kind of look like logical places for bridges from Mitkof Island to the mainland or to Kupreanof Island.

I wonder if the current ferry strikes might give second thoughts to some people?
https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/2019/07/26/as-strike-continues-ferry-service-stoppage-has-a-big-impact-on-southeast-alaska-communities/

QuoteThe Alaska Marine Highway System's ferry network was halted for a third day Friday as hundreds of workers with the Inlandboatmen's Union of the Pacific continued their strike over contract negotiations with the state.

Marine highway vessels "will not be sailing until further notice,"  the state said on its website. By Thursday afternoon, all the state's ferries were docked.

The shutdown has rendered unusable a crucial artery for moving people and goods around a large span of coastal Alaska. Vessels that move along the marine highway's 3,500-mile route serve more than 35 coastal communities, many of which are not accessible by road. The ferries also carry vehicles and freight.

On Thursday, some people were trying to figure out how to get building supplies and other goods in and out of their towns, said Robert Venables, executive director of Juneau-based economic development group Southeast Conference.

"My phone and email have been blowing up since yesterday,"  he said Thursday. The impact on the Southeast Alaska region is "severe, and it's soon to be dramatically so,"  he said.

The Anchorage Daily News reports on a controversy over a proposed 200-mile mining road that would connect to the Dalton Highway northwest of Fairbanks:
https://www.adn.com/business-economy/2019/09/11/conservationists-and-hunters-denounce-state-financed-mining-road-across-the-northern-alaska-wilderness

QuoteA state proposal to cut a roughly 200-mile mining road through the Northwest Alaska wilderness came under frequent fire at a hearing in Anchorage on Tuesday that launched a series of public meetings statewide.

Hunters condemned the proposed Ambler Road because it would be closed to the public. Conservationists said it would hurt caribou and other wildlife needed by villages in the region.

Close to 20 people spoke against the road. A few people expressed support, saying it would create jobs and state revenue.

The event, organized by the Bureau of Land Management, was the first of 22 public meetings over the next month in Alaska and Washington, D.C. Many of the meetings will be held in villages that could see significant impacts to subsistence hunting, the agency said.

(https://www.adn.com/resizer/QAu4_Ghzl28gzuXicMZjAvluNzE=/1200x0/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-adn.s3.amazonaws.com/public/KW3OH5Y3EBBSFKE3Q6K64T34G4.png)

If the road isn't going to be open to the public, then they can go pound sand, IMO.

Eesh.  Funding is sketchy on this one all around.

The Anchorage Daily News reports that conflicts are escalating over plans to upgrade an interchange on the Seward Highway (AK 1) at Scooter Avenue and Academy Drive.
https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/anchorage/2019/11/18/anchorage-assembly-members-at-odds-with-state-over-road-project/

QuoteSome Anchorage Assembly members are trying to foil a portion of a state highway project nearly 20 years in the making, saying it's a waste of public dollars.

After feeling strong-armed by Alaska Department of Transportation officials, the Assembly members say they are appealing their case to local legislators and have even entertained the idea of building a barricade to thwart the state's efforts.

Assemblyman Forrest Dunbar plans to introduce amendments at Tuesday night's Assembly meeting that could remove initial funding for the project from the proposed bond.

The transportation department wants to connect Academy Drive to Scooter Avenue, south of Dimond Boulevard, by lifting the Seward Highway and building a road underneath. It's part of a larger collection of projects to improve the Seward Highway that have been in the works since the early 2000s.

Project website: http://www.sewardhighway.info

(https://www.adn.com/resizer/CwsJT84z1HOA5TECIrcYbuA6YLQ=/992x0/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-adn.s3.amazonaws.com/public/4VTTBBVZFJAB5LY3SLAJ65DO4Y.jpg)

Looking at Anchorage on streetview, they really need to get on the ball upgrading their freeway network.

AK 1 should have a bypass the entire city directly to the east and be a full freeway.

The Hickle Parkway should have a fully directional interchange with AK 1. Some properties will be needed for this but a stack would minimize that.

AK 3 should be upgraded to a fully controlled access facility through Wasilla.

AK 1 south should be a super two with a jersey barrier all the way to homer. I wouldn't necessarily make it entirely grade separated but it should be limited access for the most part.

Alaska should also really try and poise itself for growth and go big by adding a 4 lane interstate road between Fairbanks and Anchorage and connecting Juneau via fully controlled access super two to its highway system.

I am not from Alaska nor have I ever been... yet. Is it fair to say the state is anti-freeway/development or perhaps just won't allocate the funds?

The first priority for Alaska is to properly fund its Marine Highway system, which is way more essential for connectivity than upgrading the Anchorage-Fairbanks corridor into a freeway.

Quote from: Bruce on January 20, 2020, 06:36:40 PM
The first priority for Alaska is to properly fund its Marine Highway system, which is way more essential for connectivity than upgrading the Anchorage-Fairbanks corridor into a freeway.

Thanks. I will research the proposals of this system tonight.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 20, 2020, 04:55:11 PM
Looking at Anchorage on streetview, they really need to get on the ball upgrading their freeway network.

AK 1 should have a bypass the entire city directly to the east and be a full freeway.

The Hickle Parkway should have a fully directional interchange with AK 1. Some properties will be needed for this but a stack would minimize that.

AK 3 should be upgraded to a fully controlled access facility through Wasilla.

AK 1 south should be a super two with a jersey barrier all the way to homer. I wouldn't necessarily make it entirely grade separated but it should be limited access for the most part.

Alaska should also really try and poise itself for growth and go big by adding a 4 lane interstate road between Fairbanks and Anchorage and connecting Juneau via fully controlled access super two to its highway system.

I am not from Alaska nor have I ever been... yet. Is it fair to say the state is anti-freeway/development or perhaps just won't allocate the funds?

It would be fair to say the other states don't want to contribute that many unnecessary billions upon billions of dollars for something Alaska can't afford and doesn't need?

Also, I missed it, but when did Minnesota Drive get renamed?

Quote from: Alps on January 20, 2020, 08:15:23 PM
Also, I missed it, but when did Minnesota Drive get renamed?

At least the freeway part of Minnesota Dr., and also part or all of O'Malley Rd. west of AK 1, became the Hickel Parkway sometime in 2013 IIRC.

Quote from: Alps on January 20, 2020, 08:13:52 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 20, 2020, 04:55:11 PM
Looking at Anchorage on streetview, they really need to get on the ball upgrading their freeway network.

AK 1 should have a bypass the entire city directly to the east and be a full freeway.

The Hickle Parkway should have a fully directional interchange with AK 1. Some properties will be needed for this but a stack would minimize that.

AK 3 should be upgraded to a fully controlled access facility through Wasilla.

AK 1 south should be a super two with a jersey barrier all the way to homer. I wouldn't necessarily make it entirely grade separated but it should be limited access for the most part.

Alaska should also really try and poise itself for growth and go big by adding a 4 lane interstate road between Fairbanks and Anchorage and connecting Juneau via fully controlled access super two to its highway system.

I am not from Alaska nor have I ever been... yet. Is it fair to say the state is anti-freeway/development or perhaps just won't allocate the funds?

It would be fair to say the other states don't want to contribute that many unnecessary billions upon billions of dollars for something Alaska can't afford and doesn't need?

Agreed. The state isn't anti-highway, though its environmentalists are particularly noisy, and have blocked major projects such as the Juneau Access project that would have shortened (not eliminated) the ferry link to the mainland highway system. Also, while oil prices and revenues are down, and anti-tax politicians are in control, the state just doesn't have money for this stuff.

I think freeway-izing all of AK 3 between Palmer and Fairbanks, and AK 1 down to Homer, would be excessive, especially with the high road construction and maintenance costs in the Arctic, and high earthquake risks in the Anchorage area (which got whacked hard by a 9.2 earthquake in 1964). The other items on the list don't knock my socks off, either.

Quote from: Alps on January 20, 2020, 08:13:52 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 20, 2020, 04:55:11 PM
Looking at Anchorage on streetview, they really need to get on the ball upgrading their freeway network.

AK 1 should have a bypass the entire city directly to the east and be a full freeway.

The Hickle Parkway should have a fully directional interchange with AK 1. Some properties will be needed for this but a stack would minimize that.

AK 3 should be upgraded to a fully controlled access facility through Wasilla.

AK 1 south should be a super two with a jersey barrier all the way to homer. I wouldn't necessarily make it entirely grade separated but it should be limited access for the most part.

Alaska should also really try and poise itself for growth and go big by adding a 4 lane interstate road between Fairbanks and Anchorage and connecting Juneau via fully controlled access super two to its highway system.

I am not from Alaska nor have I ever been... yet. Is it fair to say the state is anti-freeway/development or perhaps just won't allocate the funds?

It would be fair to say the other states don't want to contribute that many unnecessary billions upon billions of dollars for something Alaska can't afford and doesn't need?

Fair point, but what benefits Alaska will ultimately benefit the USA. I am not suggesting that every one of those items should start construction tomorrow. I would prioritize Anchorage first, then connecting Anchorage to Fairbanks better, than upgrading AK 1. The need might not be there today, but the potential is there.

Other countries with climates similar like Norway are able to build sophisticated freeway networks. While that isn't necessarily an apples to apples comparison, it shows it can be done. I predict Alaska is a sleeping giant figuratively and literally. If temperatures continue to warm(why do I foresee NE2 responding to this? ;) ) then that will make Alaska even more attractive given its natural beauty and warmer climate.

So far it seems to be the synopsis here is Alaska isn't going anywhere, the odds are against it, therefore it isn't worth investing major infrastructure in. That hasn't stopped the US before.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 20, 2020, 09:25:53 PM
Other countries with climates similar like Norway are able to build sophisticated freeway networks. While that isn't necessarily an apples to apples comparison, it shows it can be done. I predict Alaska is a sleeping giant figuratively and literally. If temperatures continue to warm(why do I foresee NE2 responding to this? ;) ) then that will make Alaska even more attractive given its natural beauty and warmer climate.

NE2 typically responds to people who deny global warming. You're on the other side, so you're fine.

I do see an error in your post, though. Let's see if NE2 can find it.

Quote from: 1 on January 20, 2020, 09:37:19 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 20, 2020, 09:25:53 PM
Other countries with climates similar like Norway are able to build sophisticated freeway networks. While that isn't necessarily an apples to apples comparison, it shows it can be done. I predict Alaska is a sleeping giant figuratively and literally. If temperatures continue to warm(why do I foresee NE2 responding to this? ;) ) then that will make Alaska even more attractive given its natural beauty and warmer climate.

NE2 typically responds to people who deny global warming. You're on the other side, so you're fine.

I do see an error in your post, though. Let's see if NE2 can find it.

I can see the irony in my post so I am sure he will find it!

Well, if it hasn't changed in 30 years, I think we're going to last more than 10.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 20, 2020, 09:25:53 PM
Other countries with climates similar like Norway are able to build sophisticated freeway networks. While that isn't necessarily an apples to apples comparison, it shows it can be done. I predict Alaska is a sleeping giant figuratively and literally. If temperatures continue to warm(why do I foresee NE2 responding to this? ;) ) then that will make Alaska even more attractive given its natural beauty and warmer climate.

So far it seems to be the synopsis here is Alaska isn't going anywhere, the odds are against it, therefore it isn't worth investing major infrastructure in. That hasn't stopped the US before.

Bear in mind that a warmer Alaska also means more mosquitoes.  And your Anchorage-Fairbanks corridor has an AADT less than 2000 (http://akdot.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=7c1e1029fdb64d7a86449d55ef05e21c&extent=-180,54.7188,-127.111,70.3005) (your proposed super-2 has three times as much traffic!).  I would like the freeway segments in Anchorage to be connected to a coherant system and AK 3 upgraded to a freeway through Wasilla, however.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 20, 2020, 09:25:53 PM
what benefits Alaska will ultimately benefit the USA

meh

Perhaps, but what doesn't benefit Alaska will ultimately not benefit the USA.

they get all that oil money they can afford to pay for it

Quote from: texaskdog on January 21, 2020, 02:48:36 PM
they get all that oil money they can afford to pay for it

How much money do you have?  I bet you can afford to buy me a new mattress.  What benefits kphoger benefits the USA.

Quote from: texaskdog on January 21, 2020, 02:48:36 PM
they get all that oil money they can afford to pay for it

The state isn't getting enough oil money, with lower oil prices and production. And it hasn't increased taxes (or siphoned money from the oil-funded Permanent Fund, also an unpopular idea) to offset that.

Quote from: vdeane on January 21, 2020, 01:13:13 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 20, 2020, 09:25:53 PM
Other countries with climates similar like Norway are able to build sophisticated freeway networks. While that isn't necessarily an apples to apples comparison, it shows it can be done. I predict Alaska is a sleeping giant figuratively and literally. If temperatures continue to warm(why do I foresee NE2 responding to this? ;) ) then that will make Alaska even more attractive given its natural beauty and warmer climate.

So far it seems to be the synopsis here is Alaska isn't going anywhere, the odds are against it, therefore it isn't worth investing major infrastructure in. That hasn't stopped the US before.

Bear in mind that a warmer Alaska also means more mosquitoes.  And your Anchorage-Fairbanks corridor has an AADT less than 2000 (http://akdot.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=7c1e1029fdb64d7a86449d55ef05e21c&extent=-180,54.7188,-127.111,70.3005) (your proposed super-2 has three times as much traffic!).  I would like the freeway segments in Anchorage to be connected to a coherant system and AK 3 upgraded to a freeway through Wasilla, however.

Interesting. Thank you for the numbers. I suspected the ADT between the two cities was not that high but didn't realize it was under 2000. I suppose they could just go with a super two setup and plan for an eventual four lane widening in the future as the two cities grow. I did not realize AK 1 south of Anchorage sees that much traffic. Just shows how much I know about Alaska but upon looking at it on Google Maps it has the most disjointed freeway network I have ever seen which is to be expected I suppose.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2020, 04:41:03 PM
I suspected the ADT between the two cities was not that high but didn't realize it was under 2000. I suppose they could just go with a super two setup ...

Why would a highway with less than 2000 ADT need to be a Super 2?

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2020, 04:41:03 PM
... and plan for an eventual four lane widening in the future as the two cities grow.

The population of the city of Anchorage peaked in 2013 and has been slowly declining since then.

The population of the city of Fairbanks peaked in 1993 and hasn't been above 33k since 1994.

Since nobody figured it out... Alaska isn't literally a sleeping giant.

neither is Sarah Palin
[/ne2]

Quote from: kphoger on January 21, 2020, 04:50:02 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2020, 04:41:03 PM
I suspected the ADT between the two cities was not that high but didn't realize it was under 2000. I suppose they could just go with a super two setup ...

Why would a highway with less than 2000 ADT need to be a Super 2?

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2020, 04:41:03 PM
... and plan for an eventual four lane widening in the future as the two cities grow.

The population of the city of Anchorage peaked in 2013 and has been slowly declining since then.

The population of the city of Fairbanks peaked in 1993 and hasn't been above 33k since 1994.

So it can easily be upgraded without much disruptions to traffic when the need is there for a widening. Plus this isn't just any route, it is the main route between the states two largest cities. Though they might be shrinking now that might not always be the case and I suspect it won't. Time will tell I suppose.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2020, 04:57:12 PM
So it can easily be upgraded without much disruptions to traffic when the need is there for a widening.

Are you expecting the ADT to mushroom at some point?

~ or ~

Why on earth should tax dollars go to upgrading a 300-mile highway with less than 2000 ADT, if there is no reason to expect traffic volumes to increase beyond that figure?

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2020, 04:57:12 PM
Plus this isn't just any route, it is the main route between the states two largest cities.

I don't see how that matters.  2000 ADT is 2000 ADT.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2020, 04:57:12 PM
Though they might be shrinking now that might not always be the case and I suspect it won't.

I don't think "might" and "Plutonic Panda suspects" are good reasons to upgrade a highway.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2020, 04:41:03 PM
I suspected the ADT between the two cities was not that high but didn't realize it was under 2000. I suppose they could just go with a super two setup and plan for an eventual four lane widening in the future as the two cities grow.

The overpasses would drive up the cost, with minimal benefit. Far less expensive to add passing lanes here and there. Even that isn't really needed except in the summer, when slow RVs can gum things up.

I've traveled that highway several times. It is one of Alaska's newer highways, and never cried out to me as needing major improvements except perhaps in the Wasilla area (east of there is already four-lane freeway all the way into Anchorage).

It also helps somewhat that the Alaska Railroad provides passenger service between Seward and Fairbanks via Anchorage. That's an option especially for commuters into Anchorage, and tourists.

Quote from: kphoger on January 21, 2020, 05:04:01 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2020, 04:57:12 PM
So it can easily be upgraded without much disruptions to traffic when the need is there for a widening.

Are you expecting the ADT to mushroom at some point?

~ or ~

Why on earth should tax dollars go to upgrading a 300-mile highway with less than 2000 ADT, if there is no reason to expect traffic volumes to increase beyond that figure?

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2020, 04:57:12 PM
Plus this isn't just any route, it is the main route between the states two largest cities.

I don't see how that matters.  2000 ADT is 2000 ADT.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2020, 04:57:12 PM
Though they might be shrinking now that might not always be the case and I suspect it won't.

I don't think "might" and "Plutonic Panda suspects" are good reasons to upgrade a highway.

I get your points though among various things like planning for growth even if currently there isn't much going on doesn't hurt. Safety is another benefit of grade separation and having a solid, fully controlled access facility between the states two largest cities is a win-win all around, IMO. Sure it is what I suspect and I guess we will see where those cities go. Good planning never hurts.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2020, 06:33:46 PM
I get your points though among various things like planning for growth even if currently there isn't much going on doesn't hurt. Safety is another benefit of grade separation and having a solid, fully controlled access facility between the states two largest cities is a win-win all around, IMO. Sure it is what I suspect and I guess we will see where those cities go. Good planning never hurts.

It's not a win-win when money that could be spent on more worthwhile projects gets wasted on upgrading a highway that doesn't need it.

Good planning never hurts, but building things that don't need to be built does hurt.

Quote from: kphoger on January 21, 2020, 08:15:38 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2020, 06:33:46 PM
I get your points though among various things like planning for growth even if currently there isn't much going on doesn't hurt. Safety is another benefit of grade separation and having a solid, fully controlled access facility between the states two largest cities is a win-win all around, IMO. Sure it is what I suspect and I guess we will see where those cities go. Good planning never hurts.

It's not a win-win when money that could be spent on more worthwhile projects gets wasted on upgrading a highway that doesn't need it.

Good planning never hurts, but building things that don't need to be built does hurt.

This was only my vision for Alaska. If what I proposed isn't needed now then it should be planned for, IMO.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2020, 11:01:33 PM

Quote from: kphoger on January 21, 2020, 08:15:38 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2020, 06:33:46 PM
I get your points though among various things like planning for growth even if currently there isn't much going on doesn't hurt. Safety is another benefit of grade separation and having a solid, fully controlled access facility between the states two largest cities is a win-win all around, IMO. Sure it is what I suspect and I guess we will see where those cities go. Good planning never hurts.

It's not a win-win when money that could be spent on more worthwhile projects gets wasted on upgrading a highway that doesn't need it.

Good planning never hurts, but building things that don't need to be built does hurt.

This was only my vision for Alaska. If what I proposed isn't needed now then it should be planned for, IMO.

Please stop injecting your opinion for future unbuilt freeways - that belongs in the Fictional Highways part of the forum. A 2000 AADT on a 2-lane wilderness road does not need any help. Please limit discussion here to actual proposals. Thank you.

Quote from: Alps on January 22, 2020, 12:25:40 AM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2020, 11:01:33 PM

Quote from: kphoger on January 21, 2020, 08:15:38 PM

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2020, 06:33:46 PM
I get your points though among various things like planning for growth even if currently there isn't much going on doesn't hurt. Safety is another benefit of grade separation and having a solid, fully controlled access facility between the states two largest cities is a win-win all around, IMO. Sure it is what I suspect and I guess we will see where those cities go. Good planning never hurts.

It's not a win-win when money that could be spent on more worthwhile projects gets wasted on upgrading a highway that doesn't need it.

Good planning never hurts, but building things that don't need to be built does hurt.

This was only my vision for Alaska. If what I proposed isn't needed now then it should be planned for, IMO.

Please stop injecting your opinion for future unbuilt freeways - that belongs in the Fictional Highways part of the forum. A 2000 AADT on a 2-lane wilderness road does not need any help. Please limit discussion here to actual proposals. Thank you.

Sure but perhaps you should be a bit more reasonable.

First off, this forum is littered with posts outside of the fictional sectional section with suggestions of what to do with freeways. While I can see your point about my opinions I'll keep expressing them how I see fit. I don't however wish to break forum rules and so I'll make my second point.

2. If you bothered to read my initial post it were more of a question to what the plans were for Alaska and more specifically Anchorage's plan. Maybe I didn't phrase it right, maybe you felt I put too much emphasis on my suggestions, maybe you agree Kphoger my ideas are ridiculous.? Either way I didn't post with simply a fantasy about what I'd like to see happen, I provided my opinions of what I'd like to see in a single post and in that same post asked about Alaska's plans. I am well aware of the fantasy subsection and if I wanted to only provide my input I would have just done so with no questions.

I understand. Please know I'm a moderator, and therefore I can break out the purple text: Back to on-topic discussion.

Gotcha. Thought I was at any rate.  :coffee:

Anchorage Daily News reports today on the Denali Park Road and how, despite assurances from the National Park Service, the road is becoming increasingly susceptible to landslides and other road-closing events:
https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/2020/02/23/worries-about-the-fate-of-denali-park-road-persist-as-tourism-season-looms/

QuoteBut dramatic changes are making the road increasingly vulnerable to landslides. The park service closed parts of the road multiple times last summer amid heavy rains, rockfall and mudslides, including an incident in August that left around 300 people and 17 buses stranded for a few hours about halfway down the road.

... A slowly advancing slide near the road's halfway point, known as the Pretty Rocks landslide, is one of many areas along the road that is unstable.

Recent National Park Service surveys found that since September, the speed of the landslide at Pretty Rocks has increased dramatically: The road was slumping nearly 2 inches every day after August, according to a report from the park service.

... There are multiple solutions proposed for fixing the road, including rerouting a segment or building a bridge across the unstable areas, according to park service reports. Tunneling below the landslide or building up supports against landslides was deemed unfeasible.

(https://www.adn.com/resizer/Lc8c3Zo0igwz9q0qHXvCRv289Rw=/992x0/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-adn.s3.amazonaws.com/public/SUREXXFVMBBTZICTR34DNQMMWA.jpg)

Washington Post [Washington, D.C.]: Steep budget cuts left Alaska with only one operating mainline ferry. Then it broke down. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/steep-budget-cuts-left-alaska-with-only-one-operating-mainline-ferry-then-it-broke-down/2020/02/23/56f7107e-4f4c-11ea-bf44-f5043eb3918a_story.html)

QuoteThe change in the noise coming from the Matanuska's engines was a clue something was wrong with the ferry. A peek out the window was confirmation.

Quote"We were creeping along,"  said Adrianne Milos, one of the passengers making what should have been a three-day trip from Bellingham, Wash., home to Alaska in late January.

QuoteThe crew came on loudspeakers and announced they'd be bringing the ship into Juneau at half speed.

QuoteWhen they finally arrived, Milos, her husband and their cat, Squeaks, were only 70 miles from home in Haines, a small community up the Lynn Canal from Juneau. But they were effectively stranded.

QuoteA 30 percent budget cut imposed on the ferry system last year and unforeseen maintenance problems meant the Matanuska was the only mainline ferry operating on the Alaska Marine Highway System. Now it was broken down, presenting more than an inconvenience to Milos and fellow passengers: Communities already reeling from service cuts faced a month with next to no ferries at all.

Cordova?  Seems they'd be a lot better off if they had just finished AK 10, but why do I suspect they'd rather let the town die completely rather than finish the road?

The end of the article certainly makes the case for why elected officials are bad decision makers when it comes to transportation.

Quote from: vdeane on February 25, 2020, 01:15:46 PM
The end of the article certainly makes the case for why elected officials are bad decision makers when it comes to transportation.

And there are apparently a lot of people unhappy with the current governor of Alaska, as there is an active effort to recall him from office (details can be found here (https://recalldunleavy.org/)).

This isn't necessarily road related but isn't mass transit either. Still, this worthy of a mention as a 1,600 rail line will be built from Alaska to the US. I'm not sure if the entire rail line will have to be constructed or it already exists for the most part and only needing a permit to cross the border. Either way, this seems like a pretty big deal.

https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/2020/09/26/trump-tweets-intent-to-issue-permit-for-rail-line-connecting-alaska-to-canada-and-rest-of-us/

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on September 28, 2020, 07:16:54 PM
This isn't necessarily road related but isn't mass transit either. Still, this worthy of a mention as a 1,600 rail line will be built from Alaska to the US. I'm not sure if the entire rail line will have to be constructed or it already exists for the most part and only needing a permit to cross the border. Either way, this seems like a pretty big deal.

https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/2020/09/26/trump-tweets-intent-to-issue-permit-for-rail-line-connecting-alaska-to-canada-and-rest-of-us/

Most of it is unbuilt, including all of the Yukon segment, everything in Alaska east of Delta Junction, and everything in British Columbia northwest of Dease Lake. There is some partially developed right of way between Fairbanks and Delta Junction, and southeast of Dease Lake, but no tracks.

As the linked article notes, one possible use of the new rail line is for the export of oil from Alberta's oil sands. Especially given the history of the planned Keystone pipeline from Alberta to Texas, this is guaranteed to stir up intense controversy.

This CBC article (https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/a2a-railway-1.5740678) gives more information about the routing:

QuoteThe project would build a new rail line from Fort McMurray, Alta., through the Northwest Territories and Yukon to the Delta Junction in Alaska, where it will connect with existing rail and continue on to ports near Anchorage.

Googling from that article, I found a website a2arail.com (http://a2arail.com) where they have maps of the proposed routes. Looks like it will avoid Whitehorse entirely and also cut a new terrain route along the BC/NW Territories border and through Alberta to Ft. McMurray.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50395953181_2233654ebe_k.jpg)

I wonder what the potential for Amtrak service would be if this gets done.  I could see Canada pushing for an auto train running between Alaska and the rest of the US "just in case", given their recent experiences with the Alaska exemption to their ban on non-essential border crossings - especially since the experts consider another pandemic to be a matter of when not if.

Aside from that, I also remember when the lack of a rail connection between Alaska and the rest of the continent was cited as a challenge for a Bering Strait rail tunnel.

It's going to take more than 4 days to get to Anchorage by rail, why is it a benefit to be 4 days closer to Asia...

IIRC, from discussions that I have followed over the past several years, it is indeed to allow the Canadians to export Tar Sands oil to Asia.  However, there is no place left to build a commercial sea port on Canada's west coast.

What they propose to do is to build a standard gauge railroad from the Fort McMurray, AB area to Delta Junction, AK in order to feed that oil into the Trans Alaska Pipeline.  The Pipeline is seeing a steady long-term decline in traffic volume due to the North Slope oil fields being played out, so there is capacity in it to carry the Tar Sands oil from Delta Junction to the sea port at Valdez, AK.

The expected volume of traffic that I have seen discussed could very well require that that rail line be built as double track, so it would certainly be doable from an economic standpoint and Delta Junction is close enough to the end of ARR's (Alaska Railroad) track at nearby Eielson Air Force Base, just southeast of North Pole, AK, that connecting them would not be a major stretch.

It is not proposed to go anywhere near the never completed BCOL line at Dease Lake, BC.

I suppose that once things are up and running, it could also be attractive to passenger operators to offer multi day excursions through some of the most wild and unspoiled scenery on the planet, much like Amtrak does on some of their current long distance runs (ie, the ever popular Empire Builder and California Zephyr), but it would primarily be a freight route.

Mike

I agree about Dease Lake, it could bring an opportunity to revive that project who could became an alternate link.  Also the proposed line will meet the CN line who was fermely known as Mackenzie Northern Railway (http://"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mackenzie_Northern_Railway") and way back then as Great Slave Lake Railway who linked Alberta to Hay River, NWT.

Quote from: Stephane Dumas on September 29, 2020, 01:55:19 PM
I agree about Dease Lake, it could bring an opportunity to revive that project who could became an alternate link.  Also the proposed line will meet the CN line who was fermely known as Mackenzie Northern Railway (http://"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mackenzie_Northern_Railway") and way back then as Great Slave Lake Railway who linked Alberta to Hay River, NWT.

CN took over the BCOL (British Columbia Railway) several years ago, too.  I'm not sure how interested they'd be in ever completing BCOL's partially built line to Dease Lake.

Mike

Quote from: mgk920 on September 29, 2020, 04:26:53 AM
IIRC, from discussions that I have followed over the past several years, it is indeed to allow the Canadians to export Tar Sands oil to Asia.  However, there is no place left to build a commercial sea port on Canada's west coast.

That didn't stop the effort to build a pipeline to the coast across British Columbia. First Nations in the way of the pipeline route were the main problem.

Could existing ports in BC, including Stewart's deep-water port, handle extra volume from the tar sands oil?

Quote from: mgk920 on September 29, 2020, 02:19:38 PM
CN took over the BCOL (British Columbia Railway) several years ago, too.  I'm not sure how interested they'd be in ever completing BCOL's partially built line to Dease Lake.

One of the reasons it's only partially built is that the potentially exportable resource from the Dease Lake area was asbestos. That market died around the time BCOL pulled the plug on the Dease Lake line.

Even if this project is fully funded (which I'm skeptical it will be), how many years of construction will it take to complete the route? If all goes smoothly (which pretty much never happens), I'd say this line probably won't open for at least a few decades, at minimum. With all the litigation I expect this project will endure, it might be faster to walk the entire length of the project, and carry all the freight via muscle power than to do it by train along this corridor.

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 29, 2020, 03:39:45 PM
Even if this project is fully funded (which I'm skeptical it will be), how many years of construction will it take to complete the route? If all goes smoothly (which pretty much never happens), I'd say this line probably won't open for at least a few decades, at minimum. With all the litigation I expect this project will endure, it might be faster to walk the entire length of the project, and carry all the freight via muscle power than to do it by train along this corridor.

Yes, I know that there was a strong incentive to get it done (a establish a supply route that was out of range of enemy fire from the Pacific Ocean), the original Alaska Highway was completed and opened in less than one year.

Mike

Quote from: mgk920 on September 29, 2020, 04:26:53 AM
I suppose that once things are up and running, it could also be attractive to passenger operators to offer multi day excursions through some of the most wild and unspoiled scenery on the planet, much like Amtrak does on some of their current long distance runs (ie, the ever popular Empire Builder and California Zephyr), but it would primarily be a freight route.

Realistically, I think a private operator like the Rocky Mountaineer will be the first to try and set up an Alaskan excursion on the line. They already run on routes that don't have Amtrak/VIA service.

The consequences of this rail project would go far beyond the direct impacts of laying track through the wilderness.

Funny that oscar mentioned a proposed rail project that would have served an extraction industry in the same region; one where the material was found to be extremely detrimental to our well being.  So we left it in the ground.  And the rail project was cancelled.
Seems like a blueprint worth duplicating.

Quote from: oscar on September 29, 2020, 02:33:32 PM

Quote from: mgk920 on September 29, 2020, 04:26:53 AM
IIRC, from discussions that I have followed over the past several years, it is indeed to allow the Canadians to export Tar Sands oil to Asia.  However, there is no place left to build a commercial sea port on Canada's west coast.

That didn't stop the effort to build a pipeline to the coast across British Columbia. First Nations in the way of the pipeline route were the main problem.

Could existing ports in BC, including Stewart's deep-water port, handle extra volume from the tar sands oil?

Quote from: mgk920 on September 29, 2020, 02:19:38 PM
CN took over the BCOL (British Columbia Railway) several years ago, too.  I'm not sure how interested they'd be in ever completing BCOL's partially built line to Dease Lake.

One of the reasons it's only partially built is that the potentially exportable resource from the Dease Lake area was asbestos. That market died around the time BCOL pulled the plug on the Dease Lake line.

The northwest extension of BC Rail was abandoned in the mid 1970's.  Coal, copper concentrate and asbestos were commodities that were projected to be extracted to justify the line.   Asbestos extraction stopped around 1992 while copper extraction only started large-scale in 2014.  Coal extraction never materialized because of price-drops and more recently First Nations opposition.  The line extends a ways beyond Fort St. James for forestry products, but likely not for mineral commodities.  The roadbed is still visible in many locations.

The projected line would completely bypass BC and likely not connect to the former BCRail, CN Fort Nelson extension.

Have there been any updates/discussions on the Glenn to Seward Highway connection in Anchorage? This seems to be one of the largest potential transportation projects in the state, by virtue of affecting its largest city.

Quote from: hurricanehink on October 05, 2021, 11:05:54 AM
Have there been any updates/discussions on the Glenn to Seward Highway connection in Anchorage? This seems to be one of the largest potential transportation projects in the state, by virtue of affecting its largest city.

Last time I heard of it being seriously proposed it died again.

Speaking of highway connections, I recently discovered a project to build a DDI at the Steese Expwy/Johansen Expwy junction in Fairbanks (https://dot.alaska.gov/nreg/steese-johansen/).  The Steese (AK 2) would be the through route.  The project will also build a backage road connection between Farmers Loop Rd and the Johansen/Northside Blvd intersection.  Construction isn't expected before 2024.

I've been to Fairbanks a few times and that intersection does get a lot of traffic, much more than I would have expected for a small town. A DDI makes sense.

Has there been any update about the freeway connection between the Seward and Glenn Highways in Anchorage?

Quote from: hurricanehink on January 27, 2022, 06:25:57 PM
Has there been any update about the freeway connection between the Seward and Glenn Highways in Anchorage?

Fictional.

Quote from: Alps on January 27, 2022, 06:56:59 PM

Quote from: hurricanehink on January 27, 2022, 06:25:57 PM
Has there been any update about the freeway connection between the Seward and Glenn Highways in Anchorage?

Fictional.

Are there any new proposed freeways in Alaska at the moment?

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 27, 2022, 07:30:07 PM
Are there any new proposed freeways in Alaska at the moment?

Not any I'm aware of.

Quote from: Alps on January 27, 2022, 06:56:59 PM

Quote from: hurricanehink on January 27, 2022, 06:25:57 PM
Has there been any update about the freeway connection between the Seward and Glenn Highways in Anchorage?

Fictional.

Sounds like it's one of those roads that's perpetually studied, like CT 11:
http://www.sewardglennmobility.com/FAQs.html#9

Quote from: vdeane on January 27, 2022, 09:26:41 PM

Quote from: Alps on January 27, 2022, 06:56:59 PM

Quote from: hurricanehink on January 27, 2022, 06:25:57 PM
Has there been any update about the freeway connection between the Seward and Glenn Highways in Anchorage?

Fictional.

Sounds like it's one of those roads that's perpetually studied, like CT 11:
http://www.sewardglennmobility.com/FAQs.html#9

Yup but has even less of a chance of being completed through the city. Better chance of I-A201 getting done as a beltway someday.

Anchorage Daily News updates the status of the proposed 100-mile West Sustina Access Road:
https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/mat-su/2022/02/12/plans-for-a-disputed-mega-road-through-the-susitna-valley-backcountry-are-moving-forward-again/

QuoteA nearly decade-old proposal for a 100-mile road through the rugged backcountry west of the Susitna River is moving forward again, generating optimism for new mines and public access but also concerns over potential threats to a sprawling wildlife-rich remote area close to Alaska's urban center.

Currently estimated at more than $350 million, the West Susitna Access road as proposed would run from Point MacKenzie to the Yentna Mining District in the Alaska Range, where numerous mining companies are eying potentially lucrative deposits.

... Now work on the project's third phase, the two-year process of getting federal wetlands permits, is starting after the Mat-Su Borough Assembly voted to support AIDEA's work on the permits.

... The road would bisect a roughly Vermont-sized area dotted with cabins and lodges that depend on the remote character of the area, a destination for fishing, hunting, subsistence activities, dog mushing and snowmachining.

Critics including wilderness lodge owners say that, given the lack of immediate timber or coal prospects, the road would basically subsidize foreign mining activities at the expense of the remote character and fish and wildlife that attract people now.

(https://www.adn.com/resizer/INIILySOBkatYSs7h12RP6Ez8rw=/1440x0/filters:format(jpg):quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/adn/XMW3Z2D56RFEBK77SXJFGPNBQM.jpg)

It's not like there isn't hundreds of millions of other acres in Alaska that are untouched.

There was a landslide who cut the road linking Seward to Lowell Point.
https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/2022/05/09/work-begins-on-clearing-huge-lowell-point-landslide/

QuoteWorkers have started to clear a vast landslide that severed the community of Lowell Point, outside Seward, from its only road access Saturday. But officials have warned it could be up to two weeks before the road is fully usable again.

The access road to Lowell Point has seen smaller avalanches and landslides from the steep slopes of Bear Mountain. But on Saturday at about 7:30 p.m. a tumble of dirt and trees an estimated 200 feet long and 300 feet wide came down, burying the narrow road.

"The mountain just shed,"  said City Clerk Brenda Ballou said.

No injuries were reported, and no problems related to the large debris field that spilled into Resurrection Bay have been recorded, Ballou said Monday. The city set up a shelter but no one had needed it as of Monday, she said.

On Monday, contractors used excavators to begin the process of hauling away the dirt. The debris field is estimated at 40,000 cubic yards, Ballou said.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLsV3BmIkTI

Landslide personified.

Quote from: Rothman on May 14, 2022, 05:02:06 PM
Landslide personified.

Nyhe build them on there with beans it won't prevent future landslides but tunnels will. Alaska will need a new freeway network and soon.

Looks like Alaska DOT study a new northernly crossing to link Juneau and Douglas Island.
http://www.jdnorthcrossing.com

Quote from: Stephane Dumas on May 30, 2022, 04:23:25 PM
Looks like Alaska DOT study a new northernly crossing to link Juneau and Douglas Island.
http://www.jdnorthcrossing.com

Interesting concept - I don't think it would really warrant a second bridge from a traffic standpoint (compared to most of America) unless Juneau grows as a city and Douglas develops that much more as a suburb, but I can see the benefit to a second crossing in case anything happens to the first.

Anchorage Daily News reports:
https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/anchorage/2022/08/01/state-of-alaska-proposes-major-overhaul-of-seward-highway-intersection-near-girdwood/

QuoteThe state is looking at building an interchange on the Seward Highway outside Girdwood, with looping extensions over the wetlands on either side, for at least $35 million.

Alaska road engineers say the plan, still in its early design phase, will dramatically improve safety at the T-junction where the Seward and Alyeska highways meet.

A fatality hasn't been recorded there since at least 1980, and the number of crashes isn't high compared to other similar intersections in Alaska, engineers say. But they say traffic is growing, and the left-hand turns through oncoming traffic are risky and can result in serious accidents.

(https://www.adn.com/resizer/cA17zFR7eJZX_kHdS1_hTGEKN6A=/1440x0/filters:format(jpg):quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/adn/DCA6TFRRBZGKJNWIU2NEZPLYIU.jpg)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxOcYR8Ef4w

Quote from: Kniwt on August 02, 2022, 04:12:13 AM
Anchorage Daily News reports:
https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/anchorage/2022/08/01/state-of-alaska-proposes-major-overhaul-of-seward-highway-intersection-near-girdwood/

QuoteThe state is looking at building an interchange on the Seward Highway outside Girdwood, with looping extensions over the wetlands on either side, for at least $35 million.

Alaska road engineers say the plan, still in its early design phase, will dramatically improve safety at the T-junction where the Seward and Alyeska highways meet.

A fatality hasn't been recorded there since at least 1980, and the number of crashes isn't high compared to other similar intersections in Alaska, engineers say. But they say traffic is growing, and the left-hand turns through oncoming traffic are risky and can result in serious accidents.

I remember that intersection from my trip up there a couple of weeks ago.   I stopped at the "mall" for a bio break, and drove up to Alyeska looking for a good place to take a picture of the local mountainscape.

It seemed like a busy intersection; it was a little challenging turning from the Alyeska Highway onto the Seward Highway northbound, and there was a line of traffic waiting to turn southbound.

This interchange feels like a bit much for what I saw....but I admit that I saw the intersection only at two points in time, probably not at peak times.  I'd be tempted to say that a traffic light and some protected turn lanes would be sufficient, except for the obvious risks involved with adding a traffic light to a long highway that currently doesn't have any traffic lights.

Quote from: MikeTheActuary on August 02, 2022, 08:24:50 AM
This interchange feels like a bit much for what I saw....but I admit that I saw the intersection only at two points in time, probably not at peak times.  I'd be tempted to say that a traffic light and some protected turn lanes would be sufficient, except for the obvious risks involved with adding a traffic light to a long highway that currently doesn't have any traffic lights.

I guess the risks might be the same results if they have chosen a roundabout to replace that intersection?

Quote from: Stephane Dumas on August 02, 2022, 04:18:04 PM

Quote from: MikeTheActuary on August 02, 2022, 08:24:50 AM
This interchange feels like a bit much for what I saw....but I admit that I saw the intersection only at two points in time, probably not at peak times.  I'd be tempted to say that a traffic light and some protected turn lanes would be sufficient, except for the obvious risks involved with adding a traffic light to a long highway that currently doesn't have any traffic lights.

I guess the risks might be the same results if they have chosen a roundabout to replace that intersection?

I think there'd be similar/analogous concerns.

A simple diamond interchange would probably work adequately, although keeping traffic moving during construction would be an interesting challenge given the wetlands concerns.

Quote from: Kniwt on August 02, 2022, 04:12:13 AM
(https://www.adn.com/resizer/cA17zFR7eJZX_kHdS1_hTGEKN6A=/1440x0/filters:format(jpg):quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/adn/DCA6TFRRBZGKJNWIU2NEZPLYIU.jpg)

What's the deal with that "extra" ramp connecting back to Seward Hwy SB?  There's no point in having that.
They could really lessen the wetland impacts with a simple diamond interchange; probably cheaper too.

Maybe it's a truck ramp to mitigate weaving from traffic from the loop ramp?

Seems excessive.

Quote from: Bickendan on August 04, 2022, 05:58:44 PM
Maybe it's a truck ramp to mitigate weaving from traffic from the loop ramp?

The loop ramp is carrying traffic in the opposite direction from the SB exit ramp, so truck weaving shouldn't be a concern. The SW entrance ramp's only function seems to be an "oops" ramp where people who had mistakenly exited going south can get back on the southbound highway.

Quote from: Rick Powell on August 08, 2022, 09:54:09 AM

Quote from: Bickendan on August 04, 2022, 05:58:44 PM
Maybe it's a truck ramp to mitigate weaving from traffic from the loop ramp?

The loop ramp is carrying traffic in the opposite direction from the SB exit ramp, so truck weaving shouldn't be a concern. The SW entrance ramp's only function seems to be an "oops" ramp where people who had mistakenly exited going south can get back on the southbound highway.

And one would think that an "oops" traffic could just turn around at the roundabout...

Apologies if this has been posted here before but I absolutely loved this video and couldn't imagine what it was like for the men who built this beast:

I saw a similar video from the late 70s/early 80s about the building of the Dalton Highway. That + Alaska Highway must be some of the greatest highway engineering ever, just in terms of the environment they had to deal with. (Dalton Highway itself was basically just to provide access to the pipeline during construction, but later on they kept it and improved it slightly and eventually was turned over to public use.)

Here is a Roadgeek tour of Alaska by InterstateKS.


Here is a rare freeway section in Alaska.

Looks like InterstateKS got misled about the northern/eastern end of I-A3 from this incorrect map (https://www.interstate-guide.com/alaska/).  Note that the mileages are only right with I-A1 and I-A3 ending at each other in Anchorage, and the I-A3 listing makes no mention of a junction at I-A4, which it would if they all ended at each other.

Okay, so I'm planning a trip up to Alaska with my 15-year old nephew next year in the last week of March. Speaking of the Alaska interstates, I don't know if it's ever been asked here, but could the Glenn Highway between Anchorage and Palmer ever be designated as Interstate A-1, since it technically already is. Seems like the highway is freeway quality and probably longer than Hawaii's H-1 to boot. I know they have the state highways already on the highway and prefer highway names over numbers, but would it hurt to make it A-1? I figure it's not an important issue up there and probably deemed as not necessary, but has there ever been any talk about it nonetheless?

It probably falls under the "more trouble than it's worth" category as the impression I have Alaskans are more apt to refer to their highways by name than by number, particularly since the signed AK routes are similar but not 1:1 with the underlying interstates.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on October 03, 2022, 04:45:53 AM
Apologies if this has been posted here before but I absolutely loved this video and couldn’t imagine what it was like for the men who built this beast:

(Youtube clip snipped)

It is amazing what a real need will produce.  The USA's War Department needed an all-weather supply route that was out of range of Japanese naval aviators and FAST and that road was the only way.  Would it even exist today if not for World War II?  (the USA's flag itself might still have 48 stars).

Mike

Quote from: vdeane on November 20, 2022, 04:28:55 PM
Looks like InterstateKS got misled about the northern/eastern end of I-A3 from this incorrect map (https://www.interstate-guide.com/alaska/).  Note that the mileages are only right with I-A1 and I-A3 ending at each other in Anchorage, and the I-A3 listing makes no mention of a junction at I-A4, which it would if they all ended at each other.

Did not realize that I mislabeled I-A1 as I-A3 between Anchorage and Palmer. I made that map in GIS ten years or so ago and don't have a way to update the raw data now. But did at least change the incorrect shield on the png file and corrected the map at https://www.interstate-guide.com/alaska/

Quote from: tdindy88 on November 20, 2022, 04:51:24 PM
could the Glenn Highway between Anchorage and Palmer ever be designated as Interstate A-1, since it technically already is

So... nothing needs to change?

I meant "signed" as Interstate A-1. But no worries if Alaska isn't that interested, I was just curious. 

Quote from: Alex on November 22, 2022, 08:01:57 AM

Quote from: vdeane on November 20, 2022, 04:28:55 PM
Looks like InterstateKS got misled about the northern/eastern end of I-A3 from this incorrect map (https://www.interstate-guide.com/alaska/).  Note that the mileages are only right with I-A1 and I-A3 ending at each other in Anchorage, and the I-A3 listing makes no mention of a junction at I-A4, which it would if they all ended at each other.

Did not realize that I mislabeled I-A1 as I-A3 between Anchorage and Palmer. I made that map in GIS ten years or so ago and don't have a way to update the raw data now. But did at least change the incorrect shield on the png file and corrected the map at https://www.interstate-guide.com/alaska/

How long does it take the change to propagate out to everyone browsing?

Quote from: vdeane on November 23, 2022, 10:25:50 PM

Quote from: Alex on November 22, 2022, 08:01:57 AM

Quote from: vdeane on November 20, 2022, 04:28:55 PM
Looks like InterstateKS got misled about the northern/eastern end of I-A3 from this incorrect map (https://www.interstate-guide.com/alaska/).  Note that the mileages are only right with I-A1 and I-A3 ending at each other in Anchorage, and the I-A3 listing makes no mention of a junction at I-A4, which it would if they all ended at each other.

Did not realize that I mislabeled I-A1 as I-A3 between Anchorage and Palmer. I made that map in GIS ten years or so ago and don't have a way to update the raw data now. But did at least change the incorrect shield on the png file and corrected the map at https://www.interstate-guide.com/alaska/

How long does it take the change to propagate out to everyone browsing?

Not sure, up to two weeks for the cache to clear. I can clear it manually (thought I did but I guess not).

Quote from: vdeane on November 20, 2022, 04:28:55 PM
Looks like InterstateKS got misled about the northern/eastern end of I-A3 from this incorrect map (https://www.interstate-guide.com/alaska/).  Note that the mileages are only right with I-A1 and I-A3 ending at each other in Anchorage, and the I-A3 listing makes no mention of a junction at I-A4, which it would if they all ended at each other.

Hello, Interstate KS here. I saw this a while ago and have since posted corrections on my channel. I was already suspecting that I got it wrong, and this post was the impetus I needed to say something about it. Unfortunately, YouTube does not allow the replacement of videos, but I was able to change thumbnails and post corrections in the descriptions.

Checking out the incredible scenic and historic journey that is Alaska Route 98 from Skagway to White Pass and into Canada. Also known as the Klondike Highway, the road follows the route taken by many gold prospectors during the Klondike Gold Rush of 1898.

https://www.gribblenation.org/2023/02/alaska-route-98-and-south-klondike.html (https://www.gribblenation.org/2023/02/alaska-route-98-and-south-klondike.html)

I noticed GSV has no Street View captions. I was curious though, does that particular island have any state highways and most of all any stoplights?

Quote from: roadman65 on February 12, 2023, 04:31:46 PM
I noticed GSV has no Street View captions. I was curious though, does that particular island have any state highways and most of all any stoplights?

Which island? If you're asking about Skagway, it's on the mainland.

Oh sorry. Kodiak Island. Thought I mentioned it.  I didn't in either sentence. That would help lol.

Quote from: roadman65 on February 13, 2023, 07:28:04 AM
Oh sorry. Kodiak Island. Thought I mentioned it.  I didn't in either sentence. That would help lol.

Kodiak doesn't have any primary state highways (routes 1-11, and 98), the only ones with signed route numbers. Kodiak has other state-maintained highways, with unsigned 5- or 6-digit inventory numbers, as one would expect for a state where the state DOT maintains most roads of any significance and many insignificant ones as well.

Quote from: roadman65 on February 12, 2023, 04:31:46 PM
I noticed GSV has no Street View captions. I was curious though, does that particular island [Kodiak] have any...stoplights?

There may not be any streetview, but there are some photo spheres. This particular one shows a stoplight in the background: https://goo.gl/maps/E4PXq5rV95kcEdfj9

It's also fairly visible even just with satellite view: https://www.google.com/maps/@57.789124,-152.4083979,205m/data=!3m1!1e3

Why is it that the Googlecar didn't make it there? It's only a ferry ride away.

Speaking of GOogle I see this one in Anchorage features a guide sign for Minnesota Drive which is a freeway within the city.
https://goo.gl/maps/JxpoDWm2kknP4JfF8
Love the use of NORTHBOUND.

The Alaska Marine Highway auto ferry system today released its summer schedules:

https://dot.alaska.gov/comm/pressbox/arch2023/PR23-0008.shtml

Due to staffing shortages, two vessels (including the one used for service across the Gulf of Alaska between Juneau and Prince William Sound) are for now out of service, unless and until the vessels can be crewed up for the summer season. Service to and from Prince Rupert BC has also been suspended, and to and from Bellingham WA will be reduced to once a week. Monthly service in the Aleutians, between Dutch Harbor and Homer, will still be available.

If I ever am in Alaska again, I'll be sure to head to Lone Moose to visit the Tobin family (The Great North).

Alaska DOT&PF will be studying, with an Alaska native corporation, a possible relocation of Juneau's ferry terminal about 30 miles north along the existing Glacier Highway (part of AK 7). The idea is to improve ferry connections to the main North American highway network, by shorter ferry trips to and from Haines and Skagway. Of course, this would mean a longer drive/bus ride over the Glacier Highway from downtown Juneau and most of its residents.

https://dot.alaska.gov/comm/pressbox/arch2023/PR23-0010.shtml

This is similar to a previous proposal, sunk by environmental objections, to extend the Glacier Highway to a new ferry terminal. At least the current idea doesn't require a highway extension.

Highway extensions to Haines and/or Skagway have long been off the table, for various legal and environmental reasons. See https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=22880.0 for some prior discussion.

Quote from: oscar on March 10, 2023, 07:48:00 AM
Alaska DOT&PF will be studying, with an Alaska native corporation, a possible relocation of Juneau's ferry terminal about 30 miles north along the existing Glacier Highway (part of AK 7). The idea is to improve ferry connections to the main North American highway network, by shorter ferry trips to and from Haines and Skagway. Of course, this would mean a longer drive/bus ride over the Glacier Highway from downtown Juneau and most of its residents.

https://dot.alaska.gov/comm/pressbox/arch2023/PR23-0010.shtml

This is similar to a previous proposal, sunk by environmental objections, to extend the Glacier Highway to a new ferry terminal. At least the current idea doesn't require a highway extension.

Highway extensions to Haines and/or Skagway have long been off the table, for various legal and environmental reasons. See https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=22880.0 for some prior discussion.

Move it further from Juneau?  Eesh.  The schedules are already lousy, especially if you come in from points south.  You have to disembark late at night and, if you just want to continue north, be back early in the morning.  It's already a total racket for hotels near Juneau's airport.

Horrible idea in terms of convenience to the traveler just to save an hour to get to those northern towns.

They need to come terms with the highway. Just build the damned thing.

Easier said than done.

https://goo.gl/maps/tdmVrrsNcQuSP1k5A
Has anyone ever driven up to the spot in the image while clinching SR 11 in the process?

Quote from: roadman65 on May 09, 2023, 01:49:46 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/tdmVrrsNcQuSP1k5A
Has anyone ever driven up to the spot in the image while clinching SR 11 in the process?

I've driven past that point on one or both of my visits to Deadhorse (either on my way to the airport in 1994, or to refuel in 2012), though I don't remember the Peterbilt shop.

AK 11 ends before that point, at the Dalton Hwy/Lake Colleen intersection.

I know there's some point where there is no more public access, but I'm not sure if that station is part of the restrictions or not. If you want to get all the way to the Arctic Ocean, you have to arrange it with some tour companies (although it's pretty trivial to do). Generally a solo drive will consist of taking AK-11 to its actual northern end (very close to that spot), and then you can keep going to some small little motels in the area.

I've yet to do the whole thing solo but my goal is to finally do it next winter. (Been as far as the Arctic Circle sign). I was surprised at how easy the drive was, it wasn't at all the horribly dangerous drive that I was led to believe. (Frankly, other highways such as Steese were in much worse shape). Even in winter, was a pretty simple drive, the main rule being you just yield to any trucks that pass by. So I'm excited at the idea of finally getting the whole thing clinched. Been very interested in cresting the Brooks Range.

Does Alaska have Moose Crossing signs on their desolate ( which is all rural highways there)?

Quote from: roadman65 on May 09, 2023, 12:21:04 PM
Does Alaska have Moose Crossing signs on their desolate ( which is all rural highways there)?

Very often. On the drive back from Whittier to Cantwell, I counted 17 moose.

Quote from: roadman65 on May 09, 2023, 01:49:46 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/tdmVrrsNcQuSP1k5A
Has anyone ever driven up to the spot in the image while clinching SR 11 in the process?

Yes but it's not remarkable, why bring it up here

I was noticing that Skagway is one of the few towns in Southeastern Alaska that is connected to the lower 48 by road. It lies at the southern terminus of AK 98 ( named for the 1898 gold rush) 15 miles south of Canada in the Skagway Valley in which the route follows.

Although the route doesn't connect to the rest of the state it connects to an orphaned section of Highway 2 in BC, as it intersects no other roads. Yukon is the only way to take a motor vehicle to the rest of Canada especially British Columbia from Hwy. 2. So both AK and BC are basically cut off from the rest of their territories by any road.

What I find interesting is the town itself.  It's small, near no cities and orphaned by land to the rest of their citizens. No major industry but tourism and fishing. A town that could most likely survive without state aid, with the exception of Highway 98 that is state funded hence the route designation.

I'm taking that the state DOT has a special unit assigned to just take care of AK 98 due to its isolation.

Quote from: roadman65 on May 21, 2023, 07:47:43 PM
Although the route doesn't connect to the rest of the state it connects to an orphaned section of Highway 2 in BC, as it intersects no other roads.

Don't know what you mean by "orphaned". AK 98 connects to Yukon 2, including the part in BC. Same for the Haines segment of AK 7, which connects to the BC part of Yukon 3. Yukon and BC maintain other highways on each other's turf, especially the Alaska Highway which zigzags along the YT/BC border.

Quote
I'm taking that the state DOT has a special unit assigned to just take care of AK 98 due to its isolation.

Alaska DOT maintains lots of highways everywhere in the state, not just the handful that are assigned route numbers. These unnumbered highways include some in the Aleutians, Kodiak, and remote villages in western Alaska. So commonplace, they aren't "special".

Quote from: oscar on May 22, 2023, 01:52:51 AM

Quote from: roadman65 on May 21, 2023, 07:47:43 PM
Although the route doesn't connect to the rest of the state it connects to an orphaned section of Highway 2 in BC, as it intersects no other roads.

Don't know what you mean by "orphaned". AK 98 connects to Yukon 2, including the part in BC. Same for the Haines segment of AK 7, which connects to the BC part of Yukon 3. Yukon and BC maintain other highways on each other's turf, especially the Alaska Highway which zigzags along the YT/BC border.

Quote
I'm taking that the state DOT has a special unit assigned to just take care of AK 98 due to its isolation.

Alaska DOT maintains lots of highways everywhere in the state, not just the handful that are assigned route numbers. These unnumbered highways include some in the Aleutians, Kodiak, and remote villages in western Alaska. So commonplace, they aren't "special".

Orphaned meaning disconnected from other state roads. Not saying it does not connect to anything else. It's like I-15 being orphaned from the rest of Arizona despite driving through Utah or Nevada will still get you there.

One of the things I'll always remember about Skagway was how slow the mobile data functioned when the cruise ships were in town. Basically not going to get anything but a plain text SMS out.  At least that was the case back when I was up there.  Perhaps they've upped their bandwidth since then.

Then I caught a dolly in the creek that flows in there. ;)

Anchorage Daily News reports that Denali Park Road will continue to be closed at Mile 43 until 2026.
https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/2023/06/05/denali-park-road-not-fully-reopening-until-2026-after-bridge-construction-pushed-back-a-year/

QuoteThe 92-mile road through Denali National Park and Preserve will remain closed near the halfway point for another three years due to newly discovered construction delays in the area of a treacherous landslide.

Park officials closed the Denali Park Road west of the Pretty Rocks Landslide in August 2021, saying it was no longer feasible to safely maintain. The road provides the only vehicular access into the 6-million-acre park. Buses carrying visitors into the park now turn around at Mile 43.

Road construction initially expected to wrap up in 2025 is now not expected to be complete until 2026. Park officials say the delay stems from a combination of a long winter that delayed the start of construction and the discovery that crews will need to extract more than two times as much clay as originally expected from the Pretty Rocks area.

The road began slumping in recent years at Mile 45 because of the landslide, which began moving more rapidly in 2014, amid increasing temperatures and heavy rainfall events.

Alaska will be getting two more DDI's.
The east end of Johansen Expressway at SR 2 (Steese Expressway) will be converted from an at-grade intersection. Here is the project web page (https://dot.alaska.gov/nreg/steese-johansen/).

Planners finalizing design for Fairbanks expressways' new intersection (https://alaskapublic.org/2023/04/26/planners-finalizing-design-for-fairbanks-expressways-new-intersection/)

QuoteA new $81 million intersection to improve traffic flow and safety is being designed for Fairbanks' Steese and Johansen Expressways.

The design has been scoped by Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities engineers since 2018, but requires local municipalities to grant the state planning authority. It's up for a public hearing this week before the Fairbanks North Star Borough Assembly, but it is missing a trail underpass the borough and other groups have asked for.

South into Anchorage, the diamond interchange joining SR 1 (Seward Highway) with O'Malley Road will be converted to a DDI. The project web page (http://www.sewardhighway.info/).

Set to start this summer, $130M Seward Highway project in South Anchorage faces renewed scrutiny (https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/anchorage/2023/03/02/set-to-start-this-summer-130m-seward-highway-project-in-south-anchorage-faces-renewed-scrutiny/)

QuoteThe Anchorage Assembly and some community members want the state to reconsider a $130 million Seward Highway expansion project that has long been in the works.

After years of planning, construction on the O'Malley Road to Dimond Boulevard project is expected to start late this summer, with completion in 2025, state transportation planners say.

Plans for the 1.5-mile stretch of highway in South Anchorage include raising it to create a roundabout interchange linking Scooter Avenue with Academy Drive; adding the equivalent of two lanes with a new northbound lane plus frontage and ramp improvements; and constructing the state's second "diverging diamond"  interchange with criss-crossing lanes at the O'Malley underpass.

The first DDI in the state is located along SR 1 (Glenn Highway) at Muldoon Road.

I've been on that DDI and it really does flow nicely. I'm familiar with that intersection in Fairbanks and it never struck me as terribly crowded, but any improvements are nice. Alaska in general seems to have a lot of really modernized junctions, which isn't something I was expecting given the low population. Lots of roundabouts in Anchorage, for example.

A relative of mine posted this very short Facebook video of an Alaskan highway, and I'm impressed at first glance of its engineering. Somewhere in the Fairbanks area is all I know. (She likes Filipino music loud, so apologies in advance)

https://www.facebook.com/cathy.spinks.1/videos/677289514292327

That doesn't look like the Fairbanks area. Fairbanks is a subarctic area and doesn't really have the thick forest cover you see. That looks like somewhere well to the south. A street blade was seen but I couldn't make out the name. This might be the Richardson Highway heading southeast away from Fairbanks, as that reaches into the more boreal forest this looks like.

Alaska has pretty good roads in general. Anchorage utilizes a lot of roundabouts and I'm seeing diverging diamonds appear. For the most part, only the rural roads are unpaved. Most of the significant highways are paved and never give me any issues.

For this upcoming weekend's Webinar presentation, we'll be taking a look at the highway system of the state of Alaska. We'll be taking some time to discuss our own experiences traveling across the state and highlighting our favorite drives and landmarks. Coverage will begin on Saturday (1/27) at 6 PM ET and will feature live contributions from members of this forum; we hope to see you there!

My tour guide on the Dalton Highway told me the numbers are mainly used by tourists, and rarely referenced by locals. He strangely wasn't even aware the Dalton Highway was AK-11 until I pointed it out.

What I was surprised to learn was for so few numbered highways, even Alaska had a renumbering at one point.

Quote from: Quillz on February 24, 2024, 06:05:08 AM
He strangely wasn't even aware the Dalton Highway was AK-11 until I pointed it out.

Route markers are sparse on that highway. At mile 0 (south end), around mile 60 (Yukon River area), mile 175 (Coldfoot), and mile 305 (Slope Mountain Camp). There is also a sign assembly near the north end (mile 416) that looks like it once had an AK 11 route marker.

With only one highway in that region, there is little danger of travelers getting lost.