State plan includes new bridge across Lower Susitna River

A new state surface transportation plan includes eighteen miles of new public road that would be built to Lower Susitna River, opening access for recreation and, potentially, mineral development to the northwest.

The state Department of Transportation and Public Facilities has included $82.5 million in the plan of mostly federal funds for the project, which is still in a draft.

There was earlier uncertainty about whether a bridge across the Susitna River is included but that has now been clarified. There will be a bridge if the overall plan is approved, DOTPF spokesperson Shannon McCarthy said.

The bulk of the $82.5 million would be funded by the federal government but the state must put up 10 percent in matching funds, or $8.25 million.

For now there is nothing much on the west side of the river. But mining companies exploring gold discoveries near Skwentna, about 80 miles to the northwest, are hoping the state will build an industrial road to allow them to truck gold concentrates to Port MacKenzie, the Matanuska-Susitna Borough’s port on upper Cook Inlet.

An industrial road could be funded and built by the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority, the state’s development corporation. It would typically be narrower and less expensive than a highway built for public use. It would likely have restricted access, for safety reasons.

Another difference is that mining companies or other users of an industrial road would pay AIDEA for its use through tolls.

In contrast, the state and federal governments would build and maintain a road open to the public.

Public comments on the State Transportation Improvement Plan or STIP, are due Sept. 3.

An Anchorage-based industry group, the Resource Development Council, is asking its members to weigh in with support for the road and bridge, which “would require a bridge across the Lower Susitna River, and in doing would provide a key launch point for industry to work with the State to develop a separate industrial access corridor further to the west and north.”

“This would provide important road access to mining claims and energy resources in the West Susitna region where NovaMinerals, an Australian company, is exploring gold discoveries.

So far NovaMinerals feels it has found about 10 million ounces of gold but much of this is still indicated and inferred to be present in the ore, so more drilling is needed to confirm it.

More gold resources will be needed to develop a mine and pay for trucking the gold concentrates, but the company is optimistic that the gold will be found based on its success to date.

The state’s transportation plan will include projects funded over four years, or through 2027, but this year’s plan will also list proposed projects for two more years although the funding for those has not yet been approved.

The total available for projects listed in the plan is $5.1 billion in funds that are confirmed, mostly through federal transportation formula programs, but another $1.26 billion is available in federal competitive grant programs for which Alaskan entities including municipalities, and the state, will compete against other states.

While the state renews its STIP every four years the new one is different, and larger, because it is also funded through the federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, or IIJA, which will add funds to those traditionally received by the state every year.

Projects in the plan for the Matanuska-Susitna Borough will total $350.2 million if the STIP is approved.

New programs this year include funding for state ferries and a new “water ways” program to help fund marine transportation-related projects like community docks and harbors.

State officials hope to finalize the plan and get federal approval by early December.

However, there are some who are unhappy with how the plan was put together and some of the projects listed. Metropolitan transportation planning organizations in Anchorage and Fairbanks, who develop road improvement priorities for their municipal governments, complain that some of their projects were not included in the STIP by the state.

Other criticisms, including by legislators, is that the STIP appears to be driven “top down,” meaning by the state, rather than “bottom up,” with priorities driven by local communities.

Also, there does not appear to be a clear process as to how projects are selected. Instead, the process appears ad hoc, with projects selected mainly by DOTPF staff, critics have said.

The criticism appears to be greater this year than with previous state transportation plans. That may stem from the larger size of the STIP, with the infusion of added federal money.