FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS - Updated!

Project/General

1. What is the purpose of this project?
2. When did the project development process start and how long before construction?
3. How is the project funded?
4. What are the three project phases?
5. Who is in charge? Who makes the final decision about what will be built?
6. Who do I contact for more information?

Safety

7. Why is the Parks Highway between Lucus Road and Big Lake Road is a traffic safety corridor?
8. What are the existing crash rates?
9. Are there plans to mitigate the moose/vehicle conflicts?

Access

10. What is meant by “access”?
11. What is the access plan for this corridor?
12. What does it mean to improve mobility of a roadway?
13. What is the cost of congestion in this corridor?

Signalization

14. Why is a signal planned at Stanley Road and not at Lamont?
15. Will there be a signal at Big Lake?

Alternatives

16. Did you consider the No-Build Alternative (i.e., do nothing)?
17. What other alternatives were considered?
18. What about the existing Parks Highway 5-lane section through the City of Wasilla?
19. Will there still be a multi-use pathway?
20. What is happening at the existing Railroad crossings?
21. Why not construct frontage road all along the Parks Highway?

Right of Way

22. What are my rights as a property owner if the project will require some of my property?
23. When is DOT going to contact me about purchasing my property?

1. Q. What is the purpose of this project? to top

A. The purpose of this project is to improve safety, reduce congestion, and increase travel efficiency. To improve safety, the project will reduce high severity crash rates along the corridor, particularly head-on collisions; reduce overall crash rates along the corridor for vehicles and all highway corridor users; and reduce moose/vehicle collisions along the corridor. To reduce congestion, the project will reduce unacceptable congestion in the design year for users traveling on the Parks Highway from Lucus Road to Big Lake Road; and reduce unacceptable delay (congestion) in the design year at signalized and unsignalized intersections along the Parks Highway from Lucus Road to Big Lake Road. To increase travel efficiency, the project will decrease travel time for users commuting from the MSB to the Anchorage area; decrease travel time for regional traffic heading north or south through Meadow Lakes; and safely and efficiently accommodate mobility for longer trips and accessibility to adjacent land parcels and local streets.  (Excerpt from Parks Highway: MP 44-52, Lucus Road to Big Lake Road, Revised Environmental Assessment, September 2010, page 8).

2. Q. When did the project development process start and how long before construction? to top

A. The process started with award of a consultant contract in August 2004. We are currently in the design phase and will shortly begin right of way acquisition.
Current Schedule (subject to change due to availability of funding):

Phases 1 and 2: Lucus Road to Pittman Road (Projects 52914 and 52929)
Preliminary Design: December 2010 - July 2011
Final Design: Aug. 2011 - Sept. 2014
Right of way: Sept. 2011 - Sept. 2014
Construction: 2015-2016

Phase 3: Pittman Road to Big Lake Road
Preliminary Design: July 2012 - Aug. 2013
Final Design: Sept. 2013 - Sept. 2016
Right of way: Oct. 2013 - Sept. 2016
Construction: 2017-2018

Any projects undertaken by the ADOT&PF using federal highway funds must go through a specific multi-step process that includes developing an environmental document in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Each step must be completed before we move the next step. The following graphic shows a typical schedule for a project requiring an environmental impact statement (EIS).

3. Q. How is the project funded? to top

A. The project is funded by the Federal Highway Trust Fund. The federal government pays 93.4% of project costs with the State paying for the remaining 6.6%.

4. Q. What are the three project phases? to top

A. The project corridor was split into three segments: 1) Lucus Road to Church Road, 2) Church Road to Pittman Road, and 3) Pittman Road to Big Lake Road. Church Road was used as a logical segment break because it is the first major intersection beyond the current transition from the five-lane to two-lane divided highway facility. Pittman Road and Big Lake Road were used as logical segment breaks because development in these locations generates a significant amount of traffic.

5. Q Who is in charge? Who makes the final decision about what will be built? to top

A. Jim Amundsen is the Project Manager for the DOT&PF; his role is to manage the process, staff and consultants.

6. Q. Who do I contact for more information? to top

A.
Anne Brooks, P.E. - Public Participation Coordinator
Toll Free: 1-866-535-1877
Telephone: 907-272-1877
Email: mycomments@brooks-alaska.com

Jim Amundsen, P.E. - Project Manager
Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities
Email: jim.amundsen@alaska.gov

7. Q. Why is the Parks Highway between Lucus Road and Big Lake Road a traffic safety corridor? to top

A. The Parks Highway is a designated safety corridor. This safety corridor status was enabled in 2006 by the action of the Alaska State Legislature. The designation, granted only when an analysis of crash data warrants it, mobilizes long-term and short-term mitigation strategies involving engineering, enforcement and education. What led to this designation?

In excess of 20,000 vehicles used the corridor each day in 2010, and this number is expected to double by 2033. Crash rates for traffic safety corridors are orders of magnitude higher than other corridors statewide as shown in the table below.

Crashes by Severity 1999-2008
(Source: DOT&PF, Traffic Safety)

Type	Statewide Crashes		Traffic Safety Corridor Crashes
	Number	Percentage	Number	Percentage
Fatalities	780	0.58%	61	2.47%
Incapacitating Injury	4287	3.20%	180	7.28%
Non-Incapacitating	35395	26.40%	718	29.06%
Property Damage Only	93586	69.82%	1512	61.19%

The EA noted that “many of these crashes are access-related and over 60 percent are head-on collisions.” Head-on and angle (access related) collisions are the type of crashes that are significantly reduced or eliminated by a partial access controlled divided highway. For more information about Traffic Safety Corridors, view the DOT&PF Safety Corridors web site (http://dot.alaska.gov/comm/safety_corridors.shtml)

8. Q. What are the existing crash rates? to top

A. According to the 2004-2008 crash data review, the Parks Highway between Wasilla and Houston has the highest rate of fatal and major injury crashes (per vehicle mile) in the DOT&PF Central Region. During the Traffic Safety Corridor (TSC) study period (1977-2005), 33 fatal collisions occurred in the study area. Of those, 28 of the most recent fatal collisions occurred between Church Road and Big Lake Road. The fatal accident rate for this segment was 2.68 crashes per 100 million vehicle miles (MVM), which is approximately 183 percent of the national fatal accident rate for 2004. When compared to statewide averages, three factors/conditions were over represented in the fatal collision analysis including: 1) dark and twilight lighting conditions (48 percent compared to a statewide average of 28 percent), 2) improper lane use/change (21.21 percent compared to a statewide average of 5.90 percent), and 3) head-on collisions (60 percent compared to a statewide average of 16 percent). The significant increase in head-on collisions is possibly due to several factors such as the urban characteristics of this portion of Parks Highway, high volumes of both commuter and summer recreational traffic, the disparity in vehicle speeds, and vehicle mass among commuter versus recreation drivers. (Excerpt from Parks Highway: MP 44-52, Lucus Road to Big Lake Road, Revised Environmental Assessment, September 2010, page 2, Safety Corridor Designation).

9. Q. Are there plans to mitigate the moose/vehicle conflicts? to top

A. The project will install continuous lighting along the entire 8.3 mile segment of the Parks Highway to reduce moose collisions within the project area.

10. Q. What is meant by “access”?  to top

A. The term access refers to how vehicles get onto and off of the roadway. Access can be provided via ramps, intersections, frontage roads, and driveways. The level of access to adjacent property is dependent on the primary function of the roadway. As such, “access management” determines how and where roadway users get on and get off of a roadway, directly impacting traffic flow on the roadway.

11. Q. What is the access plan for this corridor?  to top

A. The Parks Highway has a functional classification of “interstate”, which would typically indicate a design with full access control. In accordance with the exemption permitted in 23 USC 103, the DOT&PF would allow less restrictive access to the highway in order to balance the various needs and demands of users. The DOT&PF has developed a Corridor Management Plan that defines limits and types of permissible access onto and across the highway. The proposed project corridor would be developed as a partial limited access facility with allowable access points defined by breaks in controlled access lines. The plan does not eliminate any existing individual property’s access onto the highway; however, the proposed median would restrict movement at driveways and at some approach road intersections to right-in/right-out maneuvers. These controls, along with deliberate intersection design and location, would allow traffic to flow in more predictable and safer patterns throughout the area. Between Lucus Road and Deskas Street, traffic channelization and access consolidation will be considered further during final design of the project. The Corridor Management Plan protects and preserves the benefits of the proposed improvements, including improved safety, increased capacity, and enhanced travel efficiency. It would encourage development of a local collector system as development occurs, on an as-needed basis, to serve traffic generated by the development. (Excerpt from Parks Highway: MP 44-52, Lucus Road to Big Lake Road, Revised Environmental Assessment, September 2010, page 15).

For businesses along the corridor, the Federal Highway Administration has developed a publication Safe Access is Good For Business that addresses the advantages of safe access.

12. Q. What does it mean to improve mobility of a roadway? to top

A. The term mobility is defined by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) as “the ability [of traffic] to move or be moved from place to place”. This ability to move or be moved is not mode-dependent but applies to vehicles, transit, pedestrians, and bicyclists. According to the FHWA, mobility can be measured in terms of “travel times, level of traffic congestion, or duration of congestion-all of which focus on how long it takes to get from place to place”.

13.Q. What is the cost of congestion in this corridor? to top

A. Increased congestion has resulted in long delay times and high delay costs associated with stop-and-go conditions along the highway. In 2007, the DOT&PF examined the delay in its major corridors and estimated the value of lost time to the traveling public using a value of $15 per hour. This project corridor was ranked third among the top 10 congestion bottlenecks in the Central Region with an estimated cost to the traveling public of $9 million annually. (Excerpt from Parks Highway: MP 44-52, Lucus Road to Big Lake Road, Revised Environmental Assessment, September 2010, page 8).

14. Q. Why is a signal planned at Stanley Road and not at Lamont Way? to top

A. A traffic signal is planned at Stanley Road. The temporary signal will be installed in 2012 and will become permanent with the reconstruction project at a later date.

Stanley Road is a designated as a collector road. The function of a collector road is to connect the traffic from local roads to the higher-capacity arterial roads (such as the Parks Highway).  Stanley Road serves residential areas north of the Parks Highway and therefore, is an appropriate connection to the Parks Highway and warrants a traffic signal. In addition, area residents have expressed the need to provide a signal at the Stanley Road intersection. Furthermore, the Mat Su Borough Long Range Transportation Plan recommends that Stanley Road be extended to the north, all the way to Pittman Road, as development in that area expands.  Thus, in the future, Stanley Road will serve traffic from existing and future neighborhoods and roadways and link those to the Parks Highway.

In contrast, Lamont Way is designated a local road. The function of a local road is to provide direct access to the adjacent land uses.  However, it is not good practice to directly connect local streets to arterials such as the Parks Highway, especially where collector connections can be developed and used. Moreover, because of the higher volumes and speeds that will be served by the Parks Highway, it is good practice to consolidate and minimize access points wherever possible.

The project is aiming to provide median openings at 1/2-mile spacing on collectors and locations that might be signalized in the future. This works in concert with the 1-mile spacing established by the City of Wasilla for their north-south collectors (Church Road, Lucus Road, Lucille Street and Peck Street). Full access at Stanley conforms to the desirable 1/2-mile spacing allowing for synchronization of signals and good signal progression that significantly affects the travel time and speed along the Parks Highway. The Parks Highway is designated an interstate, which means the design for the Parks Highway should emphasize the mobility of the long distance traveler, providing for safe, relatively high-speed operation of the roadway, as well as capacity that is sufficient for future travel demand. A full median opening and signal at Lamont Way would not provide the proper signal spacing for optimal mobility on the Parks Highway.

15. Q. Will there be a signal at Big Lake? to top

A. At this time, based on our traffic analysis for the Environmental Assessment, a signal is not warranted at the Big Lake intersection. Phase 3 of the project is several years away and includes this intersection. During detailed design of Phase 3, the traffic conditions at this intersection will re-evaluated. If the intersection meets warrants at that time the signal will be included.

16. Q. Did you consider the No Build Alternative (i.e. do nothing)? to top

A. Yes. Evaluation of a No Build Alternative is required under National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations as a baseline for comparing the effects associated with Build Alternatives. If we were to do nothing, the existing highway would remain unchanged and only routine activities, such as road maintenance and repair, would occur during the next 20 years. Approximately 2000 feet of existing five-lane roadway west of Lucus Road would remain, and the remainder of the proposed project corridor would retain its existing two-lane configuration along the current roadway alignment. No frontage road, intersection, or pathway reconstruction would be completed.

No improvements would be made to the existing corridor management plan to proactively implement access management. As such, it is likely additional driveways and other roadways would be constructed as development continues, allowing more direct access to and across the highway. Consequences of this action would include increased congestion along the corridor, with travel declining to an unacceptable Level of Service (LOS) F, and reduced travel efficiency. High crash rates would continue. Local traffic and access, especially left turns, would become increasingly difficult.

Because the No Build Alternative does not reduce congestion along the corridor or address any of the access-related safety issues, such as left turn movements or head-on collisions, it does not meet the purpose and need for the proposed project.
(Excerpt from Parks Highway: MP 44-52, Lucus Road to Big Lake Road, Revised Environmental Assessment, September 2010, page 18, No Build Alternative).

17. Q. What other alternatives were considered? to top

A. The Environmental Assessment addressed the alternatives.

Three other alternatives were evaluated—a four-lane divided highway with a depressed grass median and partial frontage roads; a four-lane divided highway with fully controlled access; and a five-lane section.

Four-lane Divided Highway with Depressed Grass Median and
Partial Frontage Roads Alternative (Preferred)
This alternative would extend the five-lane section approximately one mile from Lucus Road to Church Road and upgrade 7.3 miles of the existing highway to a four-lane divided highway with at-grade intersections generally spaced every half-mile and a depressed median from Church Road to Big Lake Road. A 30-foot wide median would be constructed from Church Road to Museum Drive and a 42-foot wide median would be utilized beyond Museum Drive to Big Lake Road. This alternative would provide for increased capacity and improve the level of service.

The existing signalized Church Road intersection, located approximately one-half mile inside the western limits of the City of Wasilla, is a logical boundary between suburban/rural and urban development. Currently, the five-lane section ends approximately half-mile east of Church Road; this alternative would replace the first half-mile of two-lane roadway with a 5- lane section and transition to the four-lane divided cross-section west of Church Road.

Approximately 4 miles of existing frontage roads would be improved, driveways would be consolidated, and at-grade intersections would be placed where conflicts can be minimized to reduce crash rates. Approaches for 11 cross streets would be improved. The existing intersection with Museum Drive would be relocated to the west of its current location to address sight distance issues resulting from the existing alignment in relation to the embankment for the ARRC crossing bridge. The existing 10-foot wide paved multi-use pathway would be reconstructed and/or relocated as required to accommodate mainline, frontage roads, and intersection improvements. Illumination would be provided along the full length of the corridor due to the higher than average proportion of dark and twilight accidents as well as for moose mitigation.

Culverts would be upgraded or extended as needed. The two existing culverts at Little Meadow Creek would be removed and replaced with a short span bridge. A structure parallel to the existing structure would be constructed to accommodate additional through traffic lanes over the railroad.

Access management would be utilized to define limits of permissible access onto and across the highway. This design shifts “direct access” onto secondary roads where possible to preserve the high mobility function of the corridor. This would encourage development of the local roadway system to accommodate local traffic circulation off the highway system.

Initial analyses indicate this alternative meets the projects’ purpose and need. The median and illumination are anticipated to reduce the high severity crashes. The additional thru lanes would add capacity to the facility, reducing anticipated congestion. The implementation of access management would improve the travel efficiency for all roadway users by reducing the travel time for regional and commuter traffic and improving the circulation patterns for local traffic.

Four-lane Divided Highway with Fully Controlled Access Alternative
Similar to the Preferred Alternative, this alternative would extend the five-lane section from Lucus Road to Church Road. The remainder of the proposed project corridor, from Church Road to Big Lake Road would be designed as a freeway style facility and would upgrade the existing highway west of Church Road to a four-lane divided highway with two lane, two way frontage roads on each side and grade separated interchanges at two major intersections.

This design would be similar to the Parks Highway between the Glenn Highway and Seward Meridian Parkway east of the City of Wasilla. This alternative would include reconstruction of the multi-use pathway, continuous corridor illumination, drainage improvements, installation of a bridge at Little Meadow Creek and construction of a bridge over the railroad similar to the Preferred Alternative.

Existing frontage roads along this section of the Parks Highway are adequately handling access density in developed areas. In areas without existing frontage roads, driveway density is low as development in these areas is sparse. This alternative would therefore construct frontage roads for undeveloped areas along the corridor where future development may or may not occur.

This alternative would construct full frontage roads along both sides of the highway and grade separated interchanges, which would cause this alternative to have a footprint approximately twice the size as the Preferred Alternative. This would significantly increase ROW requirements and environmental impacts, particularly wetland impacts. Much of the existing development in this section has occurred in areas immediately adjacent to the highway in what is commonly referred to as “strip development”. Because numerous established businesses and residences would be relocated, impacts to the community would be excessive.

This alternative would separate the thru traffic from local traffic accessing adjacent businesses. It would increase capacity, improve mobility, attain full access control, and reduce conflicts that may lead to crashes. However, this alternative was not carried forward due to the significant additional ROW requirements, environmental consequences, and construction costs over the Preferred Alternative.

The four-lane divided highway with fully controlled access alternative was eliminated for the following reasons:

• Significant additional ROW requirements;
• Excessive impacts to the community;
• Numerous environmental consequences;
• Substantial additional construction costs.

Five-Lane Section Alternative
This alternative would extend the five-lane section the entire length of the proposed project corridor from Lucus Road to Big Lake Road. As with the other Build Alternatives, this alternative would include reconstruction of the multi-use pathway, continuous illumination, drainage improvements, and construction of bridges at Little Meadow Creek and over the railroad. This alternative would provide increased capacity; however, conflicts between highway through traffic and local community traffic would continue.

The Preferred Alternative was selected over the five-lane section alternative because it holds considerable safety, capacity and efficiency advantages over a five-lane facility. It more effectively balances the competing demands for thru-traffic mobility, local access, and public safety.

The five-lane section alternative was eliminated for the following reasons:

• Increases density of vehicles accessing the highway from adjacent properties and side streets, which slows travel speeds for thru traffic;
• Provides less capacity than the Preferred Alternative;
• Fails to provide for efficient movement of through traffic within the corridor;
• Fails to provide sufficient separation of traffic traveling in opposite directions to reduce head-on and side swipe crashes;
• Fails to provide adequate space for future multiple lane left turn pockets forecasted to be needed in the design life;
• Fails to provide for safe movement of local traffic across and throughout the corridor;
• Fails to provide a pedestrian refuge;
• Left turns not as safe as U-turns at designated signals;
• Improper use by merging traffic.

(Excerpt from Parks Highway: MP 44-52, Lucus Road to Big Lake Road, Revised Environmental Assessment, September 2010, beginning on page 18).

18. Q. What about the existing Parks Highway 5-lane section through the City of Wasilla? to top

A. The five-lane section in Wasilla currently operates well and the DOT&PF anticipates it will operate well for the next 10 years with minor improvements. This section of corridor is functionally classified as an Interstate and is on the National Highway System; however, the crash rates, access density, and speeds are not consistent with this classification.

19. Q. Will there still be a multi-use pathway? to top

A. Yes. The project includes a multi-use non-motorized pathway the entire length of the project on the north side of the roadway between Lucus and Pittman Road/Sylvan Road. The pathway shifts to the south side of the Parks Highway between Pittman/Sylvan and the end of the project.

20. Q. What is happening at the existing Railroad crossings? to top

A. The existing railroad crossings will remain as currently configured. For example, the elevated railroad crossing exists near Vienna Woods and Museum Drive will be widened to accommodate the two additional lanes of the Parks Highway.  Where the railroad crossings are on side streets like Pittman Road, the at-grade crossings will remain.

21. Q. Why not construct frontage roads all along the Parks Highway? to top

A. Existing development and the parallel Alaska Railroad tracks preclude continuous two-way frontage road development along both sides of the corridor. Where constructed, frontage roads would consist of two 11-foot wide lanes and 5-foot wide shoulders.

22. Q. What are my rights as a property owner if the project will require some of my property? to top

A. At this time, the precise right-of-way requirements are still undetermined. When the right-of-way requirements are determined and right-of-way acquisition has begun, we have to follow the specific guidelines outlined in the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 as Amended. You can download a copy of this document by clicking here.

23. Q. When is DOT going to contact me about purchasing my property? to top

A. In late 2011, the DOT selected a company to assist in the Right-of-Way acquisition for Phases 1 and 2 of the project. The contract should start work within the first quarter of 2012. Once the contractor starts work, the Right of Way team will contact affected owners.