Future of Highways

The Atlantic is a somewhat highbrow monthly that is decidedly establishment in its point of view. I mention that only because the latest edition (March 2008) contains a couple of startling pieces touching on transportation issues of the future. Both suggest the limits of urban sprawl may be upon us.

The mass movement into suburbs over the past half century was made possible by the rapid construction of freeway systems heavily subsidized by the Federal government. This was an unforeseen consequence of the Interstate Highway program which was conceived as a means of quickly moving commerce about the country. The system is perhaps the fondest achievement of the Eisenhower administration. Ike was so impressed by the German autobahns during the World War II campaign there that he brought the idea home. As a booster to commerce and the economy the Interstate Highway program was a smashing success and the enabling of suburban growth was long seen as a side benefit. Today, however, fierce opposition to expanding commute highways have converted them into bottlenecks not only to commuters but to the flow of commerce originally envisioned. One of the Atlantic articles cites an academic study which quantifies the economic loss wrought by highways, mainly in urban areas, which are operating at volumes above capacity. This is reported to be nearly $50 billion annually.

Another article reports on how the rising costs, both in money and time, of commuting by automobile as well as the sterile environment of many suburban places have driven a rebirth of urban living. It goes on to predict that some of the suburban developments of recent years featuring large homes on large lots are already beginning to resemble urban slums with an excess of vacant buildings and an increase in crime. It foresees a future where suburbia will be the home of crime and poverty, a 180-degree change from recent history. For myself, the peaceful middle class suburb where I grew up has already made this conversion with plenty of vacant buildings and a general sense of menace in public spaces.

In today's global economy the United States is competing with Europe, the Pacific Rim, China, and, increasingly India. All of these places are well ahead of us in building diverse transportation systems designed to move both commerce and people efficiently. In general, this means a separation of the two. Travel to London, Shanghai, Tokyo. or even Mexico City and your trip from the airport to the commercial district will be rapid and relatively stress free. Compare that to arrival at Kennedy or LAX. The difference is that in America you are competing for travel room in heavy traffic.

The time is coming where we will have to change our relationship with the automobile. We're not going to be able to afford them sooner than we all think. But, of course, we are not making any rational or even different plans. Let's hope we don't wait too long.

We should get behind ideas like hefty penalties for driving into certain congested areas, development of high speed electric train systems both local and regional, and separations of commercial and individual traffic. But we have done little of this. In California proposals have been made to address each of these areas and have died in a storm of protest from the keepers of the status quo. We are very much like addicts who realize that we should cease our behavior but haven't the fortitude to do so.