[SButtonZ button="digg"]
At a White House gathering last week, both Barack Obama and Joe Biden warned America’s governors not to squander stimulus funds on ill-conceived infrastructure projects. “Six months from now,” Biden said, “if the verdict on this effort is that we’ve wasted the money, we built things that were unnecessary, or we’ve done things that are legal but make no sense, then, folks, don’t look for any help from the federal government for a long while.”
Nowhere is this warning more pertinent than in building new roads. The stimulus bill allocates nearly $30 billion in highway funds to the states and requires that they put the money to use quickly. That’s a good thing when it is being spent on smart construction, but it raises the danger that some bad projects will be rushed through, simply because the plans are ready to go (in some cases after being controversially fast-tracked by the Bush administration.) Misguided road building can encourage sprawl, make communities less livable, and devastate the local environment. We looked at shovel-ready new highway projects across the country that are either getting stimulus money or could potentially get some and found seven that, in Biden’s words, “make no sense.”
7. I-295 Loop — Fayetteville, NC
In November, North Carolina decided to allocate $275 million to an 8-mile stretch of the I-295 freeway that will eventually belt around Fayetteville, the state’s sixth-largest city. In the state’s preliminary stimulus funding list, the road would get another $63 million for a construction start within the next few months.
But this segment of highway, which runs from I-95 to the army base at Fort Bragg crosses through rural land and is a recipe for the worst kind of sprawl. Meanwhile, the city center, deprived of military traffic that currently constitutes its lifeblood, would suffer.
The state already has ample evidence that this road is unnecessary: An existing 7-mile section of I-295, to the east of the extension current in planning, has attracted few drivers, carrying only 10,000 cars a day, compared to the 100,000 carried by Raleigh’s unfinished outer loop or the 120,000 carried by Charlotte’s. Other state roads would be a much better investment for the limited funds.
So why do it? Former state Transportation Secretary Lyndo Tippett and State majority leader Tony Rand are both from Fayetteville and they had unlimited discretion in prioritizing which roads to fund. Importantly, the state has no cost-benefit analysis to determine which roads would make the best investments.
6. I-69 Extension — Indiana
Indiana is in the process of planning the construction of this extension of I-69, which would run from Indianapolis to Evansville, via Bloomington. The I-69 corridor is eventually planned to extend from Canada to Mexico as a “NAFTA” corridor to expand trade.
The new highway – at 142 miles long – would cost an estimated $3.5 billion to build (up from $1.8 billion in 2000). Its effect on the sections south of Bloomington, where it would be built on “new terrain,” would be devastating to the rural life there, with 400 families affected by the route’s construction and 2,800 acres of farmland paved over. More than 1,000 acres of forests would be cut down, including a portion of the Patoka National Wildlife Refuge.
People in Indiana wonder why the road needs to be built. After all, today, roads between Indianapolis and Evansville are rarely crowded. Meanwhile, though the state claims that the new road would reduce travel time between the two cities by 27 minutes, an independent analysis suggests it would only save commuters 10 to 14 minutes.
A better alternative, suggested by community members affected by the project’s construction, would improve existing roads in southwestern Indiana and route I-69 via Terre Haute, instead of Bloomington. Such a path would only be 13 miles longer and cost half as much. That’s because it wouldn’t require constructing a new right-of-way, which means not taking nearly as much private land nor destroying as many environmentally sensitive areas.
5. Widening I-93 — Southern New Hampshire
Southeastern New Hampshire has become a place of residence for commuters working in Boston, many of whom appreciate the state’s scenic beauty and easy drive into Massachusetts. So many people have been making the move, though, that more and more scenic beauty has been consumed by sprawl and the drive’s no longer so easy.
The main access route, I-93, is a mess at rush hour. New Hampshire DOT’s solution: widening the highway from four lanes today to eight along a 20-mile stretch between Salem and Manchester, at a cost of $750 million. The project – now in the implementation phase – has dragged on for decades because the state never fully studied its environmental consequences – which include the loss of some of the state’s remaining wetlands.
More importantly, though, the state didn’t consider what has become common knowledge among transportation experts: building more roads simply encourages more road usage. Nor was a major new transit service considered as an alternative to the project. A parallel existing rail line, which has been disused for years, would offer the area’s commuters a direct shot to downtown Boston. The state has thus far ignored this congestion-relieving option.
In New Hampshire, the highway’s construction would likely mean more suburban home building, more environmental destruction, and increasing pollution. How about trying a new train service instead?
4. I-66 — Kentucky
U.S. Representative Harold Rogers has been relentlessly pursuing the $10 billion extension of Interstate 66 through his state, earmarking more than $90 million for project planning over the last decade. He seems convinced that the freeway would help the economy in struggling southern Kentucky.
Rogers might be well-intentioned, but the project is a disaster. The 420-mile route, connecting Paducah in the west to Pikeville in the east, lies directly between I-64 and I-40, which are only three hours apart. In this rural area, a freeway simply isn’t necessary. There is little traffic on existing roads. More importantly, neighboring states have abandoned work on connecting segments, meaning that the highway would effectively dead-end into local roads at both ends. But the the most dire effects would be on the environment. The road would tear through the Appalachians and the Daniel Boone National Forest, a fact conveniently ignored when the Bush Administration fast-tracked the proposal in 2003.
3. Grand Parkway — Houston, Texas
Houston, it seems, wants to be like Beijing. With six ring roads, the Chinese government has made it clear it doesn’t mind letting sprawl continue without limits around its capital. Houston’s Grand Parkway, at 184 miles in length and a projected cost of $5.1 billion, will be the city’s fourth outer loop.
The next stretch of the road to be built, funded by $181 million of stimulus money, would be a 14-mile corridor running through the traces of Texas’ famous – and now almost completely destroyed Katy Prairie, as well as a number of other uninhabited areas, including a swath of Lake Houston State Park.
The Grand Parkway Association, the nonprofit group that is pushing the road, has a board made up of major land developers, who see a profitable new frontier for exurban sprawl. One of the project’s biggest boosters is General Growth Properties, which just happens to be developing of a 20,000-home subdivision along the Parkway. (Photo: houstonfreeways.com)
2. Intercounty Connector — Prince Georges and Montgomery counties, Maryland
Former governor Parris Glendening’s assessment that this highway project would be an environmental disaster for the state didn’t prevent the Bush administration from later fast-tracking it.
The Intercounty Connector would stretch 18 miles across the suburban counties and cost up to $3 billion to build by the time it is completed in 2012. Its six to eight lanes would be tolled, but before the revenue starts coming in, the project would consume $2 billion from the state’s reserves and leave Maryland at 93% of its legal debt capacity, making it difficult for it to fund other major projects – like needed new light rail lines in Baltimore.
From the beginning, the Intercounty Connector has infuriated environmental activists. Understandably so, as the chosen alignment would destroy nearly 1,000 acres of forest and induce even more sprawl in the greater D.C. suburbs.
To make matters worse, the project won’t even be much of a help in clearing the traffic on Washington’s infamously congested Beltway. Even though the ICC would be built on average just four miles from that road, its net effect would be to increase the number of miles traveled by Marylanders in their cars, rather than reduce such movement.
Construction has just begun the project, but there’s still time to shut it down.
1. I-65 Downtown Bridge — Louisville, Kentucky
Kentucky and Indiana have a plan on the books to rebuild the Ohio River crossings in Louisville, where three interstate highways intersect. The Ohio River Bridges would double the span of the existing I-65 bridge and expand the “spaghetti junction” in eastern downtown, where the road meets I-64 and I-71. Several miles upriver, a new East End bridge would allow commuters to bypass downtown Louisville along the newly expanded I-265.
Sounds harmless enough, right? Just the expansion of an existing network of roads and the creation of a new outer loop? The problem is that this $4.1 billion project would create a 24-lane monstrosity along downtown Louisville’s waterfront, further separating the city center from the Ohio river and cutting into a brand new park. Approximately 100 residential properties and 30 businesses would be taken for the project, and the enormous, ugly interchange of the three roads would loom above downtown.
A local group that wants to nix the project as it currently stands, citing its Robert Moses-like scale of destruction and willful disinterest in the healthy function of the city, argues that I-64 should be rerouted around the city via the new East End bridge. This would eliminate any need for an expansion of the downtown span and call for a much smaller interchange. It would open up the downtown waterfront and allow the for the construction of an attractive boulevard like San Francisco’s Embarcadero. Another upshot? This plan would cost half as much.
-
See Also:
Beyond the Cloverleaf: “The Butt” and 21 Other Crazy Highway Interchanges You’ve Never Heard of
-
-
Yonah Freemark is an independent researcher currently working in France on comparative urban development as part of a Gordon Grand Fellowship from Yale University, from which he graduated in May 2008 with a BA in architecture. He writes about transportation and land use issues for The Transport Politic and The Infrastructurist.
To Jim, Steven, and the rest-
I understand the reasons for supporting the ICC but the fact is that it was not planned well. Half the people I grew up with will be forced off their families’ land to make room for a polluting toll road that will not actually serve the communities that it runs through. You say its already “built up” but just because communities exist does not mean that a commuter road is a good idea or that it won’t be damaging.
P.S. Thomas i really hope that you’re joking
[...] Freemark of The Infrastructurist put a nice list of roads that have seemingly little value. He lists [...]
Building ANY new or wider roads on the downslope of Peak Oil is nuts beyond language.
All of these federal pork-ways are supposedly to address traffic demands twenty years in the future — not current traffic levels. But as the oil supplies dwindle, and the “alternatives” are shown to be less concentrated than fossil fuels, it is obvious there will be less traffic as the years go by. Nationally, VMT – Vehicle Miles Traveled – have “peaked,” and as the downslope of Peak Oil becomes harder to deny, total VMTs will decline as well.
As for the Inter County Connector in Maryland, the primary reason for that sprawlway is to connect the various Fed.Gov compounds and contractors, not for traffic issues. Perhaps it could be called the NSA Expressway, since it will connect the world’s largest collection of computers with the high-tech contractors along I-270.
The goal for the ICC was also to induce more sprawl north of the route, but the collapse of the real estate market will probably slow that down considerably. I hope the citizens of suburban Maryland are able to adapt to higher carbon monoxide levels – clean air is obviously an overrated concept, getting somewhere a few minutes faster is more important than using up the world’s oil supplies and poisoning your grandchildren.
Gov. Glendening was forced to withdraw his blatant support for this highway in the late 1990s when the Federal Highway Administration privately told him that the project would not meet “legal sufficiency.” He kept the project on life support and let his successor push the project through, along with the Bush administration’s “streamlining” of relevant highway laws.
The interstate highway system will be an interesting relic after the oil is gone, far more fascinating to future generations than Ankor Wat in Cambodia, the Egyptian Pyramids or the stone heads of Easter Island.
Thanks for this informative post. After reading about I69 Extension and the projects for Louisville, KY. I wanted to share some of my thoughts. I have held a CDL (Commercial Drivers License) since Mar. of 05. During that time, I have worked for companies based just outside of Louisville & Indianapolis.
With respect to the I69 Extension, Gov. Daniels has and continues to sell Indiana tax payers short. Just recently, Gov. Daniels issued directives to INDOT to “throw away the federal highway construction rulebook whenever possible.” http://www.fox28.com/Global/story.asp?S=10387047
Not only does Gov. Daniels think that ignoring Federal code is an acceptable and safe way to do business, he continues to ignore the wishes of Indiana Tax Payers. I69 provides NOTHING for citizens that reside within Regions 5, 8 & 11 except minimum wage paying jobs.
With respect to Louisville, I spent many days navigating I65/I64 & I71. There are far fewer days when a serious accident or fatality incident does not occur on the Kennedy Bridge or at Hospital Curve. For those that navigate these corridors on a regular basis, there is a reason why 18 Wheelers grab the left lane 1 to 1.5 miles out and hang there until they are through Hospital Curve or even all the way down to the Gene Snyder. Though truck traffic is restricted through portions of I65, we’d rather take the risk of being caught with our pants down than be stuck in an Accordion style traffic jam. Though I am not versed enough to say whether or not the expansion of the East Bridge is a viable solution to this issue, I do know that until SOMETHING is done, more people will be seriously injured and killed needlessly. If I am correct, hasn’t the west bound connector of 265 been an unresolved issue for the past 10 years? Maybe the West Bound connector could be finished and truck traffic diverted around down town freeing up a lot of traffic.
Whether that is a solution to the problem I do not know. I do know this much. Anywhere, ANYWHERE you have multiple interstates ending, beginning and continuing through one another, there are going to be congestion issues. Until Indiana & Kentucky take a serious approach to it’s transportation infer structure, and for that matter our nation, projects like these will always be a cash cow for some and a socicial/economical and ecological challenges for others.
[...] miles down the city’s Main Street, did the trend begin to reverse itself. Though the region remains committed to the construction of huge expanses of asphalt, for the first time in decades, a large transit [...]
Anyone who thinks that the 8664 plan would stop travelers from stopping in our fair city, is dumb at best. If you are traveling on these interstates through Louisville and are from out of state then 9 times out of 10 you are not stopping in Louisville. These travelers are headed to Florida, Ohio, Michigan and are caught up in the mess that is the downtown interstates.
If any true person who drives daily to downtown Louisville would know, all it takes is one wreck on any of the 3 interstates (65,64,71) to almost stop traffic. My belief is to get the above mentioned travelers out of downtown get them around the city and on their way.
Come on the true drivers into Louisville no who they are, they are the ones that go to the football. basketball games and leave early in the 2nd half because they want to beat that traffic. Anyone that thinks the 8664 plan would create more issues, well they have already left and are no longer looking at things with new and better ideas and just think more lanes will be better. Just look at 264 (Watterson) for proof that more lanes do not alleviate traffic.
Build the East End Bridge first let the traffic normalize to the new directions around Louisville lets make the city world class and reconnect with the river that built this city in the first place.
the fact that a lot of people with money live in the east end of louisville has everything to do with the downtown bridge being built.
these people donate to political campaigns on a regular basis with the purpose of subverting what is needed.
granted. the east end bridge is the smart and inteligent choice. but, since even the mayor of louisville lives out that way…………..
and, don’t plan on seeing either bridge built anytime soon anyway. the people in charge are more worried about passing out money to their friends firms to do consulting work work rather than actually paying for something to be done.
these bridges have been in the works for over 15 years.
it’s actually kind of sad to think that it’s like that. but, it is. and it’s the same with the I 69 project in indiana. it’s all about getting money to the right people.
As infrastructure reporters, you guys might do a bit more research before you list a project as unnecessary. The I65 bridge and “Spaghetti Junction” reconfiguration in Louisville IS necessary. I65 runs from Chicago to Mobile. It is heavily traveled. The I65 Kennedy Bridge across the Ohio River at Louisville is inadequate to the transportation needs of the corridor. Reconfiguring the I65 interchange with I64, which runs from St. Louis to Hampton Roads/Norfolk VA, and I71 which runs from Louisville to Cleveland, OH is also necessary as part of construction of the new parallel bridge needed on I65.
The existing interchange of those 3 interstates immediately east of downtown Louisville MUST be replaced. With the new bridge and interchange there will still be 8 elevated lanes at downtown proper. No more land over downtown will be taken, and in fact, east of Waterfront Park a significant area, on the river-ward side where I71/I64 junction just east of the “spaghetti junction” is currently located, will be opened up along the River Road corridor. The new configuration will place the highway lanes farther from the park over what are now auto salvage yards, a cement plant and an abandoned brownfield oil terminal.
A group that is against this project as planned calls themselves “8664″ because they want to chop 1 mile out of the middle of I64 where it passes downtown Louisville under the Belvedere, a festival plaza and green roof on top of a parking garage and over the elevated interstate. The 8664.org crowd claims that they want to connect pedestrians and bicyclists coming from downtown Louisville to the waterfront by replacing I64 along the downtown waterfront with a surface parkway. They ignore the fact that the 30,000 or so commuters coming into downtown from the west would be put onto that surface road, making pedestrians have to cross that traffic instead of walking under the highway, as they do now under the elevated I64.
They also disregard the fact that the reason these highways are elevated is to keep them above the 100-yr floodplain. River Road underneath I64 downtown floods regularly. The 1997 flood reached within 3′ of the top of the piers supporting I64. Cutting a “Parkway” through the floodwall down there is not only NOT a good idea, it wouldn’t be allowed because the road would be in the floodplain. The “Parkway” at ground level would be impassible every time the Ohio River comes up over it, often several days per year. Even if allowed, it would add tremendously to the cost to have to replace sections of the floodwall and levee and install multiple lanes worth of new floodgates. Sewers and pump stations would also have to be removed, reconfigured and replaced.
Proponents of “8664″ completely disregard the fact that there is no other direct way for people coming from the west side of town to get to the east side of town, including to the five hospitals that are all clustered on the east side of Downtown. It is easy to disregard them because those people live in the Black and Poor White neighborhoods on the west, and they have not been asked for their opinion on this lunacy. The push to get rid of I64 is entirely coming from the wealthy White eastern part of town from people who probably never go west of 9th street. They have no idea how long it might take someone suffering a heart attack at 39th & Bank St to get to a hospital if the ambulance couldn’t go up a ramp and drive 4 miles on an interstate to the emergency room.
The primary pushers behind eliminating I64 probably do know how much their family’s real estate at 9th and Main might be worth if there weren’t a set of elevated on-ramps and 7 lanes of I64 next to their very nice tourist attraction.
The 8664.org tries to compare this project to cities where waterfront interstates have been removed, such as Portland OR. The difference is that those other cities had a parallel highway on the other side of the river connected to their downtown by multiple bridges. Louisville does not, and cannot. Southern Indiana has wetlands and the Falls of the Ohio fossil beds over there, as well as two state parks, residential neighborhoods, and a wastewater treatment plant. They are not going to sacrifice those so that certain Louisvillians can have a nicer view out their windows. The only other bridge across the Ohio River at Louisville is the Sherman Minton Bridge on I64, 4 miles west of downtown. The 8664 plan would make the Sherman Minton a ‘bridge to nowhere.’
Someone’s wish to chop about a mile out of the middle of I64 does not change the need for an additional I65 bridge across the Ohio River in Downtown Louisville, and that a small, very vocal and well-financed group of people is lobbying to do that is no basis for listing this project on your webpage.
The “I66″ corridor in Southern Kentucky IS indeed an interstate to no state that would have severe ecological impacts on the Rockcastle River watershed for no apparent reason. THAT project should be number one on this list.
Regards,
S:-D
I agree with fellow Louisvillian Sue.
I-66 West deserves to be number 1, not number 4.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_66_(west)
Seriously, we need an interstate to connect Somerset and London, which is already served by four-lane highways? This is an interstate hundreds of miles long that wouldn’t connect any communities larger than 60,000 people.
8664 is a plan to boost the property values of the wealthiest section of Louisville, the East End, while further marginalizing some of the most underserved and underconnected areas, Portland and the West End. The debate over building an East End bridge versus a downtown bridge has been going on for many years in Louisville; and 8664 is an attempt to make sure that, even if the ORBP falters, the interests of east-enders are insured.
River Road on the east side of Louisville is one of the city’s worst roads for pedestrians and cyclists. Directing traffic off of the I-64 Sherman Minton bridge onto a similar surface road on the west side is a sure way to “cut Louisville off from the river.” And anyone who regularly cycles the Riverwalk west of downtown can attest how common flooding problems can be.
Louisville needs more bridges, not fewer.
Why don’t these idiots get with the program? We don’t need another monster that they don’t intend to maintain!!! We have roads in dire need of repair all over the city and pot holes the size of New Jersey going unrepaired!!! Fix what’s really wrong, and stop trying to fix what ain’t broken!!! Uggghhh!!!
The current I-64 infrastructure is far from the eyesore that 8664 makes it out to be. In fact, it is quite beautiful. It makes for a very scenic drive and provides perspective for photos of the city (large buildings dwarfing the roadway in front of it). There is still a beautiful downtown park that is easily accessible.
As a resident that commuted from Indiana, then lived downtown, then commuted from the East, I have found it integral to the flow of traffic. A couple of years ago they shut down the very section of the highway that 8664 wants to get rid of for maintenance. It crippled the city! Commuters were practically incapable of entering and exiting the city. Downtown was flooded with re-routed traffic causing traffic jams that lasted well into the night.
I do believe that another bridge on the East End would alleviate quite a bit of unnecessary traffic heading over I-65 to the east and I definitely believe that it is quite ridiculous for there to be only one off-ramp from I-65 heading to I-64 East and West and I-71 North and South. Almost all of the traffic jams from Indiana to Louisville are a result of a majority of the traffic attempting to squeeze into that single lane before mish-meshing with all of the traffic already on those two interstates as they intertwine and then head their separate ways. It’s quite the obstacle! Routing the off-ramp for one of the highways further down or expanding the off-ramp would be a welcomed relief for the daily commuters. I’ve been lucky enough that I was headed straight into downtown and could bypass the parking-lot known as I-65 via the 2nd street bridge.
I think that a mixture of providing more bridges at different locations allowing for through traffic to bypass the city and increasing very slightly the off-ramps from the existing I-65 bridge to I-71 and I-64 would be quite productive without taking away from the current beauty of the city.
Removing that portion of the interstate would funnel traffic into downtown that would not need to leave the Interstate otherwise, slowing their commute and putting them in the way of the downtown driver. The interstate functions to reduce travel time from distended locations and shield the downtown blocks from the influx of through traffic. It was mentioned before also, if the purpose is to reunite the urbanite with the city, how is creating an impassible roadway in their path going to assist with this. While living downtown, I often took walks with my preschooler all the way to the waterfront and found no issue at all with crossing safely underneath the interstate. The whole area is so well integrated that it is barely noticeable that such a large amount of traffic is passing right there.
Although…. I would be concerned about living in one of the multi-million dollar condo’s with a glass wall over looking the interstate that everyone can see in. I hope they are conscious of how visible they are and choose to wear only what they would be seen in in public when their shades aren’t drawn!
Edit: It was mentioned before also, if the purpose is to reunite the urbanite with the *river*, how is creating an impassible roadway in their path going to assist with this.
Anyone who has driven from Evansville to Indianapolis can tell you it is no picnic. There are speed limits from 40 to 60 MPH along the way. It would take much longer to upgrade 41N to Interstate standards and disrupt many more lives than a new highway that goes straight to its destination instead of out of the way. The 13 minute difference in driving time is a bogus argument put up by someone who can’t do geometry. The other bird that gets killed with new highway is a direct route for students who attend IU, the largest college in the state. Present roads are very dangerous at night and inclement weather. If you want to upgrade 41N, it is a great idea as we have no good roads to Chicago either. Just keep going past Terra Haute and upgrade 63 while your at it.
[...] Highways to Nowhere: America’s 7 Most Ridiculous New Road Building Projects [...]
[...] other great links on that page, as well. [...]
Richard Stowe: If the PENN line extended service to Newark, DE I would no longer have to drive my private automobile 2 and a half hours to visit my family.
Newark DE is also the home of the University of Delaware and has a reasonably effective free bus service in town run by the university. Having rail service south at reasonable prices (Amtrak is NOT reasonable for students) would greatly reduce the number of students who require cars on campus.
[...] Read More [...]
[...] choice to spend the majority of its transportation dollars on I-270 expansion (and on the ICC) will only exasperate existing congestion and threaten the environment. Choices like these will [...]
I’m stationed in NC i completely agree with the top two posts about I295. It’s needed for convoys. secondly as stated before it cuts 20+ minutes of lights and interchanges you need to go south to get to 95 from bragg. if we wanted to move equipment swiftly from norfolk to bragg the best way would be the completion of 295 from where its been left at and an upgrade to US 58 from 95 to norfolk.
highways are not the real answer after the fact. roads have been known to change weather patterns from pasture destruction and such. if the solution was to go with auto trains it would dramatically subtract from the compounding issues of polution over time, and oil issues for starters.
to sum up its a good idea and its needed for military purposes with SOME civilian use but after the fact if FT Bragg/Pope AFB didnt exist it wouldnt be needed.
[...] March, the American transportation site The Infrastructurist proclaimed it Number One in their ranking of the “Most Ridiculous New Roads Being Built In [...]
[...] Whittington should therefore be happy that the stimulus bill included $29 billion to fund highway construction projects across the country while leaving just $8.4 billion for public transit, $8 billion in grants for high speed rail and [...]
I actually welcome the Grand Parkway. It will divert a lot of trucking traffic around Houston instead of through Houston, since there will be more direct alternate routes around the city. Also, Houston is not like other cities, with only one city center. In fact the Greater Houston area includes over 2 dozen cities, and the Grand Parkway is part of a regional mobility initiative, which includes light rail and commuter rail. I don’t think it is accurate to say that the Grand Parkway is a road to nowhere, as it connects many cities and communities in the region.
And you continually talk about how urban sprawl is a bad thing. I have lived in Houston for many years, and I have lived in New Jersey and was in NYC many many times, and I have been to Chicago many times as well. I must tell you that Houston’s sprawl is much much better than millions of people living on top of each other. I would much prefer urban sprawl and less people per square mile than tall buildings and crowded dirty streets with everyone fighting for space.
I should also mention that Houston’s urban sprawl means more trees, lawns and green spaces than an NYC style build on top of each other mixed use strategy.
The ICC in Maryland is a terrible idea. I don’t believe that there will be a reduction of Beltway traffic at all. I agree with the posters who advocate this will spur terrible sprawl: anyone been to Northern Virginia recently? Do we seriously want that sort of congestion here as well? Most people live in MD to ESCAPE the rat race of NOVA. Yikes.
I have a novel idea. Why don’t we let DC deal with DC’s problems? Let’s put 70-S, and I-95 via downtown DC (I-395) back in the plans. I’m thoroughly disgusted with DC traffic problems being pawned off to Maryland. Man up. Nobody wants an interstate in thier backyard… but it would only serve DC right to have thier share.
I know this article is about gigantic super projects. I wish Federal money for road and transit construction would be funnelled to cities for regular roads, crosswalks, new sidewalks, bike lanes….. There is relatively little federal money for these improvements that would benefit thousands.
I would rather pave 1 mile that served thousands than thousands of miles that serve few. It seems like the formula is miles paved and not people served.
I-65 Downtown bridge,KY. When I read that they want to cut off the waterfront to the city. Rip out parks and homes. Well I live in Boston and as we all know before the Big Dig we had a big green 2 Decker freeway. That cut our city not only from its waterfront but from hole parts of the city. That had gone on for about 50 yrs. I hope they can stop this and the rest of the projects on your list. City planners or who ever does these projects have no clue what they do to cities and land and people yrs. after their projects go up. Heaven help these cities.
The I-69 extension will create a direct route from Evansville to Bloomigton and Indianapolis, and is indeed a needed highway. Evansville is the third largest city in Indiana, and Indianapolis, obviously, is the biggest city. The current roads between the cities are either indirect (I-70/US 41) and/or narrow and dangerous (the others south of Bloomington). From a northern and central Indiana perspective, perhaps the road provides marginal value, but for the southwest part of the state, it would be invaluable. This region is the only part of the state served by such poor roads connecting to Indianapolis, the capital and economic hub of the region.
The “new terrain” I-69 also would serve the Crane Naval facility which is the major employer in that area. Not having the highway jeopardizes the existence of that base. Also, the “new terrain” alternative uses approximately 50 miles of SR 37 plus parts of I-164 and I-465 so it is not an entirely new route.
Before you say the road is a boondoggle, you might want to ask why it was proposed and enjoys so much support outside of Bloomington. Does the governor and most every state leader simply wish to blow hundreds of millions of dollars? If that is what you are saying, you might want to provide some supporting evidence. Also, contrary to what you say, most Hoosiers support the I-69 extension. On what basis do you say “people in Indiana wonder why the road needs to be built”? Can you reference any polling to support that statement? Please read this from the Fort Wayne newspaper which is about as far away from Evansville as you can get and still be in Indiana:
http://www.journalgazette.net/article/20100521/EDIT07/305219929/1021/EDIT
- The “new terrain” I-69 route that was selected is both direct and safe. – I-70/US 41 is neither direct nor desirable. Just look at a map.
- Do some research on the 10-14 minute time difference. How could that be? The I-70/US 41 alternative appears to be at least about 20 miles longer, but look at all the jogs in that route. That slows you down significantly, and note that an I-70 route most likely goes through downtown Indy.
- The I-70/US 41 alternative looks good in some ways, but in addition to being indirect, it would not be inexpensive. I-70 would need to be widened from Terre Haute to Indianapolis for one, but US 41 is certainly not even up to expressway standards so major expenditures and disruption would be required. So this alternative is both poor and costly. I have not seen an updated cost estimate for the I-70/US 41 alternative so how does that now compare?
- Furthermore, the I-70/US 41 alternative still would not connect southwest Indiana to Indiana University in Bloomington.
- Remember, the goal is to have a safe and efficient route from Evansville to Indianapolis and Bloomington, not to erect new read, white, and blue I-69 shields in Indiana. What is the point of that?
I am from and live in Northern Indiana, BTW.
Sue seems to be missing something obvious in her presentation.
I-65 is certainly a well-traveled interstate, but there’s no reason whatsoever to widen its swath through the heart of a city and destroy a significant degree of its historical fabric when it can be redirected along I-265 and a new East End Bridge.
It’s called I-265 for a reason.
Is Sue and the other downtown ORBP cheerleaders connected to River Fields in any way?
River Fields is the organization that has been conducting political terrorism for decades to stop the East End Bridge, and the new downtown I-65 bridge (and hyperwidening of Spaghetti Junction) was added in the early 1990s as a “political compromise” and is not an actual necessity. This was uncovered in the landmark article “Burned Bridge” from last fall that can be found in LEO Weekly.
[...] to nowhere – frivolous highway projects? Highways to Nowhere: The 7 Most Ridiculous New Roads Being Built In America
A bit late to the party but I’d like to throw a shout out to the ridiculously expensive and totally unnecessary Corridor H, now known as US 48, project that has been under construction for years now in West Virginia. The pet project of the late Senator Byrd, it is, quite literally, a road to nowhere, running through the Appalachians and some of the least densely populated areas east of the Mississippi. The routing was so bad Virginia refuses to even plan a short section that would connect the border and I-81 in the Shenandoah valley. While the roads in this section of WV previously were, and in places still are, some of the worst and most dangerous around, the state would surely have been better off improving them than spending all those billions.
Perhaps the most ridiculous part is that many in Maryland and West Virginia would like to complete Corridor O as a freeway from Cumberland at I-68 to connect with Corridor H; a routing that couldn’t possibly be used by more than a few dozen people a day(my father among them) and is served by adequate roads for the amount of traffic involved. Interestingly, Corridor O is the same routing that resulted in I-99 (the fantastically named Bud Shuster Highway after the former Republican House Transportation Committee Chair) in Pennsylvania, which PA wisely chose not to extend to the Maryland border. US 220 between Bedford, PA(I-99) and Scherr, WV(Corridor H) is mostly flat and relatively straight and, outside of a few bottlenecks, the posted speed limit is 55 with a defacto speed limit of 70.
I suppose a lesson in all his being both parties have been equally as irresponsible with unnecessary Highway projects.
I would like to invite someone with this effort to come on my talk show and discuss. It would be a good conversation. Let me know. Thanks,
Ed Fallon with The Fallon Forum, Des Moines Iowa
[...] March, the American transportation site The Infrastructurist proclaimed it Number One in their ranking of the “Most Ridiculous New Roads Being Built In [...]
Although I have deep family connection to the Louisville area I will not be staying if the regressive downtown ORBP (I-65) is built. I will not raise my son in a community that is doomed to economic stagnation from the economically destructive downtown ORBP. I have spoken to many others in the community who feel the same, Doctors, lawyers, small business owners, IT professionals, students, and even a local TV news anchor.
[...] [...]