Last month, we published a list of some of the country’s least appealing new roads projects, as a follow-up to our spring discussion of potential “highways to nowhere.” One thing the more recent list lacked, however, was projects east of the Mississippi.

And so, here are four more costly, less-than-worthwhile projects located in the eastern(ish) U.S.

Northern Virginia’s I-95/I-395 Toll Lanes

After the construction of the Washington Metro system beginning in the 1970s, suburban areas such as those in Northern Virginia have experienced a veritable renaissance, departing from traditional forms of single-family development to newly-urbanized environments clustered around transit stations. With major spending on an extension of Metro to Dulles Airport by 2016, the state is hoping to repeat that success.

Unfortunately, the Richmond-based DOT is also trying to push highway expansions along I-95 and I-395 — even though the projects are opposed by some of the affected municipalities.

The state argues that the addition of one new lane for 28 miles between the Pentagon and Dumfries and two more lanes 28 miles further south to Spotsylvania County is all about encouraging efficient use of transportation resources. Using private capital, these new lanes would be paid for with automatically adjusting congestion-monitoring tolls on all vehicles with one or two passengers; people driving in vehicles with three or more occupants would continue to move freely once the lanes open in 2013.

The new lanes will then force drivers into three options: one, get two other people to join you and take the express lanes; two, pay a high user fee and use the express lanes even if you’re by yourself; or three, drive in the slow lanes for free.

For those willing to pay the price, the new lanes will mean vastly improved travel times — but for those who aren’t, the situation will get worse. The difficulty with this scheme is that it allows single-occupancy cars to use the express lanes and therefore won’t do much to reduce congestion on the other parts of the road. It will encourage wealthier drivers to use the fast lanes by themselves and push poorer people into the slow ones.

Virginia has a rail corridor that closely parallels I-395 and I-95, and it’s currently serviced by the Virginia Railroad Express commuter train, which runs to Union Station in downtown Washington. But VRE only offers six trains heading north in the morning and seven trains heading back in the evening — hardly enough to keep up with demand or compete effectively with the roadways. That’s part of the reason transit has a low market share on travel from the far suburbs to inner-city D.C.

Instead of concentrating on adding lanes to roads for the limited advantage of the wealthiest commuters, Virginia should be spending on improving its rail operations. This year, it took a step forward, choosing to invest $17.2 million over three years on improved Amtrak trains to Richmond and Lynchburg. It’s a start, but not enough.

Image

New Mississippi River Bridge Project

Sometimes, you wonder whether highway builders ignore the details in their pursuit of a grand scheme.

That certainly seems like the case for St. Louis’s new I-70 bridge over the Mississippi, connecting Illinois and Missouri. The project will include the magnificent 1,500-foot cable-stayed span pictured here, providing the city a second major monument to compete with the Gateway Arch just down the river.

In the process, the city could eliminate the freeways currently running in a trench between downtown and the riverfront (and the Arch) as they will no longer be needed for commuters needing to get between the two states. The result? A better connection between a revitalized memorial grounds and the Old Courthouse, for instance, would improve the neighborhood’s livability. But there are no such plans.

Rather, the main goal of the new bridge is to reduce traffic. Each state hopes it will clear up congestion on existing roadways by freeing up space on the Poplar St. Bridge, a mile south, which currently carries I-70 in addition to I-55 and I-64. At a cost of $667 million, traffic flow will be reduced on the older structure with the new bridge and also create a massive three-level interchange between the three freeways in East St. Louis.

The end result will be useful for the city’s car commuters, but provide no benefit to the pedestrians using the urban core. It’s time for highway builders to take them into account as well.

(more…)

Back in March, we warned that stimulus money might be spent on a number of huge, wasteful projects around the country. We spotlighted the Ohio River Bridges project through downtown Louisville as the worst offender — it would require a 24-lane monstrosity towering over downtown.

Those seven big infrastructure programs weren’t alone. There are many other highway plans in the works around the country that are primed to be a potential waste of taxpayer funds and increase car use exactly when we should be encouraging the opposite. Here are some of the worst examples.

Seattle’s Alaskan Way Viaduct Tunnel

Everyone is in agreement about one thing: Something has to be done about the Alaskan Way Viaduct, the elevated highway that runs along Seattle’s downtown waterfront. After being damaged during the 2001 Nisqually earthquake, it has to be replaced — or thousands of commuters could be put in danger if and when another disaster occurs.

For much of the past decade, advocates staked their ground on three opposing sides: Some wanted to simply rebuild the viaduct on site, some wanted to tear it down and replace it with a much smaller surface road, and some suggested building a two-mile tunnel under downtown in its place. In the end, Washington state and the city agreed on the latter choice, and the state is planning a more than $3.5 billion investment in the project. As a compromise to transit advocates, about $400 million will be spent on related public transportation improvements by Seattle and King County.

For much of the past year, it appeared that the tunnel’s construction was assured. A contractor is supposed to be picked for the corridor in March 2010.

After winning the election in November, new Mayor Mike McGinn appeared to have become a reluctant supporter simply because of prior commitments made by the city and state, despite the fact that he is a historic opponent of the project, having argued repeatedly for the less expensive and less auto-oriented surface option. But in the Wall Street Journal this week, McGinn said “Nothing has made me think the tunnel is a good idea.” State officials remain committed to the tunneling.

McGinn’s statements suggest that this megaproject may still be defeated. For the sake of a city with exciting light rail plans and big-city potential, we hope this happens, since the tunnel is too expensive and will only advance the interests of car commuters, rather than encourage them to try transit.

Image

Alaska Highway2Highway Project

Most American cities long ago learned the dangers of urban freeways. Beginning in the 1950s, the urban renewal movement advocated building new highways through city centers in the interest of speeding travel times for car commuters. To do so, government planners tore down neighborhoods, with highly unfortunate consequences: more congestion, fewer people riding transit, and less livable communities.

Oddly enough, Alaskan state highway officials seem to want to repeat that story in Anchorage with the Highway2Highway project.

Disappointed with the fact that the city’s two major freeways — the A1 Glenn Highway running north and the A3 Seward Highway running south — end some 3.5 miles apart, project managers want to build a connection between the two. With construction beginning sometime in the mid-2010s, the road would cost upwards of $600 million dollars based on 2005 estimates.

The proposal has yet to be finalized, but all of the alternatives currently on the table share the same problems: They’ll encourage car use and they’ll require the demolition of hundreds of properties. Local residents, and many of the politicians representing them, are unsurprisingly up in arms.

Highway engineers working for the State of Alaska suggest that local roads will be at capacity by 2035, but that’s the point, after all, since these roads run just blocks from the downtown. A vibrant inner-city community is one crowded with people. Rushing people around on big roadways will reduce downtown Anchorage’s attractiveness.

Ironically, proponents of the project argue that it would “reconnect neighborhoods surrounding the project area.” When was the last time that happened after a big road was built?

(more…)