Skip to Content
Streetsblog Los Angeles home
Streetsblog Los Angeles home
Log In

If there's a highway expansion debate raging in your community right now, here's a new item to add to the "con" column.

false

Shane Phillips at Network blog Better Institutions raises the point that when wider highways induce more driving, that's going to dump more traffic on local streets:

The problem here is obvious: unless 100% of the new highway users are bypass traffic--none of them using the highway to get into the city itself--local roads have to deal with a huge influx of additional vehicles. Many of those vehicles aren't bypass traffic, of course, so local streets (and their residents) are burdened with their presence and the congestion they bring. And while federal- or state-owned highways can sometimes afford to increase their capacity, local roads usually can't. Besides being a poor choice from a return-on-investment and livability perspective, widening local streets to cope with the increase in vehicles is usually physically impossible--city centers are already built out and, thankfully, few people support tearing down homes and businesses just to expand local roads.

The downsides for cities don't stop there, Phillips says:

Imagine this scenario: you live 20 miles outside the city and want to get downtown, so you take the freeway there. The highway part of your trip used to take 30 minutes, but thanks to the new lanes it now only takes you 20 minutes. The last mile of your trip has slowed since there's a bit more local traffic, but it only increases from three minutes to five. All told, your trip time has decreased from 33 minutes to 25--great!

Now imagine you live in the city, five miles from the city center. It used to take your bus 20 minutes to get downtown, but unfortunately as a city resident you don't reap many benefits from the additional highway capacity. Instead, your trip is entirely on local roads, so all those extra cars coming into the city only slow you down. The trip that used to take you twenty minutes now takes thirty. The suburban visitor/commuter saved about ten minutes, and the city resident lost about ten, and all it cost was a few hundred millions dollars in construction and millions more in demolished buildings and businesses that are no longer producing revenue for the city. Money well spent, right?

That's a really good explanation of how highway widenings can quickly become a social equity problem.

Elsewhere on the Network today: Bike Portland says folks in suburban Portland are already beginning to discuss "alternatives" to the Columbia River Crossing, a highway megaproject that met its demise last week. Mobilizing the Region reports that older adults in the New York metropolitan region are particularly vulnerable to pedestrian injury. And Transport Providence tells the story of a farm-supply business that replaced a gas station in the city and what they are doing to improve sustainable transportation.

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog Los Angeles

Planning Department Releases Measure HLA Implementation “Standard Elements” Draft

The city is working to clarify exactly what minimum bus/bike/walk improvements are triggered by Measure HLA

February 5, 2025

Op-Ed: How Transit Agencies Are Tackling America’s Public Bathroom Crisis

Lack of public restrooms can be a barrier to using transit — and a devastating problem for those who have no choice but to ride. This company is trying to solve the problem.

February 4, 2025

Planning Continues on Metro E Line Eastside Extension Project

Given a funding shortfall, much of the Eastside E Line project work this year will be focused on federal environmental clearance, which would make the project eligible for federal funding

February 4, 2025

This Week in Livable Streets

Metro Eastside A Line extension meeting, Merced Greenway ride, Metro budget meeting, and more.

February 3, 2025
See all posts