Why were freeways made

The law authorized the construction of a 41,mile network of interstate highways that would span the nation. Under the terms of the law, the federal government would pay 90 percent of the cost of expressway construction. The money came from an increased gasoline tax—now 3 cents a gallon instead of 2—that went into a non-divertible Highway Trust Fund.

The new interstate highways were controlled-access expressways with no at-grade crossings—that is, they had overpasses and underpasses instead of intersections. They were at least four lanes wide and were designed for high-speed driving. When the Interstate Highway Act was first passed, most Americans supported it. Soon, however, the unpleasant consequences of all that roadbuilding began to show.

Most unpleasant of all was the damage the roads were inflicting on the city neighborhoods in their path. They displaced people from their homes, sliced communities in half and led to abandonment and decay in city after city. People began to fight back.

The first victory for the anti-road forces took place in San Francisco , where in the Board of Supervisors stopped the construction of the double-decker Embarcadero Freeway along the waterfront. In many cities and suburbs, however, the highways were built as planned. All told, the Interstate Highway System is more than 46, miles long. But if you see something that doesn't look right, click here to contact us!

That day journey across the US in ? Today, the record for New York to Los Angeles by car is 26 hours and 28 minutes. According to Bloomberg, a key part of the Interstate system, I, is the oldest part of the system, and the longest north-south Interstate, totaling 1, miles.

The last tiny piece of I took two decades to finish. At the New Jersey-Pennsylvania border, drivers leave I, take a detour and join it 8 miles later. The money came from taxes on gasoline and diesel fuel.

The United States federal excise tax on gasoline is The federal gasoline tax was last raised in It is not linked to inflation, which has slashed the real value of the tax by two-thirds since For two decades, elected US Federal governments have not had the courage to even keep gas taxes in line with inflation.

Meanwhile, state and local governments are strapped for funds as well. This explains the disastrous disrepair of US bridges and roads. The solution?

None yet exists. Why did it take six decades to finish I? Its purpose was to provide high-speed, high-capacity system of highways without stoplights and with exits spaced, whenever possible, at least a mile apart. Planning for what is now known as the Dwight D. The report that resulted showed that a toll network would not be self-supporting.

Mayor William E. Kemp of Kansas City, Missouri, for example, responded to a question about the necessity of the new roads for evacuation:. Mayor Albert E. Cobo of Detroit, Michigan, testified mainly on financing issues. He favored upfront financing for the entire year program instead of a pay-as-you-go approach:. The article reflected the optimism, even enthusiasm, of city officials. Hillenbrand stated:.

Smaller communities near the larger cities were likely to "experience rapid new growth" so planners should think on a metropolitan basis. Planners would be busy:. The program was so new, Hillenbrand explained, that municipal officials would have to change their perspective. This view was widespread, virtually unquestioned, among State highway officials, city officials, and urban planners - until construction got underway.

What most strikes a 21st century observer is that none of the Mayors discussed the concerns that would overwhelm debate about the urban Interstates within months after construction began in the cities - disruption and displacement of residences and businesses; decline of central business districts; loss of tax base; suburbanization now called sprawl ; destruction of minority communities and historic buildings and districts; air quality, noise impacts, or adverse environmental impacts; and impacts on transit.

In , no one questioned the need for the Interstate System, as outlined by General Clay and the President. The one controversial issue was how to pay for it. Congress could not agree on a method in Congress rejected the plan developed by General Clay. In fact, the financial plan had little support in Congress, even from the President's strongest supporters. Alternative financing schemes based on tax increases also failed, largely because of lobbying by the highway interests that wanted the Interstate System but didn't want to pay for it.

The Senate passed Senator Gore's bill in , but it lacked a financing mechanism - under the Constitution, tax provisions must originate in the House of Representatives. In July , however, the House rejected all versions of the legislation, including bills with the Clay Committee financing plan and another with increased highway user taxes.

After Congress adjourned on August 2, , the highway interests worked with key Members of Congress over the winter to develop an acceptable tax package that was embodied in the Federal-Aid Highway Act of This basic financial structure - revenue from highway user taxes, including a gas tax increase, credited to the Highway Trust Fund - would serve the Nation throughout the Interstate era.

The Interstate System would achieve much of its original intent. It would be the safest road network in the United States and one of the safest, if not the safest, in the world. Its design concepts would be used on non-Interstate roads to make them safer as well. It would sustain the economy and support international competitiveness even as the economy evolved from an industrial era to an information age in a worldwide marketplace.

In addition, the Interstate System has proven invaluable to the national defense through countless military endeavors. The record on evacuations, particularly with oncoming hurricanes, is mixed but improving with experience. It would prove, however, to be an ungainly lever for controlling the economy as President Eisenhower had envisioned.

Because of the multi-year nature of highway construction and the pay-as-you-go basis of its financing mechanism, job-creating expenditures could not easily be increased or decreased to match economic needs. The President had an opportunity to use the Interstate lever in operation during a sharp recession that began in August The Federal-Aid Highway Act of , which President Eisenhower approved on August 8, , attempted to stimulate the economy by increasing authorizations for Interstate construction, but without an equal increase in tax revenue for the Highway Trust Fund.

The short-lived recession had ended in April , before increased construction could have any impact on it, but under the Act, the Highway Trust Fund expended more funding than it took in, creating the first financial crisis of the Interstate Era.

Perhaps the greatest failure, however, was that the Interstate System did not relieve congestion. In some respects, the comments about congestion, circa the mid's, could be used about congestion in the 21st century, with changes only in the data population, number of vehicles, miles traveled, and cost of congestion.

Many factors contributed to this failure, including population growth, demographic changes, increased number of vehicles per household, expansion of urban areas, social changes, and the inability to expand the highway network commensurate with demand leaving aside the question of desirability. The city officials who testified before Congress in the mid's were primarily interested in congestion relief.

If traffic could flow freely to the central business district, the outward flow of residences and businesses would be slowed, the city tax base would be maintained and even increased, blighted neighborhoods would be replaced, and the central business districts would regain their former preeminence.

The failure to relieve congestion was one reason why the urban Interstates were unable to stem what was already a decline in city viability. Moreover, much to the surprise of the AMA, the BPR, and others who supported the Interstate System in the 's, the urban Interstates would quickly be depicted as a primary villain in the decline of the Nation's cities, a charge that has been repeated many times by urban advocates and social critics in the years since President Eisenhower's memoir, Mandate for Change , contained a prediction based on the original intent:.

The next 40 years would be filled with unexpected engineering challenges, unanticipated controversies, and unforeseen funding difficulties. Nevertheless, the President's view would prove correct.

The Interstate System, and the Federal-State partnership that built it, changed the face of America - and its cities. This article reflects the original intent of those who helped launch the Interstate Era in MacDonald and Herbert Fairbank, included a different element in their original intent, namely revitalization of the Nation's declining cities.