|
|
|
|
Costs to Families
Concerned citizens across Michigan, however, say it's time for the state to make more fiscally responsible investments with taxpayer money, especially in an era when:
- Personal cars and trucks cost an average of $5,000 to $6,000 a year to operate.
- Transportation has become the second-largest expense in family budgets.
- MDOT is either studying or pressing to build $2.5 billion in new highways in western and northern Lower Michigan. It is the most aggressive and expensive highway construction program proposed since the state Interstate highway system was completed in the 1960s and 1970s.
 "Just look at the money that's being spent on roads compared to what's spent on public transportation or any alternative," said David Bulkowski, associate director of the Center for Independent Living in Grand Rapids, a disability rights organization that works on transportation issues. "The state needs to make a policy adjustment that responds to new needs, that promotes Smart Growth instead of sprawl, and makes a real investment in public transit."
That such views are gaining greater currency in Michigan reflect not only a maturing attitude about the relationship between transportation and development, but also how difficult it has become to get around in a state where the vehicle population is increasing twice as fast as the human one.
From 1990 to 1998, Michigan's population increased from 9.3 million to 9.8 million, a gain of 500,000 people or 5%. Of the 50 states, 46 are growing faster in population than Michigan.
But during the same period the state's vehicle population grew from 7.5 million to 8.4 million, or more than 10%. According to MDOT, residents last year drove 91.6 billion miles, which is 38.5 billion miles or 72% more than in 1970. The Detroit metropolitan region, now a geographic area four times larger than it was in the 1960s, has become the seventh most congested urban center in the United States, according to a study by the Texas Transportation Institute, a research group based at Texas A&M University.
Sky's the Limit
"At one time, it was considered a sign of progress to develop an extraordinary highway system to improve accessibility," said June Manning Thomas, director of Urban and Regional Planning at Michigan State University. "There was no recognition at the time that the more highways you build, the more congestion you'll produce."
Dr. Manning, the author of Redevelopment and Race: Planning a Finer City in Postwar Detroit (Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997), explains that the highway culture at MDOT was established by the federal highway acts of 1944 and 1956. In both laws, Congress agreed to pay states to build new highways, set no cap on costs, and financed the leveling of neighborhoods to make way.
"Federal policy set up a mentality that basically it was better to construct than repair," said Dr. Thomas. "It was better to build new and don't worry about having to fix it up."
Moreover these early highway laws contained no money to pay for public transportation. It wasn't until 1964, when the Urban Mass Transit Act was passed, that the federal government contributed to public transportation. Even today, such federal support nationally amounts to $6 billion a year, compared to $30 billion a year for road repair and construction.
Plan for the Future
Gary Naeyaert, MDOT's chief spokesman, said his agency is aware of growing public concern about sprawl and the need for transportation alternatives. He added, though, that neither the Governor's Office nor MDOT see it as state government's responsibility to get involved in land planning efforts. "We are not a social engineering agency," said Mr. Naeyaert. "Our role is to solve transportation problems, not land use fights."
Counters Mr. Bulkowski of Grand Rapids, "The Transportation Department's role in building roads that weaken city centers, produce congestion in the suburbs, make it impractical to get around except by automobile, and result in growing pollution and social inequality is unmistakable. This agency is pursuing a policy of social engineering that is powerful, pervasive, and needs to change."
In the state Legislature, lawmakers are beginning to consider proposals that would require MDOT to coordinate more closely with com- munities in order to solve congestion through better land use planning, not by spending great sums of money on roads.
One idea, modeled after legislation Maryland approved in 1997, would establish a Smart Growth Commission to recommend new policy to curb sprawl and increase transportation alternatives in the state. (See article on page 17.) Planning for more walkable communities, after all, costs much less than new pavement and improves the quality of life by making it possible to drive shorter distances — or occasionally, maybe even not having to get into a car at all.
CONTACTS:Louis Lambert, MDOT, 517-373-0343, e-mail:<lambert@mdot.state.mi.us> ; Gary Naeyaert, MDOT, 517-335-3084, e-mail: <naeyaert@mdot.state.mi.us>; June Manning Thomas, 517-353-9054, e-mail: <thomas@pilot.msu.edu>; Thomas Hickey, 215-790-2323; David Bulkowski, 616-949-1100, e-mail: <budbulk@juno.com>. |
|
|
|
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 
