Utrecht destroys street, restores canal as Pinocchio sings "I've Got No Strings."

Automobile supremacy has taken a hit in Utrecht, Netherlands, and while this is a victory, it reminds us that Americans by and large display no comprehension about such matters. This wouldn't be so bad if we didn't continue electing and appointing them.

I can already hear Pinocchio Rosenbarger's excuses. Is he retired yet, or still merrily suckling at the public teat?



A more detailed rendering of the Utrecht project is here.

Utrecht restores historic canal made into motorway in 1970s, by Daniel Boffey (The Guardian)

Swimmers and pleasure boats gather as Dutch city celebrates reopening of Catharijnesingel

It is being viewed as the correction of a historic mistake. More than 40 years after parts of the canal that encircled Utrecht’s old town were concreted over to accommodate a 12-lane motorway, the Dutch city is celebrating the restoration of its 900-year-old moat.

In an attempt to recast its residents’ relationship with the car, Utrecht’s inner city is again surrounded by water and greenery rather than asphalt and exhaust fumes.

"On a main street, that which looks like 'vehicle delay' to a traffic engineer looks like economic activity and success to a local merchant."

What it looks like to Jeff Gahan is complete and utter  incomprehension.

Tell the Feds: Don’t Turn City Streets Into Highways, by Angie Schmitt (Streetsblog)

Will the Obama administration prod state DOTs to abandon the destructive practice of widening roads and highways, or will it further entrench policies that have hollowed out cities and towns, increased traffic and car dependence, and made America a world leader in carbon pollution?

It can't be stated any more clearly:

There’s a direct connection between how we decide to measure [congestion] and how we choose to address it. If we focus, as this rule does, on keeping traffic moving at a high rate of speed at all times of day on all types of roads and streets, then the result is easy to predict: our solutions will prioritize the investments that make that possible, regardless of cost vs. benefits or the potential impacts on the communities those roads pass through.

USDOT plans to measure vehicle speed and delay seven different ways, while ignoring people carpooling, taking transit, walking & biking or skipping the trip entirely.

"Highway engineers dominated the decision-making. They were trained to design without much consideration for how a highway might impact urban fabric."

If we retained the public transportation infrastructure we possessed 100 years ago, Bulldog fans could have taken the train to Indianapolis and back for last night's championship game.

This article makes at least two points that we should never tire of emphasizing.

First, that "gas taxes have never fully paid for highways," even though we insist on believing it's true.

Second, "An unmistakable part of the equation was the federally supported program of 'urban renewal,' in which lower-income urban communities — mostly African-American — were targeted for removal."

That's history, folks.

Highways gutted American cities. So why did they build them? by Joseph Stromberg (Vox)

... So why did cities help build the expressways that would so profoundly decimate them? The answer involves a mix of self-interested industry groups, design choices made by people far away, a lack of municipal foresight, and outright institutional racism.

"Study: States wasting billions on highways."

In New Albany, the builders, pavers and excavators tithe back to the politicians who funded them with public money.

Gee, you don't think there's a connection, do you?  

Study: States wasting billions on highways, by Keith Laing (The Hill)

State governments are wasting $24 billion on highway projects that are unnecessary, according to a new study released Monday by the United States Public Interest Research Group Education Fund.

The study "details how despite America’s massive repair and maintenance backlog, and in defiance of America’s changing transportation needs, state governments continue to spend billions each year on new and wider highways," according to the group, which typically pushes for more transit investment.

“Many state governments continue to prioritize wasteful highway projects that fail to effectively address congestion while leaving our roads and bridges to crumble,” John Olivieri, the national campaign director for 21st Century Transportation at the United States Public Interest Research Group Education Fund, said in a statement.

"Debunking the Myth That Only Drivers Pay for Roads."

The author writes, "The point is that America is an increasingly (and, now, majority) multimodal place, with a transportation network that offers personal options and collective benefits."

Has the point been grasped hereabouts?

Debunking the Myth That Only Drivers Pay for Roads, by Eric Jaffe (City Lab)

The use of general taxpayer money to construct and repair roads is enough on its own to shatter the concept that drivers pay their own way. But there's lots more to the problem—starting with the enormous social costs of driving. Those are the costs that society as a whole pays for car-reliance: the environmental impact of pollution, the health impact of accidents, and the economic impact of productivity lost to traffic, among them. These have been estimated at $3.3 trillion a year ...

... When you tally all these hidden costs together, alongside the assists that already occur for road construction and maintenance, the average household pays between $1,105 and $1,848 a year in what the report calls "uncompensated damage costs to support motor vehicle use in the United States." Again: whether they drive a lot or hardly at all.

Marohn on transportation funding: "Facing the Unknown with Courage."

My guess is that Irv Stumler disagrees, although it might just be a case for mood stabilizers. When presumed "pillars" view city streets as through highways, the case for sedation is even stronger, as are the required dosages.

Facing the Unknown with Courage, by Charles Marohn (Strong Towns)

... We accept that there is a big difference between the pace of change in technology and infrastructure. Yet, while we are accustomed to rapid change in technology – no thoughtful person would commit today to purchasing a new iPhone every other year for the next two decades – we also seem to accept no change – ZERO – when it comes to infrastructure. When considering roads and bridges, sidewalks and transit systems, there is a general consensus among policymakers and advocates that the only responsible approach is one that commits today to massive investments decades from now ...

... We’re locked into a transportation system that requires us to lie to ourselves about what we can know about the future and then spend huge amounts to support that lie. When we underestimate our needs, it confirms our bias for building more. When we overestimate, we can explain it away – if we are ever asked to, which we hardly ever are – by citing factors beyond our control (oil price, recession, fickle humans, etc…). This is a dumb system.

And it’s not just Minnesota. In fact, we’re not even close to dysfunctional when compared to the insane asylum that is America’s state DOTs ...

... Committing to spending billions on our current approach to transportation is not courageous; it is cowardly. It will take far more courage to stand up, admit that we don’t know what we’re doing – that we’ve actually had it wrong for some time – and chart a new course, one that uses real data and feedback (not politics) to discern spending priorities.

"The Indiana Toll Road and the Dark Side of Privately Financed Highways."

The legacy of Saint Daniels stretches on, and on, and on ...

The Indiana Toll Road and the Dark Side of Privately Financed Highways

by Angie Schmitt and Payton Chung

This is the first post in a three-part series on the Indiana Toll Road and the use of private finance to build and maintain highways. Part two takes a closer look at how Australian firm Macquarie manages its infrastructure assets. Part three examines the incentives for consultants to exaggerate traffic projections, making terrible boondoggles look like financial winners.