NEWS: Op-Ed from NYT Pushes for Alternative Road Uses

One of the Op-Ed's out of the New York Times this morning, Revolutionary Road is basically advocating for making the roads serve a different use. I actually have a couple of huge issues with her suggestions.

"The most obvious use for the Interstate’s corridors is rail transportation. If we are going to spend billions rehabbing the highways, shouldn’t we, at the same time, invest in adjacent rail lines like the 800-mile high-speed rail system voters approved last year in California"

> The author clearly doesn't realize that building adjacent rail is expensive due to having to procure right of way. Living in LA, a lot of residential properties back up to the freeway, so essentially you're going to be dislocating families to build? The other option is building the rail into the existing right of way. Also problematic for transit-planning reasons. Some have suggested to build a lightrail in between the north-south/east-west bound lanes in the center. Maybe plausible, but excess right of way is still going to be needed for the pedestrian connections necessary for getting over the freeway. Probably through someone's backyard.

"The corridors are also perfectly suited for the transportation of energy. Power generated from rural wind farms and solar plants could run through lines buried under the highways to big cities where electricity is needed. The plug-in hybrid vehicles that will someday use the highways could charge up from this grid. And when left idling, these cars would also be able to supply power back to the grid at times of peak demand, while their owners work or shop by the roadside. "

> Wait. What? I can't tell if Jacobs wants to repave the freeways with a magical solar surface that would allow for the cards to supply power back to the grid and self-charge or if she wants to burry the lines and repave the freeway. Putting utilities under roads is not a new idea and is currently how water/sewer/gas lines are hooked up. Exisiting use. Try again.

The realities of infrastructure developement are challenging and complex. They do encourage sprawl (growth) but ultimately it is up to zoning codes and cities to control how much sprawl they have. A freeway will encourage development outside a major city, but it does not dictate whether there will be single family homes or mixed use projects.

What a disappointing article.