The Need for More Transportation Infrastructure

By David J. Rizzo

Studies show that the quality of life for commuters who live long distances from work can be improved by reducing traffic congestion and building more roads and freeways. Everyone benefits because less smog is generated when traffic is not impeded by congestion.

To relieve the documented (1) stress, frustration, and detrimental physical effects of traffic congestion, we need more roads.

According to the latest thinking from transportation planners at the Institute of Transportation Studies (ITS) at Berkeley, building more freeways is increasingly indicated. The theory of "If you build it (a freeway), they (more cars) will come" is quickly being discounted in favor of meeting the already latent demand for more freeway capacity.

In a recently published commentary (2) by land-use expert Robert Cervero, Cervero wrote: Although I personally sympathize with the aims of many environmentalists, fighting highway projects, regardless of what benefit-cost numbers say, is misguided. The problems people associate with roads, e.g. congestion and air pollution, are not the fault of road investments per se.

Current thinking, as espoused in lectures (3) by the department head of the Institute of Transportation Studies, Martin Wachs, Ph.D., also states that rail transit is not cost effective or sufficient to solve congestion problems. We need more roads.

In a recent study (4) published in the Journal of Transportation and Statistics, researchers determined that: as a result of additional highway capacity, workers spent less time working and commuting and more time at home and doing other activities. This same study also concluded that even non-commuters gain from increased highway capacity, by easier access to shopping and other errands.

Increased road capacity that improves traffic gridlock also benefits the environment. South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD)-approved training manuals (5) for certifying Employee Transportation Coordinators have pointed out that cars emit three times as many smog-forming hydrocarbons at 15 mph, as when traveling 50 mph.

With all the benefits of decreasing traffic congestion that accrue to commuters and those living within the area, why shouldn't this be the most important issue for a Member of Congress to address? Therefore, as the elected representative of the 44th Congressional district, I would devote the overwhelming majority of my efforts toward ensuring that a new road gets built over the Cleveland National Forest between Corona and north Orange County. If I have to spend half my time in California to achieve this objective, then that's what I'll do.

These efforts would consist of a two-pronged attack: a) speed the environmental-review process, and b) secure funding.

At the federal level, I can work to rush any federal Environmental Impact Report review process and negotiate with conservationists to ensure that the road gets built as soon as possible. I will also ensure that federal funds from either of two laws (6) will be used in Riverside and Orange counties to build this road. At the state level, I will utilize any and all negotiation tools at my disposal to ensure that local review processes take place just as quickly.

Already, 2-3 corridors have been identified to connect Interstate 15 with Interstate 5 over the Cleveland National Forest. The "Cajalco" corridor -- which runs just south of Corona to State Route 241 in Irvine -- appears to be a logical choice because of its short distance (11 miles). All things being equal, a shorter road impacts the environment less and costs less to build.

At this time, consensus favors a tunnel, as it would impact the environment less than a surface road. On the other hand, an average six-lane freeway costs approximately $100 million per mile to build; whereas putting that same freeway through a tunnel can cost over $500 million per mile. Additionally, tunneling often takes longer because of delays from encountering methane pockets, underground rivers and even earthquake faults. For example, the Red Line Metro Rail project ran into several unexpected delays -- and subsequent cost overruns -- when boring under the Hollywood Hills.

Ideally, cost and time would "be no object." Yet, in light of budgetary constraints both in Washington and Sacramento, and the urgency of establishing a new link, a surface road may have to suffice. Initially, I would seek funding for a tunnel, hoping for the best.

In any case, any activities or results will be posted on a Web site for the specific purpose of keeping people informed on a regular basis. The constituency deserves to know exactly what their elected representatives are doing on their behalf. Traffic mitigation efforts should receive top priority for the newsworthy element that they are within this Congressional district.

References
1. Transportation and Well-Being, An Ecological Perspective by Daniel Stokols and Raymond W. Novaco; Chapter 4 of Transportation and Behavior by Altman, Wohlwill, and Everett; Plenum Press; 1981.

2. Are Induced-Travel Studies Inducing Bad Investments? Robert Cervero; Access; published by the California Institute of Transportation Studies; Spring 2003.

3. Transportation Demand Management certificate training; UCLA extension course; lecture by Martin Wachs, Ph.D.; 1992.

4. Road Capacity and the Allocation of Time; David M. Levinson and Seshasai Kanchi; Journal of Transportation and Statistics; V5/N1 2002.

5. Regulation XV training; Rancho Santiago College; Santa Ana, California; 1989.

6. "Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century;" Public Law 105-178; "Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2003" (pending).