Federal aid highway program

“ There are now numerous Federal environmental laws and regulations relating to a wide range of Federal or Federal-aid programs, of which the Federal-aid highway program is only one. To the extent that highway projects are affected, they must and do comply. ”

“ The real need, in his mind, was to strengthen the State highway departments by giving them full control over both the Federal-aid matching funds and the maintenance of Federal-aid highways. In time, he believed long-distance highways would come into existence as the States improved their trunk highways, provided they could be persuaded to agree on a restricted mileage of interstate roads on which to concentrate the Federal-aid funds. ”

“ Critics of Federal aid also liked to point out that, according to the official reports of the Bureau of Public Roads, three-quarters of the road mileage improved with Federal aid had low- or intermediate-type surfaces such as earth, sand-clay, gravel, or macadam which were incapable of carrying heavy truck traffic without excessive maintenance, and were, therefore, unsuitable as long-distance national roads. (However, the same reports showed that 65 percent of the funds were spent for high-type roads such as concrete and brick.) ”

“ The first would authorize additional appropriations from general funds to aid the State in maintenance and in constructing tertiary non-Federal-aid system development roads where and when opportunity appeared. The second would allow the use of regular Federal-aid funds for tertiary road construction. Both alternates would provide also for improvement in the ferry system, as the “marine highway” system is economically more desirable than attempting to provide land transportation between certain points, such as connecting Juneau, the capital, to other parts of the State. ”

“ When the war ended, the States were well prepared with plans for the largest highway program in history. On the shelf ready to go were plans for $590 million worth of road improvements, and plans for another $2.5 billion worth of work were well advanced. A total of about $624 million in Federal aid was available from prewar and postwar authorizations, and most of the States had ample matching funds saved up during the war/ [22] Most highway departments anticipated some difficulty in obtaining trained engineers and building contractors, but this did not seem at first to be a great obstacle. ”

“ Federal appropriations should be at least $100 million a year in order to carry out the program. The Federal-State 50-50 matching ratio should be modified to increase the Federal share in States where more than 10 percent of the area was public lands. The application of Federal aid should be restricted to those roads that would expedite completion of a national highway system. Federal appropriations for forest roads should be continued for 10 years at the level of $10 million a year. ”

“ While many States sought the cities’ advice and cooperation in connection with programs in urban areas, their concern generally (and quite naturally) was more with getting the highway through the city in an acceptable manner than in contributing to a solution of the city’s internal transportation problems. For the next decade the problems of the States in carrying on the Federal-aid program in urban areas were far more severe in the areas of organization and administration than in the technical or even financial areas. ”

“ The American Automobile Association took a strong position in favor of Federal aid and against dissipating the Federal funds in driblets over the more than 2 million miles of local roads:. . . we advocate the main roads to be built first, and those are the two fundamental principles that this Association is working for: that the government should aid, and that the government money should be spent only on the main thoroughfares and should not be dissipated by trying to spend it on 2,000,000 miles of road . ”

“ There are still numerous safety and other highway-related programs with separate funding accounts, some with contract authority and some that must await each annual appropriations act for budget authority to spend money. Thus, the appropriations acts provide liquidating cash with which to reimburse the States under the normal Federal-aid highway programs, provide budget authority for certain other programs, and may provide limitations on obligations equivalent to previous Executive Branch impoundments for specific programs. ”

“ That Congress extend financial aid to the States to encourage them to build and maintain good roads. That no appropriation for road construction should ever be made without proper provision for maintenance afterward. That all States provide for State supervision of main highways through a State highway department, and that liberal financial assistance be given through State aid in the building and maintenance of such roads. That the work of construction and maintenance of all public highways of any locality or State should be under the direction of experienced highway engineers. ”

“ To try to establish with the State legislatures the need for more funds, many highway officials reasoned that if highway planning facts were convincing to the War Production Board in allocation of critical materials, they might be equally convincing to State legislators as evidence of highway needs in their own States. Some States did use the data to develop programs for bringing the State highway systems back to reasonable service levels, hopeful of receiving legislative approval and necessary funding. ”

“ The Congress first recognized the need to give citizens the opportunity to comment on proposed highway projects in the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956, but for diametrically the opposite reason for what is now fundamental to project acceptance. At that time citizens and travel-oriented businesses in small towns feared the loss of business if the Interstate System, with its required control of access and widely spaced interchanges, were to bypass their communities. ”

“ During the years since the Federal Aid Road Act of 1916, specialized knowledge and skills were required to cope with the expanding program. The program became more complex with each piece of highway legislation in response to the need for broader measures in transportation, the desires of the public it serves, and the interaction of the highway program with other programs to serve the needs of a growing Nation. Technology became so sophisticated that, to keep pace with the demands, the program developed special areas of concern. ”

“ In this regard, local elected officials of urbanized areas may elect to use certain apportioned highway funds for public mass transportation projects instead of for highways. Such an effort may be expected to extend to the transportation disadvantaged segment of our population the same opportunities for social, cultural, recreational, and economic benefits enjoyed by the rest of us. ”

“ Traffic growth was not uniform but was concentrated most heavily in the industrial States and, to a large extent, on a very small mileage near and between the large cities. Yet it was politically impossible for the highway departments to concentrate their funds on this small mileage. Their programs were designed to distribute highway work rather evenly over their States, and in a situation where all roads needed some improvement, it was not possible to deny some areas in order to build a few miles of costly superhighways near the cities. ”

“ A total of 180 projects having an estimated total cost of $116,006,860, of which $66,108,358 may eventually be paid from Federal-aid funds, had been programed in the 4 States for the improvement of 656.8 miles of highway under the bond program.
Since the end of World War II the demand for solution of traffic problems on main highways has become increasingly urgent. At the same time there has been no provision of public funds, or steps toward financing, that offered relief within a reasonable period of years. ”

“ These grants, with the National Industrial Recovery Act grant, pumped a billion dollars into highway construction between 1933 and 1938—enough to assure the continuation of highway building at boom levels. Altogether, the emergency funds financed over 54,000 miles of road improvements on the Federal-aid system, urban extensions and secondary feeder roads, plus the elimination of nearly 3,000 railroad grade crossings. ”

“ City residents began to benefit from the highway improvement program long before the expenditure of Federal-aid highway funds on municipal streets wa authorized. By focusing attention upon the improvement of intercity and interstate routes, the creation of the Federal-aid primary system under the 1921 Act stimulated more travel over greater distances than had been possible before.
Urban automobile owners began to venture beyond the city limits on “joy rides,” and commercial and intercity trucking developed. ”

“ In most of them, the main highways most in need of improvement ran through sparsely populated prairies, deserts, and mountains where there was no prospect of rural post routes being needed or established for decades. Nevada, a State as large as all of New England, had only four rural routes.
The industrialized eastern States were also denied the full benefits of Federal aid by the provision in the Act limiting Federal participation to 50 percent of the cost up to a maximum of $10,000 per mile. ”

“ Despite the fact that most surfaced rural roads built after 1900 had been made possible by State aid, paid for largely by city people or by urban support for county bond issues, many rural residents looked upon the motorists as intruders. This feeling was exacerbated by a minority of the motorists who used the roads for racing, often with mufflers cut out, frightening livestock and teams and raising clouds of dust. Some of the farmers countered by refusing to yield for overtaking, forcing motorists to creep along behind them for miles. ”

“ The Administration asked the States and counties to step up work on the strategic network and on access roads to defense installations, but with little success. Many of the defense access roads were not on the Federal-aid or State highway systems and were thus ineligible for improvement with Federal or State funds. The counties were impoverished and unable to take on the added burden of providing for vastly increased volumes of defense traffic. The Federal-aid secondary and feeder road funds for fiscal years 1940 and 1941, drastically cut by Congress, were hopelessly inadequate for the job. ”

“ Another emerging social concern in 1962 was the plight of those persons required to move because of highway construction. At first the States were required to provide counseling for those whose property or dwelling place was taken, but in 1968 limited financial reimbursement was authorized. In 1970 the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act was passed to protect the displaced people, and Federal review and approval were required before right-of-way could be taken on any Federal-aid project. ”

“ Additional bond issues, plus the Federal aid authorized for fiscal year 1920 had, according to BPR estimates, boosted the road funds available to the States and counties to at least $663 million. A few sober voices warned of trouble ahead and advised the States to revise their programs downward to a realistic level or risk loss of public confidence. [57] Others predicted that the highway program would put unbearable strains on the national economy which was already suffering from shortages of every kind. ”

“ Throughout this massive deflation, roadbuilding held up much better than other kinds of manufacturing. During the “Roaring Twenties,” the States built up their roadbuilding capability to the point where they could obligate $100 million of Federal aid per year. This rate exceeded Congress authorizations and was possible only because of the backlog of unexpended funds from the early years of the program. By 1928 this backlog was exhausted and the States began to cut back their programs to fit the authorizations, which were only $75 million per year. ”

“ By 1962 highway projects in cities were numerous and concern for the integration of the highway with other modes of transportation, with the growth of the cities, and the potential needs of the future came to the fore. Federal assistance for planning had been available since 1934, but in 1962, legislation required that after July 1965 all Federal-aid highway projects within urban areas of more than 50,000 population must be based on the results of a continuing, comprehensive, cooperative transportation planning process. ”

“ Continuing assistance to the States for improving the efficiency and safety of the highway system in both rural and urban areas. (Studies would be necessary to redefine the Federal-aid systems and enable sound economic analyses to reveal how and where the investment of Federal funds would be most beneficial in terms of national objectives; general economic and social benefits; and transportation service to people and commerce.) ”

“ With more and more cars being sold, the automotive industry favorably affected the national economy by requiring more materials and services for the traveler and his car.
By 1929 the number of vehicles had increased 21⁄2 times, to 26.5 million, but State highway revenues had increased over 6 times, to $763.4 million, and the percentage of the highway burden carried by road users had risen to over 99 percent. Actually, when Federal aid is considered, the road users paid about $81 million more than the cost of building and maintaining the State highways. ”