In 1999, taxpayers will pay for a record amount of new road construction. Unfortunately, this is not a case of smart policy decisions following proven strategies to address the nation’s transportation needs. Instead, taxpayers are footing the bill for an outdated policy of blindly building new roads in an attempt to solve our transportation woes.

Many of the proposed new roads have been buried within state planning books for 20 to 30 years — unable to garner federal or state funding — until now. A lot has changed since many of these roads were first on the drawing board. There has been a colossal shift in public opinion on the building of new roads. Across the country, local communities are recognizing the impact of new road projects on their "quality of life" — loss of open space and natural areas, increased sprawling development, and more traffic congestion and air pollution.

But this new citizen awakening and effort to reinvent government transportation priorities has run into an onslaught of new federal funding for road projects, many of which are against the common sense agenda of local communities around the country.

Last year’s federal transportation bill, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) will spend a huge amount of money. TEA-21 guarantees a 47% increase in highway funding over the next five years, which means there will be a massive dumping of new money into highway construction. At the same time, community transportation needs are evolving.

Some of the proposed new roads in this report are partially funded through highway "demonstration" projects — specific pork-barrel projects earmarked at the request of a Member of Congress. Demonstration projects designate some roads as "high priority" which circumvents local decision-making and planning. The number of demonstration projects has dramatically increased in each successive highway bill over the last two decades. In 1982, 10 demonstration projects were authorized, costing a total of $362 million. In 1987, 152 demonstration projects were created, costing a total of $1.4 billion. In TEA-21, there are over 1850 demonstration projects that were approved at a total cost of over $9 billion.

This report illustrates how the power of federal pork is over-riding local community concerns. In looking at the roads listed in this report, opposition is not simply isolated cases of citizen discontent. In many cases state highway departments are pushing massive road projects over significant local objections, while communities try to fend off the loss of farmland, natural areas and the negative economic effects on businesses that these roads cause. In fact, there are common themes and similar battles being fought in communities throughout the country.

In last November’s elections there were about 240 local ballot measures — 72 percent passing — designed to address "quality of life" issues, such as protecting or improving parks, open spaces, farmlands, historic resources, watersheds, greenways and biological habitats. Many measures were advanced as part of programs and initiatives to enhance community livability and manage growth. Vice President Al Gore has picked up on this public sentiment and has made community "quality of life" a cornerstone of his stump speeches in his apparent campaign for President.

This year’s Road to Ruin report identifies the 50 worst proposed new highway projects in 26 states. While the report’s authors are not necessarily against all new roads, the roads named in this report would waste taxpayer money while hurting rural communities and small businesses, destroy farmland, diminish natural areas, and fuel sprawling development. The state of Michigan leads the list with five wasteful road projects, Pennsylvania and Virginia have four each, and California has three ill-conceived projects. If federal funding for all 50 proposed new roads was denied, it would save federal taxpayers $17 billion.

The 50 projects represent a sharp increase from the 1997 Road to Ruin report, which highlighted 37 projects. The increase can be attributed to two factors: 1) A significant increase in federal funds in TEA-21 that state Departments of Transportation can use for new road projects; 2) Growing citizen awareness and concern about the role new roads play in their communities. Following the 1997 report, we received dozens of calls and letters from communities around the country asking that their proposed road project be added to the list.

How the Top 10 Were Selected

The 50 highways in the report were all nominated by local citizen organizations and individuals, then researched by Taxpayers for Common Sense (TCS) and Friends of the Earth (FOE) staff in consultation with local and national transportation advocates. All 50 projects are unneeded, all have serious problems, all face significant local opposition and none should be built. They are presented in no particular order.

The two report authors, TCS and FOE, selected the Road to Ruin Top 10 list from the 50 proposed highways in the report. This list represents the most wasteful and environmentally harmful highways in the U.S. We ranked the proposed roads by using three major criteria and four minor criteria. The three major criteria are as follows:

• Cost to taxpayers High ranking went to those roads with the highest overall cost to federal taxpayers, and/or the highest cost per mile.
• Impact on the environment High ranking went to those roads that would be built through national parks or impact national marine sanctuaries. We also considered other impacts, including: building through national forest land legislated to remain forever roadless and wild; impact on wild and scenic rivers; impact on national wildlife refuges; built in national forest; and, built in state parks.
• Induces sprawl Proposed roads that feed sprawl development in suburbs and areas far from downtown cores.

In addition, extra ranking was also given to those proposed roads that met one or more of the following minor criteria: contributes significantly to the loss of farmland; cuts through historically designated areas and undermines efforts for historic preservation; worsens regional air quality problems; and undermines existing local businesses by routing traffic away from downtowns and thriving business corridors.

The Road to Ruin Top 10

1 Corridor H (WV) This proposed100-mile four-lane highway cuts through the mountains of West Virginia. It has an outrageous overall federal cost of $1 billion. This proposed highway would fragment the George Washington National Forest and cut through the Monongahela National Forest — one of the largest roadless areas on the East Coast. It would also bulldoze Civil War battlefields and induce sprawl development in West Virginia to the detriment of area farmers and merchants. Despite these flaws, Corridor H receives special treatment in transportation bills because of its powerful patron, Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV).

2 Stillwater Bridge (MN) This oversized and overpriced bridge would harm a federally protected river. The proposed plans for a new Stillwater Bridge at a total estimated cost of $120 million far surpasses what is needed for this small town. Even worse, the new bridge would cross the St. Croix River; a Congressionally designated Wild and Scenic River protected by the National Park Service. Furthermore, the proposed Stillwater Bridge would encourage jobs and development to sprawl into neighboring Wisconsin.

3 Route 710 Highway (CA) This proposed highway would cost $311 million per mile, giving it a higher cost per mile than the Los Angeles subway. Rt. 710 also has a staggering federal price tag of $1.12 billion. Furthermore, this proposed highway would raze 1,300 homes and businesses and destroy 70 historic properties over six districts listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Finally, it would worsen southern California’s already serious clean air problems.

4 I-69 Highway Extension (IN) Upgrading existing highways would cost far less than the $1.1 billion it would cost to build this brand-new highway across 140 miles of precious Indiana farmland. Not only would the proposed road duplicate existing interstates, I-69 would destroy 5,000 acres of land and go through the Patoka National Wetlands and Wildlife Refuge, home to various endangered species. Finally, it would induce sprawl as it would render prime farmland open to unneeded and unchecked development.

5 Grand Parkway (TX) The Grand Parkway’s $1.8 billion cost to federal taxpayers is the highest in the report. In addition to being a fourth beltway around Houston, the Grand Parkway would slice through a number of state parks. Furthermore, the project would invite a significant increase in sprawl as plans for a number of residential communities, commercial malls, and landfills have already been announced to coincide with the building of this proposed highway. Finally, the Grand Parkway and its secondary impacts would worsen Houston’s already serious clean air problems.

6 U.S. 1 (FL) This 20-mile proposed project, with an estimated cost to federal taxpayers of $136 million, would impact the Coral Reef Ecosystem of the Florida Keys, the only coral reef in the continental U.S., as well as Everglades National Park and the Key Largo National Marine Sanctuary. Furthermore, the major widening of the current U.S. 1 would induce sprawl in the Upper Keys as the area would become more accessible to development and short-term visitors, thus making evacuations during hurricanes more difficult and dangerous.

7 U.S. 23 (MI) This unneeded freeway would force a record loss of wetlands in Michigan. This proposed 100-mile freeway extension, with an estimated cost to federal taxpayers of $640 million, parallels the existing U.S. 23 which is already being widened to four lanes. The proposed extension would devastate local businesses by bypassing existing communities. It would consume farmland for construction and related sprawl development. Finally, the proposed road would greatly compromise state and national forest lands, and cause the "largest single wetlands loss within Michigan," according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

8 Denali National Park Second Access Road This proposed 80-mile project would construct an unneeded second access road through pristine and protected wilderness in the Wonder Lake area of Denali National Park, one of America’s premiere national parks. Not only is this area already served by an existing road and bus system, but the $84 million cost of the project would be paid entirely with federal taxpayer funds through the National Park Service budget. This road is expensive and duplicative, and would compromise the very wilderness that is supposed to be protected from sprawl and developers’ interests.

9 Western Transportation Corridor (VA) Although the state of Maryland has canceled its involvement in the proposed project, the Virginia Department of Transportation continues to push the Western Transportation Corridor. With several existing north-south corridors and others under construction in the region, the proposed 50-mile road, with a total estimated cost of between $1 and $1.5 billion, would be redundant. The proposed project would encourage sprawl and traffic while exposing rural areas to increased development levels that would overwhelm the area’s existing infrastructure and destroy acres of farmland and wetlands.

10 Legacy Highway (UT) This 120-mile project has a staggering estimated total price tag of $2.76 billion, with federal taxpayers responsible for $1.4 billion. Part of the largest road construction program in Utah’s state history, the proposed Legacy Highway would parallel most of I-15 which is currently being expanded as part of infrastructure preparation for the 2002 Winter Olympic Games to be hosted by Salt Lake City. This duplicative road would bisect countless acres of farmland, leaving them vulnerable to sprawl development. The proposed highway would also cut through a Western Hemispheric Shorebird Reserve Network Site that millions of shorebirds depend on for secure and pristine wetlands.

There is some good news

There is some good news. There have been some victories and significant signs of progress attributed primarily to citizen efforts. These victories have saved taxpayers over $500 million.

Victories

Red Rock Crossing (AZ) Funding was dropped for a highway and bridge at Red Rock Crossing that would have cost $30 million. The proposed bridge would have crossed U.S. Forest Service land. Local opposition was high as the bridge and road would have disturbed the rural atmosphere and tranquillity of the area. The adjacent Cathedral Rock is world-renowned for its scenic beauty, and has appeared in more than 40 featured films.

I-287 (NY) This unnecessary expansion in West Chester County would have cost approximately $500 million for a High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane designed to reduce traffic. The HOV lane was a short-term solution, and strongly opposed by the community. Traffic could be reduced 35 percent through offering transit options, and retrofitting ramps and interchanges. This project was cancelled in 1998.

Barney Circle (DC) In December 1996, citizen pressure forced Washington, D.C.’s City Council to reject construction of this $200 million project. Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) declared Barney Circle dead on March 4, 1997. TEA-21 officially cancelled the project, and reprogrammed the money to road maintenance, construction and beautification projects.

Signs of progress

Route 50 Corridor (VA) The Virginia Department of Transportation wants to expand this two-lane highway to six lanes in Loudoun and Fauquier Counties. In addition, the agency would construct bypasses around Aldie, Middleburg, and Upperville, citing congestion and safety as justifications. There is a growing effort to promote a low-cost, traffic calming, alternative to the bypasses, which is gaining momentum. Senator John Warner (R-VA) included $13 million for traffic calming in TEA-21. Traffic calming controls speeding and aggressive driving with medians, traffic circles, raised intersections and pedestrian crossing.

About this report

Federal funds
This report includes only proposed highway, road and bridge projects for which federal funds have been or may be sought.

Alternatives
It is important to note that alternatives have been suggested for almost all of these projects. While this report does not necessarily endorse any specific alternatives, it recommends that they be considered where appropriate.

Savings
Estimates represent an approximate savings of federal taxpayer money. In cases where project boosters have sought federal money, the price tags are well known. Cost estimates do not yet exist for other projects.

Contacts
The people and organizations listed at the bottom of each page are knowledgeable sources of information on the respective project. However, such contacts do not necessarily endorse the particular article in which they are listed or the report in its entirety.

Maps
The maps for each project are illustrative, intended only to show the general location of the proposed project.

Why Groups Support This Report
In compiling this report, the 50 worst road projects were identified by a coalition of taxpayers, environmentalists and community activists seeking to stop new road projects that waste money, damage the environment and harm local communities. Different groups support this report for different reasons:

Taxpayers support this report to ensure that their tax dollars are used wisely, rein in pork-barrel politics and stop wasteful projects.

Much of the federal spending on highways is paid for through the Highway Trust Fund, which is funded by 18.3 cents per gallon of the federal gas tax. Supporters of the federal highway program point out that the Highway Trust Fund finances a large part of the spending - as if that should exempt it from oversight and reasonable priorities.

Gas tax revenues should be spent wisely as should all tax dollars. But TEA-21 was written with airtight restrictions on how money can be spent. Money is being allocated for roads around the country, regardless of whether the roads are needed or wanted by the local community. In effect, Congress has put highway spending on autopilot — with little oversight or accountability. Taxpayers care less about budget technicalities than whether the government is using their money in the best way possible.

Environmentalists support this report to preserve clean air, improve energy use, control urban sprawl and prevent destruction of habitat. Increasingly, environmentalists also advocate subsidy cuts in order to link environmental and economic goals.

Environmentalist are concerned about the problems caused by America’s growing reliance on the automobile. The growth in new road funding is fueling sprawl development around the country, which is paving over open spaces, polluting the air, and building through farmland. These new mega highways are being pushed by developers, encouraging people to live farther from where they shop, work and eat.

Sprawl development leads to increased driving and a greater devotion to fossil fuels, both of which contribute to a decline in air and water quality. Equally important is the damage new roads inflict on habitat in national and state parks and other federally and state protected lands. Often, this dramatically disrupts wildlife and unique natural communities.

Local Community Groups support this report to protect the quality of life in their neighborhoods, preserve their local economies, have a voice in determining their future, and more transportation options.

Citizens in communities around the country are concerned about new roads that force many homes and businesses to be destroyed or are significantly affected. New roads have effectively transformed many rural communities by fueling suburban sprawl - attributed with consuming 1.5 million acres of farmland each year. In addition, new roads undermine the tax base of existing cities and towns by encouraging residents to relocate elsewhere.