Without buy-in for new ways of thinking at the state level, the presidential election is not likely to change much about the ways the United States plans and funds transportation infrastructure.
Yonah Freemark offers a little perspective about the future of transportation planning and policy heading into the presidential election next week, starting first with a nod to the conventional thinking about the potential of a major sea change at the federal level to deliver necessary change in how the nation plans and funds its transportation priorities:
Hoping to respond to the economic crisis brought on by COVID-19 and the prospect of Democratic control over both houses of Congress and the White House, Senate Democrats have begun preparations for a $1 trillion infrastructure package.
The list of possibilities for a Democratic-led coalition on transportation are enticing, but Freemark insists that far bigger prizes can be found at the local and state level:
Yet the key questions regarding transportation in the United States—whether the country is able to truly adapt its mobility system to mitigate the devastation wrought by climate change; whether we integrate transportation and land-use planning so as to reduce exurban expansion and automobile dependency; whether we harness access as a tool to reduce inequality, rather than as a mechanism to further empower and enrich a lucky few—are in fact more often than not in the hands not of the federal government, but rather in those of elected officials at the state and municipal levels.
According to Freemark, states and cities have a habit of making regressive choices on transportation, and "neither the federal government nor lower levels of government have been particularly effective custodians of their massive expenditures on transportation—at least when it comes to achieving more sustainable and equitable outcomes."
In the rest of the article, Freemark throws water on the idea that an infrastructure stimulus will provide equitable or sustainable projects without buy-in from local and state governments. The solution to these challenges, according to Freemark: change at lower levels of government, not just at the very top.
FULL STORY: The path to a better transport system runs through progressive states and cities
Planetizen Federal Action Tracker
A weekly monitor of how Trump’s orders and actions are impacting planners and planning in America.
The state-sanctioned urbicide of Austin
People don’t kill cities. Freeways do.
US to reduce Colorado River water deliveries to Mexico
A new Colorado Treaty amendment reduces Mexico’s Colorado River water allocation by 250,000 acre feet.
5 New England states march closer to 800 megawatt wind energy project
Securing federal approval for the project may be complicated under the Trump administration, which has historically been hostile towards domestic wind power.
Baltimore to break ground on $50 million Transit Priority Project
The project will bring faster bus trips, safer streets and better bike connections to Baltimore.
Airbnb launches $250 million 'last-dollar financing' housing accelerator, makes first investment in Austin
The company will put $6.4 million towards affordable housing development in Texas’ capital.
FREE Course: Walkable City 1: Why Walkability?
After describing his path towards focusing on walkability as the essence of good planning, Jeff Speck marches through his five principal reasons for making more walkable places.
Reinventing Malls: Planning Alchemy—Turning Gray Fields Into Gold
The course focuses on the opportunities and imperatives that shape reinvention of mall sites.
Eagle County Government
Harvard University Graduate School of Design
Nashville Planning Department
The Architects Foundation
University of Cincinnati Online
The Pocatello Development Authority
The Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Pocatello
Journal of the American Planning Association