In a word – politics.
Via Planetizen.
A new report from U.S. PIRG (PDF, 1.8M) describes the political forces that cause politicians to favor ribbon cuttings over basic maintenance programs:
One thing is for sure: the deterioration of our roads and bridges is no accident. Rather, it is the direct result of countless policy decisions that put other considerations ahead of the pressing need to preserve our investment in the highway system. Political forces often undermine a strong commitment to maintenance. Members of Congress, state legislators
and local politicians thrive on ribbon-cuttings. Powerful special interests push for
new and bigger highways. Meanwhile, federal and state policies–which should provide strong guidance in the wise use of taxpayer dollars–often fail to achieve the proper balance between building new infrastructure and taking care of what we already have built.
5 responses to “Why We Build New Roads As Old Ones Crumble”
Milwaukie MAX Bridge, anyone? Why are we building a brand new transit bridge when the Sellwood is already crumbling before our eyes?
Can you imagine if something tragic happened to the Sellwood structurally before it could get repaired and just a few hundred feet north there was a new bridge being constructed (or already constructed)?
I would not want to endure the political fallout that would occur from that, especially if the Sellwood decided to fail and hurt or kill someone in the process.
A remote possibility, but you never know what can happen especially after Minnesota’s bridge failed.
A couple other thoughts:
1) Maintenance work, unless it’s a Really Big Project, is generally done by public employees working for the DOT or the city/county public works department. New construction, major maintenance, and specialty work, OTOH, is outsourced to private firms. Which sort of work do said private firms frequently agitate for?
2) Likewise, what sort of project is more likely to receive outside funding?
A remote possibility, but you never know what can happen…
The “fear” line is also being used to try to push the CRC through.
Also part of the problem; all the campaign statements of “as your _____ I would…,” many of which are done before any realities are known by the candidate. New programs, services, and infrastructure are created while existing infrastructure is left to decay.
Everyone talks about the number of potholes on streets within the City of Portland. Some of them are now the size of lakes, especially on unimproved streets. Just last week a city maintenance crew fixed two small potholes on a barely paved side street in front of where I live. Coincidence because I’m involved in current politics? (I don’t have a “smart phone” so no I didn’t report it using an “app” or even call it in. Heck, when I saw a malfunctioning pedestrian signal in Downtown Portland one day and stopped by the nearest publicly-owned building to ask them to call 823-SAFE, they couldn’t figure out why I would want to do so.)
This is also probably a good time to mention that the Metro Public Hearing for the RTP update is tonight at 5 PM. Plans in the “big buck$” range, funding for all of them of a “whammy.”
Jason:
The fear of the bridge over the Columbia failing is way more remote than the fear of the Sellwood failing. Yes, they are using fear to push CRC through, I don’t disagree.
The structural integrity of the Sellwood bridge is actually quite discernible to the eye.
I did use the cliche word “crumbling” in describing the bridge’s condition, but I think it fits well. It is crumbling.
gotta love how mr. anti-tax and government spending man bill sizemore suggests building a new ring road around portland.