Citizens for Appropriate
Transportation (CAT)
The
Eisenhower Transportation Corridor
INDUCED
TRAVEL DEMAND
After two years and $140 million spent
retooling the notoriously congested
-
Mr.
Jonak’s simple observation summarizes the complex
issue of "induced travel demand," or the degree to which building new
highway capacity encourages new car and truck trips that would not have
otherwise occurred.
While
Think
of travel as something you purchase. The price you pay includes both the
dollars and the time you spend. If the price of gasoline were $10 per gallon,
people would travel less than if it were 10 cents per gallon. This simple
lesson of price vs. demand can be applied to time just
as easily. If the time it takes to get somewhere
doubled, fewer people would make the trip. And if the
time it takes to go somewhere dropped – by adding a lane to the Eisenhower, for
instance – then more people would drive.
In
some cases, induced demand can be a good thing. State Departments of
Transportation frequently boast about the siting of
new housing and jobs resulting from highway investments. Indeed, one could
question the value of a public investment that did not attract users just as
one could question the value of a private sector product that did not attract
customers.
But induced demand
also brings with it three serious problems.
First,
induced demand increases community and environmental impacts.
In
the case of the Eisenhower, induced traffic would have three sources:
Unfortunately,
you can’t choose which of these three kinds of traffic
to get. While moving traffic off city streets and onto the highway is
beneficial, it comes at the cost of reduced public transit use and an absolute
increase in the number of cars on the road. When new capacity induces new cars
and trucks to use the Expressway, more noise and air pollution result.
Second,
increased capacity can cause sprawl. Not only do drivers
change their short-term behavior in reaction to changes in price and time, but
they change their long-term behavior as well. How long it takes to drive to
work, for example, is a significant criterion in people’s choice of where to
live. Reduce the travel time, and you encourage people to live further away. As
Washington Post columnist Neil Pierce explains, "the
added traffic…grows and grows over the long term as people travel further and
further on the new or widened roads to take advantage of less expensive land. So government actually pushes sprawling development, siphoning
growth and vitality from existing cities and closer-in suburbs. City and
established suburb residents pay most of the bill."
Third,
more cars mean more congestion. The irony is that
induced demand can undermine the very purpose for expanding the highway –
reducing congestion.
Evidence
from around the country suggests that induced demand on an urban highway like
the Eisenhower could be significant, leaving the road almost as congested as it
is now:
And, of course, there
is every reason to believe that if expanding capacity on the Eisenhower in
A
thorough and honest environmental impact statement would carefully model the
induced demand of the proposed highway expansion and weigh the purported travel
time benefits against the environmental costs of the project and the demand it
induces. Unfortunately, the Illinois Department of Transportation has not yet
agreed to conduct such a study.
Air
pollution update: Our last issue brief described the air
pollution consequences of automobile and truck exhaust. A few days after our
brief was mailed, the United States Environmental
Protection Agency released its findings concluding that long-term exposure to
diesel exhaust is likely to cause lung cancer and other respiratory diseases.
CAT Home | Previous Issue Brief | Next Issue Brief | Issue Brief Index