Can a highway be racist?

[edwaleni]

Before the current administration came into office, (actually 10 years ago) was the first time someone confronted me with the idea that highways can be racist.

I thought this an unusual concept because after all, American highway and tollways are open to all comers, rich, poor, native and non-native, how can a highway have a preference?

After doing some research and reading a few books on highway planning in the post WW2 era, I began to see where the concept of "racist highways" had come from.

Some books discussed the idea that many highway planners intentionally chose the planned ROW's to go through certain neighborhoods, which just happened to be either very poor, or very black.

So the authors asked why?

Was this intentional? By design? Or just a consequence of rational road planning?

The answer I found was "it depends".

When doing highway planning in the 1950's it was standard routine to look at urban renewal opportunities. It was also considered optimal to plan highways using the least expensive real estate.

These opportunities presented themselves in the most poor of neighborhoods, which were quite healthy for the residents, but perhaps looked blighted for those not used to it, or to local leaders.

So planners would route highways through these neighborhoods with the effect of either tearing them apart, splitting them in two by dividing them up or building large walls that essentially cut the view (and noise).

Were any of the planners and engineers outright racists?

Many of that generation are no longer alive, so its hard to say (or interview them) to see if they had ill intent in their work. (or if they would even admit to it)

I have asked people familiar with urban planning to show me some examples of where road planning, or even zoning to promote new roads was discriminatory in some way.

Some of them were compelling, some of them were speculative, some of them were just plain over thinking it. (IMHO)

In the post war period of road building the NEPA process was nothing close to what it is today. Many variables and impacts are measured and taken into consideration when planning a highway.

But even then many plans for highways still had committees and reviews with various public agencies, could someone or something with an agenda get a nefarious road plan through?

I looked at a few examples where some were successful and where some weren't to see if there were any common threads.

One was in Portland Oregon, where in the "master plan" they had an expressway (I think it was called the Fremont Expressway) going through what at the time was considered lesser economic areas east of the downtown. It was considered a benefit as part of urban renewal. (it was not built)

The other was Jacksonville Florida. The then JEA (Jacksonville Expressway Authority) had exclusive rights to build expressways in metro Jacksonville. What is now I-95 from Golfair Road south to the terminus with the future I-10 went through the middle of a large black community called Lavilla. (it was built).

I also looked at the Eisenhower ( also called the Congress Expressway) in Chicago, especially when it passed through Garfield Park. For a period of time it used to end at Central, but when it was built through Garfield Park, it created a major disruption in the local neighborhoods which still resonate today.

Also looked at was the gap in I-49 in Shreveport north of I-20 and through 12 Mile Bayou.

I am sure there are other examples or ideas that these issues were at play.

But were they intentional or directed at a certain community?

In the Chicago example, the then Mayor Daley (Sr.) had some very clear objectives when it came to using the new federal dollars to build expressways. But was he targeting anyone?

Hopefully this will be a constructive dialog and not get into the cellar with accusations and recriminations, but get a better idea of how roads were planned in the post-war buildout and was there any efforts (intentional of otherwise) to push out people of lesser economic value or by culture or skin color.

It's a very compelling topic that has (unfortunately) been heavily politicized. I was hoping that fellow highway enthusiasts could share feedback.

[SEWIGuy]

One was in Portland Oregon, where in the "master plan" they had an expressway (I think it was called the Fremont Expressway) going through what at the time was considered lesser economic areas east of the downtown. It was considered a benefit as part of urban renewal. (it was not built)

The other was Jacksonville Florida. The then JEA (Jacksonville Expressway Authority) had exclusive rights to build expressways in metro Jacksonville. What is now I-95 from Golfair Road south to the terminus with the future I-10 went through the middle of a large black community called Lavilla. (it was built).

A couple of points using these examples:

First, I think there was a misguided notion that freeways would be a positive part of urban renewal.  They were largely wrong when such freeways tore through existing neighborhood of every color.  However since freeways were relatively new at that point, I would chalk this up to a well intentioned theory that has since been proven wrong.

Second, my guess is that the people who were making these decisions had little knowledge of these neighborhoods outside of their assessed value. They were largely male and white.  Were some of these people making "racist" decisions?  Likely.  Were some making "white savior" decisions on the mistaken theory that highways were a positive force of urban renewal?  Also likely.  Were some making decisions based on either ignorance or not really caring?  Definitely.

So I think asking "can a highway be racist" is too limiting a question.  I think race was part of the motivation where to put these highways, even if it was well intentioned. 

Also does the motivation of these people a couple generations ago even matter?  What's more important now is trying to fix the mistakes that were made and to make sure they don't repeat themselves in the future.

[hotdogPi]

I will note that nonwhite communities can form after all this happened. Lawrence MA is a good example. It's mostly Hispanic, but this only started after WWII and gradually became the case over decades. I-495 clips the edge and I-93 bypasses it; neither goes through downtown Lawrence, nor does the freeway MA 213. I believe these freeways were built in the 1960s, but I'm not that good with historical road information.

[webny99]

I am sure there are other examples or ideas that these issues were at play.

But were they intentional or directed at a certain community?

I think the short answer is that yes, that may have been the case in the past, but not at present, and likely not in the future either. Approval processes are so much more rigorous, eminent domain is so much rarer, and the country is so much more diverse now than it was 60-70 years ago, that it's almost impossible to envision a situation where this is a major issue in the near future like it was in the past.

What's more important now is trying to fix the mistakes that were made and to make sure they don't repeat themselves in the future.

Concur, although again, it's much easier to make sure these types of issues don't repeat when there's more stringent project requirements and a lot less new road construction and new infrastructure in general.

[Henry]

Failure to complete a freeway project may also play a huge factor in the issue. I-170 in Baltimore is one such project; it was built from downtown to US 1, but the rest was unbuilt mainly due to the cancellation of I-70 which was to go through a nearby park. Despite this, the neighborhoods around it began to deteriorate almost to the point of no return, and the Red Line light rail wouldn't have made a difference anyway.

Conversely, Atlanta has been able to escape these ills, and it even built the Jimmy Carter Presidential Library where two of the cancelled freeways (I-675 and I-485, with I-420 being the third) were supposed to have met. That city has gotten along just fine without them, no matter how bad traffic on the existing ones may get.

[thspfc]

No. The people who built the highway can be racist, but not the highway itself.

[kphoger]

Religion isn't the same things as race, of course, but...

[edwaleni]

Religion isn't the same things as race, of course, but...

Very interesting. Never seen this before.

[kphoger]

From what I've read, they've removed the 'Muslims only' part from some signs leading to the Prophet's mosque in Medina–which I'm guessing just reinforces the belief among Saudis that their nation is now a liberal country–but I'm pretty sure they remain on the signs leading to Mecca.

[NWI_Irish96]

There's a pretty clear direct line between the practice of redlining and where urban freeways were routed.

As to whether transportation officials decided to purposefully route freeways through black neighborhoods or whether they chose the least expensive path due to budgetary reasons and ended up going through black neighborhoods due to the decisions of others, is a motive that may not be able to be assigned.

[roadman65]

Some may say that naming highways after certain folks who were part of American History can make references to racism.

To me personally a freeway grade or even a gravel road isn't a living being to make an opinion so nothing inanimate can be racist.

[hbelkins]

Black Pavement Matters!

Concrete Pride Worldwide!

[abefroman329]

There's a pretty clear direct line between the practice of redlining and where urban freeways were routed.

As to whether transportation officials decided to purposefully route freeways through black neighborhoods or whether they chose the least expensive path due to budgetary reasons and ended up going through black neighborhoods due to the decisions of others, is a motive that may not be able to be assigned.

Considering the Dan Ryan was originally going to be routed through Bridgeport (Daley's home turf, and a predominately Irish neighborhood), and Daley made damn sure that didn't happen, I don't even know that it cleaves neatly along racial lines so much as who had political power and who didn't.

And it's also important to remember that, when these expressways were being built, "white"  meant "White Anglo-Saxon Protestant"  and everyone else was not white.

[edwaleni]

Black Pavement Matters!

Concrete Pride Worldwide!

Just don't call it cement. 

[kphoger]

What's more important now is trying to fix the mistakes that were made ...

Could shunpiking become a form of virtue signaling?   

[hbelkins]

Scanning this thread for the name "Robert Moses" and surprised it hasn't been mentioned yet. 

[Bruce]

A highway itself can't have any feelings whatsoever.

But it can be designed and planned with the intent to harm people of a certain socioeconomic background, of which one factor is race. Denying that there were racist highway planners at the dawn of the Interstate era is akin to denying a lot of historical wrongs.

Righting those wrongs requires some sacrifices that upend the status quo, which of course will create backlash and anger despite having no long-term ill effects if managed properly. Fighting these little steps to mend decades of hurt and damage will make you seem like an aggressor, because you are (either knowingly or not) helping perpetuate it.

Some of these highways have got to go by the way of the wrecking ball. Rip it out and try to recover what's left of the communities that were destroyed decades ago (or even today, in the case of Shreveport).

[triplemultiplex]

Planners back in the day knew exactly what they were doing.  They can claim it was for reasons of cost, but I guarantee you some similar sentence was uttered inside a closed door meeting in every major American city to: "Let's just punch it through the colored neighborhood!"

Planners absolutely used the 110 to physically divided the black neighborhood from the more white neighborhoods to the west on LA's south side.
Planners in Tulsa purposefully slammed I-244 through the Rosewood neighborhood to twist the knife in the wake of the race riot.
The Crosstown Commons on I-35W exists because planners purposefully shifted the freeway east a dozen blocks to take out the black neighborhood on Minneapolis's south side.
I look at Milwaukee where planners wanted a freeway angling into downtown from the northwest to plow through the black neighborhood, but there was no symmetrical proposal for a freeway coming in from the southwest to downtown.  I'm sure the fact that those southside neighborhoods were mostly white is just a coincidence and there was some hand-waving about how a freeway in that direction wasn't needed.

One can fairly accurately map out the minority neighborhoods in American cities c.1950 by simply looking at where the freeways exist today.
It's divide and conquer, man.

I just wish we had a 'control group' for the mid-20th Century urban renewal craze.  Some cities where we did not punch freeways through very heart of the city and instead just had a loop with a few spurs poking in.  Sort of like Baltimore, but better planned and not the result of aborted projects.  There are no true examples of this in the United States.  Closest allegory is Vancouver, but that's not a 1:1 comparison because as similar as Canada is the the US, it is not the US; especially 60 years ago.

[Max Rockatansky]

One of the more interesting aspects about the California HSR in Fresno is where it is being aligned through.  The majority of the neighborhoods were (most are razed already) along the heavily poverty strewn Golden State Boulevard corridor and Chinese District in downtown.  Given how aggressive Fresno was with getting the HSR and the corridor selected, it isn't hard to see it as modern slum clearance. 

I'm not saying racism is at hand, the parcels involved are certainly the lowest cost in Fresno.  All the same it is interesting to see the HSR line swing way out from the central core of cities like Madera, Hanford and Visalia.  I do find it interesting that everyone seems oblivious to the parallels with 1950s era freeway development.   

[NE2]

Yes.

[NE2]

I just wish we had a 'control group' for the mid-20th Century urban renewal craze.  Some cities where we did not punch freeways through very heart of the city and instead just had a loop with a few spurs poking in.  Sort of like Baltimore, but better planned and not the result of aborted projects.  There are no true examples of this in the United States.  Closest allegory is Vancouver, but that's not a 1:1 comparison because as similar as Canada is the the US, it is not the US; especially 60 years ago.

Columbia SC? Raleigh NC?

[abefroman329]

I just wish we had a 'control group' for the mid-20th Century urban renewal craze.  Some cities where we did not punch freeways through very heart of the city and instead just had a loop with a few spurs poking in.  Sort of like Baltimore, but better planned and not the result of aborted projects.  There are no true examples of this in the United States.  Closest allegory is Vancouver, but that's not a 1:1 comparison because as similar as Canada is the the US, it is not the US; especially 60 years ago.

Toronto?

[vdeane]

Planners back in the day knew exactly what they were doing.  They can claim it was for reasons of cost, but I guarantee you some similar sentence was uttered inside a closed door meeting in every major American city to: "Let's just punch it through the colored neighborhood!"

Planners absolutely used the 110 to physically divided the black neighborhood from the more white neighborhoods to the west on LA's south side.
Planners in Tulsa purposefully slammed I-244 through the Rosewood neighborhood to twist the knife in the wake of the race riot.
The Crosstown Commons on I-35W exists because planners purposefully shifted the freeway east a dozen blocks to take out the black neighborhood on Minneapolis's south side.
I look at Milwaukee where planners wanted a freeway angling into downtown from the northwest to plow through the black neighborhood, but there was no symmetrical proposal for a freeway coming in from the southwest to downtown.  I'm sure the fact that those southside neighborhoods were mostly white is just a coincidence and there was some hand-waving about how a freeway in that direction wasn't needed.

One can fairly accurately map out the minority neighborhoods in American cities c.1950 by simply looking at where the freeways exist today.
It's divide and conquer, man.

I just wish we had a 'control group' for the mid-20th Century urban renewal craze.  Some cities where we did not punch freeways through very heart of the city and instead just had a loop with a few spurs poking in.  Sort of like Baltimore, but better planned and not the result of aborted projects.  There are no true examples of this in the United States.  Closest allegory is Vancouver, but that's not a 1:1 comparison because as similar as Canada is the the US, it is not the US; especially 60 years ago.

And isn't Vancouver's current system the result of cancelled projects?

[bulldog1979]

The Lansing State Journal did a piece about this very topic 13 years ago in relation to the construction of I-496 (pp. 1, 8). The interesting part of that story is that the Black community used the buyouts as an opportunity to integrate into other neighborhoods. Those efforts had a mixed result.

Another interesting detail is that the Olds Mansion was in the path of what is now named the Ransom E. Olds Freeway.

[Scott5114]

This shit again? Didn't we already have one of these threads?