Widening crowded highways: Bigger isn't better

Solving the ongoing traffic nightmare that has frustrated Southern California's commuters for decades is an issue that fascinates drivers across the country. But a recent New York Times investigation that examined congestion found that widening highways may not be the answer to improving traffic flow.

While the story focuses on a famously clogged freeway in Los Angeles — Interstate 710 between downtown L.A. and Long Beach — it also looks at traffic problems in New Jersey and Houston.

The conclusion is that, while adding lanes can ease congestion initially, that so-called remedy “can also encourage people to drive more. A few years after a highway is widened, research shows, traffic — and the greenhouse gas emissions that come along with it — often returns.”

Houston's Katy Freeway is a world-famous example of this — within five years of a massive expansion of up to 26 lanes of traffic, the congestion became worse than it was before.

Although enormous amounts of federal funds are earmarked over the next few years for expanding highways through the President Biden-supported infrastructure package, the Times found that some opponents think the money is better spent elsewhere. In a report last year by the Department of Transportation, the agency said it would seek to prioritize funding for safety of pedestrians, motorcylists and others outside of cars rather than paying for road widening — and based on the latest NHTSA data showing increased pedestrian and motorcyclist deaths, that sounds like a good plan.