Coupling Housing and Mobility: A Radical Rethink for Freeways

(AI translation below)

An ambitious vision for freeways: intersections with dense, tall buildings and rights of way repurposed for high-speed, high-capacity public transit.

The stark images of nearly empty freeways in the Spring of 2020 offered an opportunity to reevaluate many aspects of daily life—like the environment, the housing market, and mobility. Hopefully, the experience offered an opportunity to question at least two truisms about daily life in the United States. Truism 1: Freeways Only Have Cars, Buses, and Trucks

Seeing the nation's empty freeways last year should provoke a question: Should cars, buses, and trucks be the only vehicles using freeways? The default answer since the 1950s has been an unequivocal "yes." However, given evolving mobility choices, policymakers could reevaluate how freeways are used.

America's big push into high-speed rail and very rapid public transport has been fraught with challenges. Some of those challenges have been encountered in the uncharted territory of high-speed rail regulation, contractor experience, and tunneling costs. However, many challenges are created by the securing of right of ways, notably in California.

All too often, behavior changes only after seeing a real alternative in action. One of high-speed rail proponents' largest mistakes was not focusing on regions with potentially high demand. As a commuter languishing in traffic five days a week, I have very little impetus to use a system that I cannot see, no matter how fast it might be going. However, if I am stuck in traffic and see a train whizzing by at 80 miles an hour, the message is loud and clear, and most importantly leads at least to the serious consideration of a change in behavior.

The trains themselves could serve as the perfect advertisement—passing hundreds of thousands of potential clients daily. The "drip, drip, drip" messaging over the course of days and weeks would take hold.

Surface streets used to have only cars and buses, now they have significantly more sidewalks for pedestrians and dedicated bike and bus lanes, not to mention more trees. Why not rethink freeways, if regular, reliable and user-friendly feeder systems are available near the freeway? Truism 2: Larger Living Space Is "Better" Living Space

Another truism has been the clear preference for larger living quarters, characterized by the single-family home. Indeed, the post-World War II era largely followed the pattern "commercial real estate rises up, residential real estate spreads out."

With inner cities suffering a perceived lack of "livability," and because of exorbitant housing, many families feel compelled to buy a cheaper house in other regions to achieve a better quality of life. With that housing choice comes an extensive commute to boot. Not for the fainthearted, these commutes can take three or four hours a day—12%-16% of one's life, inching along a 10-lane concrete ribbon. Almost the lone American exception to this reality is New York City, which couples dense living with an extensive public transit system. These commutes have had a reprieve during the pandemic, but the majority of them will eventually come back.

Developers should shake off the cookie cutter approach of the "3+2 with a backyard" or "loft living" and start thinking about the fortune in the affordable housing market. Does a family "need" 1,500 square feet when it comes with a three-hour commute? Or does it simply "want" it? Even worse, does it feel that a single-family residential lifestyle is somehow "deserved"? The energy costs of a house that size will only increase in the coming years. Indeed, to take one example, California’s energy prices have risen 2.8% per year since 1994 . It’s hard to imagine these prices stabilizing given the tenuous situation with PG&E.

Coming generations will have to profoundly reconsider this tradeoff—square feet vs. time. That same 1,500 feet could be divided into two apartments, with equally if not more, of a profit margin for a developer. It is significantly cheaper to build up, as opposed to build out. And what if that reduced space came with a two-thirds reduction in commuting time? Indeed, time should be more widely considered as a currency. Developers are currently building more apartments, but access to affordable and smaller apartments could be significantly increased.

Policymakers can encourage more responsible urban living through measures that promote a sustainable urban landscape, saving time and money and reducing environmental impacts. One such measure would be the idea of a sprawl tax—sprawl costs billions in utilities and roads, and air pollution due to long commutes. If the term "sprawl tax" offends, maybe "density dividend" works better. Radical Rethink: Couple Mobility and Housing

To solve this Gordian Knot, mobility and housing could be and should be coupled. Many of America’s largest cities have major interchanges usually with adjacent unused patches of land. Using the city of Los Angeles as an example, some of its major interchanges include the 405/10, 101/110, and 405/101 freeways.

Building a 20+ story predominantly residential tower at interchanges, dedicated to affordable housing (prioritizing essential public servants—health, education, and policing) with some mixed use, might help to alleviate the paucity of housing.

Complementing these new vertical spaces in key nodes around the city would be a transport system that rapidly moves the adjacent population to another node. From the 405/10 node, one could travel 11 miles north to the 405/101 interchange or east 12 miles to the 10/110 (downtown) in just minutes. That mode of transport could be a fast train or, should the technology be proven, a hyperloop, traveling down the freeway’s center divider. Even dedicated bus lanes (with dozens of buses) would allow a quick start on the effort and avoid the exorbitant costs of large capital projects. High Speed Rail Learning

Most importantly, for such an approach, there would be no right of way issues and usually one interlocutor—the state. Using existing right of way would avoid the need to purchase of individual pieces of land with countless lawsuits. As late as 2019, California’s High Speed Rail still had to purchase over 450 parcels of land . Such a system would take the equivalent of three to four lanes of a ten-lane freeway, would substantially decrease air pollution, and, most importantly, would save time by moving people around at dramatically increased speeds.

Before the naysayers start, recall that an NFL stadium was once seriously considered at the 405/10 interchange , potentially used 10-12 days annually in one of the country's most strategic interchanges. What about a vertical "city" there, acting as a residential option and transport node to facilitate commuting around one of the world’s largest cities? The hardware (freeway) is there—the software (policy) is now needed. Developers should be provided incentives to create flagship housing that doesn’t contribute to sprawl. How We (Choose to) Live in the 21st Century

Over the last 18 months, futurists have equated Covid-19 to a great accelerator. Perhaps it is, but the question remains: Toward what? More Business as Usual ?Or, a Brave New World , in which mobility, housing, and the environment meet? The "pause" button of 2020 allowed us to reimagine some of the possibilities. There is only so long that people can shelter in place. Housing is only one side of the coin—the other side being mobility. The current situation allows us the very unique ability to ask ourselves: What if?

Los Angeles has made a considerable leap forward in establishing a public transport network—a massive improvement compared to a generation ago. The burgeoning system needs a stronger push toward a rapid, regional solution to complement that progress.

Policymakers and indeed all of us will have to consider what is best for future generations. A major portion of that effort will require setting priorities for the built environment. A more enlightened freeway policy coupled with (affordable) housing that goes up, not out, would be a dramatically positive step forward.

Let's hope that we juggle both urgent short-term action and equally urgent long-term thinking. Getting the balance right is crucial for coming generations.

Richard Dion is an advisor in the Governance and Human Rights Unit at GIZ, the German Corporation for International Cooperation GmbH.

住房与交通的耦合：对高速公路的彻底反思

一个雄心勃勃的高速公路愿景：密集的高楼交叉路口和路权被重新用于高速、大容量的公共交通。

2020年春天高速公路几乎空无一人的鲜明图像提供了一个重新评估日常生活许多方面的机会--比如环境、房地产市场和流动性。希望这次经历提供了一个机会来质疑至少两个关于美国日常生活的真理。真理1：高速公路只有小汽车、公共汽车和卡车

看到去年全国空荡荡的高速公路应该引发一个问题：汽车、公共汽车和卡车应该是唯一使用高速公路的车辆吗?自20世纪50年代以来，默认的答案一直是明确的“是的”。然而，考虑到不断变化的流动性选择，政策制定者可以重新评估高速公路的使用方式。

美国对高速铁路和非常快速的公共交通的大力推进充满了挑战。其中一些挑战是在高速铁路监管、承包商经验和隧道建设成本等未知领域遇到的。然而，通行权的保障带来了许多挑战，尤其是在加利福尼亚州。

通常，只有在看到一个真正的替代方案后，行为才会改变。高铁支持者最大的错误之一是没有把重点放在潜在需求高的地区。作为一个每周五天都在交通中苦苦挣扎的通勤者，我几乎没有动力使用一个我看不到的系统，无论它可能运行得有多快。然而，如果我被困在交通中，看到一列火车以每小时80英里的速度呼啸而过，这个信息是响亮而清晰的，最重要的是，至少会引起我认真考虑改变行为。

火车本身可以作为完美的广告--每天传递成千上万的潜在客户。在几天和几周的时间里，“滴，滴，滴”的信息将会持续下去。

地面街道过去只有汽车和公共汽车，现在他们有了明显更多的人行道供行人使用，以及专用的自行车和公共汽车车道，更不用说更多的树了。如果高速公路附近有正规的、可靠的和方便用户的支线系统，为什么不重新考虑高速公路呢?真理二：更大的生活空间是“更好”的生活空间

另一个不言而喻的事实是，人们明显倾向于以单户住宅为特征的更大的生活区。事实上，二战后的时代基本上遵循了“商业地产崛起，住宅地产铺开”的模式。

由于市中心被认为缺乏“宜居性”，以及住房价格过高，许多家庭感到不得不在其他地区购买更便宜的房子，以获得更好的生活质量。随着住房的选择，靴子需要大量的通勤。不适合胆小的人，这些通勤每天可能需要三四个小时--一个人一生的12%-16%，沿着10车道的混凝土带缓慢前进。几乎是美国唯一的例外是纽约市，它把密集的生活和广泛的公共交通系统结合在一起。这些通勤在疫情期间得到了缓解，但其中大多数最终会回来。

开发商应该摆脱“3+2带后院”或“阁楼生活”的做法，开始考虑经济适用房市场的命运。一个家庭是否“需要”1500平方英尺，而它需要三个小时的通勤?还是它只是“想要”它?更糟糕的是，人们是否觉得独栋住宅的生活方式是“应得的”?这样大小的房子的能源成本在未来几年只会增加。的确，举个例子，加州的能源价格自1994年以来每年上涨2.8%。鉴于宝洁公司的脆弱局势，很难想象这些价格会稳定下来。

未来几代人将不得不深刻地重新考虑这种权衡--平方英尺与时间。同样的1500英尺可以分成两套公寓，对开发商来说，如果不是更多的话，利润率也是一样的。建造比建造要便宜得多。如果减少的空间伴随着三分之二的通勤时间减少呢?事实上，时间应该被更广泛地视为一种货币。开发商目前正在建造更多的公寓，但购买负担得起的小公寓的机会可能会显著增加。

政策制定者可以通过促进可持续城市景观、节省时间和金钱并减少环境影响的措施，鼓励更负责任的城市生活。一个这样的措施将是扩展税收的想法--扩展在公用事业和道路上花费数十亿美元，以及由于长时间通勤造成的空气污染。如果“扩张税”一词冒犯了，也许“密度红利”更有效。激进的反思：夫妻流动性与住房

为了解决这个棘手的问题，流动性和住房可以而且应该结合起来。美国许多最大的城市都有主要的立交桥，通常与邻近的未使用的土地相连。以洛杉矶市为例，它的一些主要立交包括405/10、101/110和405/101高速公路。

在交汇处建造一座20多层的以住宅为主的塔楼，专门用于负担得起的住房（优先考虑基本的公务员--卫生、教育和警察），并有一些混合用途，可能有助于缓解住房的短缺。

与城市周围关键节点的这些新的垂直空间相补充的是一个交通系统，它可以将邻近的人口迅速转移到另一个节点。从405/10节点，你可以在几分钟内向北行驶11英里到405/101立交，或向东行驶12英里到10/110（市中心）。这种交通方式可以是快速列车，或者，如果这项技术得到证实，可以是沿着高速公路中心分隔线行驶的超级环路。即使是专门的公共汽车专用道（有几十辆公共汽车）也可以让这项工作快速开始，并避免大型资本项目的高昂成本。高铁学习

最重要的是，对于这样一种办法，不存在通行权问题，而且通常只有一个对话者----国家。使用现有的通行权将避免需要购买单个的土地和无数的诉讼。直到2019年，加州高铁仍不得不购买450多块土地。这样一个系统将占用相当于10车道高速公路的3到4车道，将大大减少空气污染，最重要的是，将以大幅提高的速度让人们四处移动，从而节省时间。

在反对者开始之前，请记住，在405/10交汇处曾经认真考虑过一个NFL体育场，每年可能在该国最具战略意义的交汇处之一使用10-12天。在那里建立一个垂直的“城市”，作为居住选择和交通节点，方便在世界上最大的城市之一周围通勤，怎么样?硬件（高速公路）在那里--现在需要软件（政策）。应该向开发商提供激励措施，以创建不会助长扩张的旗舰住宅。我们如何（选择）生活在21世纪

在过去的18个月里，未来学家把新冠肺炎等同于一个伟大的加速器。也许是这样，但问题仍然存在：走向什么?更多的一切照旧?或者，一个勇敢的新世界，在这个世界里，流动性、住房和环境相遇?2020年的“暂停”按钮让我们重新想象了一些可能性。只有这么长的时间，人们可以在原地避难。住房只是硬币的一面--另一面是流动性。当前的形势使我们有一种非常独特的能力来问自己：如果?

洛杉矶在建立公共交通网络方面取得了长足的进步--与一代人相比，这是一个巨大的进步。这个迅速发展的系统需要更有力的推动，以快速、区域性的解决方案来补充这一进展。

政策制定者和我们所有人都必须考虑什么对子孙后代是最好的。这项工作的一个主要部分将需要为建筑环境确定优先事项。一个更开明的高速公路政策加上（负担得起的）住房是向上的，而不是向外的，将是巨大的积极进步。

让我们希望，我们既要采取紧迫的短期行动，又要进行同样紧迫的长期思考。正确的平衡对子孙后代至关重要。

Richard Dion是德国国际合作公司GIZ治理和人权部门的顾问。

2025/07/01

Hot News

知识

, 全球汇流;

能力

, 跨界创新;

人格

, 造就生态

｜ @2021 WUPEN 世界规划教育组织