In our opinion. . . upstream bridge should be the priority

The plan to rebuild and widen the Interstate 74 Bridge is not cost-effective, will add to air and noise pollution and ultimately will fail to improve bi-state travel in the Quad Citiesí region.

A new six-lane bridge will significantly increase air pollution and noise pollution and the decade of construction work will make the I-74 corridor a traffic nightmare during, and even after, construction work is completed.

Regional planners and local governments should be working instead on an upstream crossing between Bettendorf and East Moline that will be needed to carry an estimated 22,000 daily crossings of the Mississippi River in 2025.

At the local public meetings on the proposed bridge, state officials said future traffic counts for the new I-74 bridge (78,000 in 2025) ìassumesî a new upstream span between East Moline and Bettendorf is constructed. So where are the planning meetings and the environmental impact study for an upstream bridge?

Planners have set aside common sense for the easy solution of tapping into federal dollars for rebuilding the ìinterstateî corridor and bridge. What cost-benefit ratio can possibly justify spending $600-million on the I-74 corridor reconstruction for virtually the same amount of traffic usage in 2025 as today?

Of course, a new I-74 will carry much more traffic in 2025 than the 78,000 trips the draft environmental statement says. Thatís because the upstream bridge wonít be anywhere in sight. Add another 22,000 vehicles to the 78,000 for at least 100,000 vehicle trips per day.

But traffic on a new I-74 bridge is likely to be much higher than that figure, based on what traffic planners call ìinduced travel.î We all like to take the fastest route, so new highways and bridges ìinduce,î or attract, more traffic. Once word gets out there is a new, faster way through the QCA from Des Moines to Chicago or Chicago west, will interstate trucks and cars continue to use the smaller and narrower I-80 bridge?



According to the Surface Transportation Policy Project, ìdrivers will often abandon carpools and public transit when additional roadway space is made available through highway widenings or new road construction, thus creating additional trips and more traffic. In the longer term, the promise of more convenient transportation access allows commuters to live further from work, increasing development pressures and thus fueling even more traffic demand.î



If it seems obvious that traffic counts on the new I-74 bridge will be much higher than estimates, it also can be assumed the impact on air quality and noise levels will be much higher and more severe.



Each summer regional planners warn residents not to mow the grass during hot days. The fear is pollutants from lawn-mowing will result in the Quad Cities metropolitan area exceeding federal ozone levels and make the region a ìnon-attainmentî area.

Even this winter, the Iowa Department of Natural Resources issued warnings about air quality falling to unhealthy levels in the Quad Cities.



Is the air impact of 22,000+ vehicle bridge crossings addressed in the I-74 draft environmental statement? No, because the project is in an air quality area of ìattainment,î there is no requirement to determine what additional air pollution might result from the project, or if such an increase will push the ozone levels out of attainment.



Noise levels from current traffic were found to exceed standards at most locations monitored by the state highway departments, but there are no plans proposed in the draft environmental statement to mitigate current or future noise levels.



The federal Department of Energyís 1997 Energy, Environment and Natural Resources Study recognized the importance of noise abatement when noise generators, including highways, are proposed.



ìFurther interstate construction and other federally funded highway construction in urban areas should continue to include a provision for sound barriers or buffer zones to be constructed as an integral part of the highway as required by local governments,î the federal study said.



Maintaining the areaís economic vitality is another reason cited in the need for construction of a new bridge. However, there is no evidence such work will benefit the regional economy, and the project is very likely to hurt the economies of the two affected downtowns.



ìBeyond the highly localized benefits that highway projects tend to confer, transportation economists generally agree that at the regional level, additional highway capacity offers little added value in terms of productivity, economic competitiveness, or efficiency,î the Surface Transportation Policy Project reports.



ìThis is a jarring revelation for many individuals who still believe that the tremendous productivity gains resulting from infrastructure spending during the 1950ís and 1960ís can be repeated with the right level of spending. However, those gains were achieved back in the days when the nation lacked a network of modern highways, and interstate construction was needed for basic connectivity to facilitate the flow of goods and services between regions, states ñ the entire continent. But as the interstate system was completed, economists found that returns on infrastructure investment diminished as well, because the efficiency gains from this basic connectivity had mostly been captured.î



In short, new transportation infrastructure, like the I-74 corridor improvements, will result in economic shifts within the region and not a net gain for the metro area. And, based on the current I-74 corridor, the shift will likely result in continuing economic losses to the Illinois Quad Cities and gains for the Iowa Quad Cities. A new upstream Bettendorf-East Moline crossing would be much more likely to provide a balance in future economic growth in the region.



Another ìbenefitî of the proposed new bridge would be that travel on the new span would be ìsafer.î
However, with a greater number of vehicles and higher speeds, it is likely the severity (fatalities) from accidents on a new span will be greater than the current rate, even if the number of mishaps is reduced.



Significant reductions in bridge accidents could be achieved today with even moderate enforcement of existing speed limits and the use of technology to monitor and control traffic on the span.



There is a need for another bridge crossing in the Quad Cities metropolitan area and it should be upstream between Bettendorf and East Moline. Demolishing the current bridge and replacing it with a wider version is not a wise investment ñ for local or federal dollars ñ and will not improve cross-river transportation in the Quad Cities.