tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37846117.post3342683075210937217..comments2023-08-14T08:10:09.074-04:00Comments on A Trip Within the Beltway: Eisenhower's Burning Tree Commute Desire?Douglas Andrew Willingerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06412711658495398785noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37846117.post-10100958683606890322010-03-30T01:01:55.226-04:002010-03-30T01:01:55.226-04:00Eisenhower simply did not pay much attention to ci...Eisenhower simply did not pay much attention to cities. In general, his leadership style was to delegate authority and let his underlings deal with petty details like the routes of urban freeways. <br /><br />However, the position of his adviser, General John S. Bragdon, was unequivocal: freeways generally should be routed around cities and not enter them; they should end at spurs that connect to urban arterials. There should be no inner beltways, no freeways intended to handle primarily local traffic, and any such facilities should be a local, not federal responsibility. Bragdon's opposition was not social or environmental; urban freeways were simply too expensive. <br /><br />Bragdon stated repeatedly that Eisenhower agreed with these guidelines. The president was, at the very least, sympathetic to Bragdon's line of thinking, because in 1959 he directed Bragdon to pursue a broad investigation and prepare a report on general freeway policy and cost saving measures. <br /><br />Bragdon presented his report to the president in April 1960, but was outmaneuvered by urban and freeway interests and their allied bureaucrats and appointees. Shortly afterward, the Secretary of Commerce announced there would be no cutbacks in urban interstate highways. That was likely the high point of pro urban freeway policy.kokeefenoreply@blogger.com