Questions raised about cost-benefit estimate on Interstate 30 project | Arkansas Blog

Tuesday, November 3, 2015

Questions raised about cost-benefit estimate on Interstate 30 project

Posted By on Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 7:24 AM

click to enlarge TOO SIMPLE: So says a blog of the state's analysis of cost and benefits of the I-30 project. - MOVEARKANSAS
  • MoveArkansas
  • TOO SIMPLE: So says a blog of the state's analysis of cost and benefits of the I-30 project.
MoveArkansas, a blog that focuses on urban planning and design, has raised questions about the Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department's cost-benefit analysis for the $600 million Interstate 30 expansion project through downtown Little Rock.

An article by Tim McKuin, who works in urban planning professionally, says the department's analysis is flawed in several ways and produces a greater benefit ratio than it should. You can read his analysis here. I'm not able to judge the accuracy of the mathematical computations he presents. The numbers were drawn from the application the state submitted for $200 million in federal TIGER funding, an application that was not among those approved by the government last week.

I did run McKuin's argument past another engineer. He's not ready to say there was any intentional effort to mislead, but he pointed out some simple things. For example, if the project puts more cars driving more miles through town, this likely carries some disbenefits as well as benefits — operating costs of vehicles and more accidents, to name two.

More elemental, the engineer said, is the question of benefit from faster drive time. That is a social benefit, to be sure. But is it an economic benefit to get home 8 minutes sooner? And, he says, if social benefits are to be included (and they are in the analysis done by the Highway Department) then there are disbenefits to be considered — new obstacles to pedestrians, bikes and buses; harder routes to reach new developments on the east side of Little Rock. Also, if more more miles are driven, won't there be more smog? Is there no cost to air and water quality from more concrete, more exhaust emissions, more noise and the like? And what about time lost and other severe dislocation during four to five years of construction?

These questions would be well put at tonight's City Board meeting with the Highway Department, along with the agency's plans for replacing the $200 million in TIGER money. If the state is to push ahead, some more intensive cost-benefit studies should be in order.

Another transportation professional, a Little Rock native, writes also to raise another political consideration — the fact that about a third of the bonded highway program supported by a statewide sales tax is dedicated to widening I-30 through Little Rock.This has a direct impact on other desired projects in other parts of the state.

Tags: , , , , ,

From the ArkTimes store

Favorite

Comments (7)

Showing 1-7 of 7

Add a comment

 
Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-7 of 7

Add a comment

More by Max Brantley

  • The assault weapon open line

    The open line. And report of the arrest of a man with an AR-15 who threatened to shoot people at a Springdale business.
    • Feb 17, 2018
  • A primary challenger for Rep. Laurie Rushing

    Blue Hog Report has some news on a Republican primary challenge of an incumbent legislator, Rep. Laurie Rushing, by Ernie Hinz of Hot Springs.
    • Feb 17, 2018
  • A common-sense gun measure draws no sponsors from Arkansas

    Republicans, including at least one from Arkansas, are talking about repealing the Dickey Amendment which prohibits gun research from a public health perspective. But none of them are yet willing to DO anything about it.
    • Feb 17, 2018
  • More »

Readers also liked…

Most Shared

  • A mayor stands up against freeway widening. No. Not in Little Rock.

    Another booming city, Indianapolis, fights ever wider urban freeways. Meanwhile, back in Little Rock .....
  • In the margins

    A rediscovered violin concerto brings an oft-forgotten composer into the limelight.
  • Donald Trump is historically unpopular — and not necessarily where you think

    My colleagues John Ray and Jesse Bacon and I estimate, in the first analysis of its kind for the 2018 election season, that the president's waning popularity isn't limited to coastal cities and states. The erosion of his electoral coalition has spread to The Natural State, extending far beyond the college towns and urban centers that voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016. From El Dorado to Sherwood, Fayetteville to Hot Springs, the president's approval rating is waning.
  • Arkansans join House vote to gut Americans with Disabilities Act

    Despite fierce protests from disabled people, the U.S. House voted today, mostly on party lines, to make it harder to sue businesses for violating the Americans with Disabilities Act. Of course Arkansas congressmen were on the wrong side.

Most Viewed

  • The assault weapon open line

    The open line. And report of the arrest of a man with an AR-15 who threatened to shoot people at a Springdale business.

Most Recent Comments

 

© 2018 Arkansas Times | 201 East Markham, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72201
Powered by Foundation