Page:America's Highways 1776–1976.djvu/302

 In 1960 intercity travel studies showed this basic travel pattern.

First the roads to be included in the Federal-aid system should be designated under a functional classification definition applicable to all States, and second the general level of Federal aid for rural secondary roads in relation to that for other systems, particularly in the urban area, needed review. It could be considered a restudy and perhaps a restatement of purpose of the Federal-aid secondary program after its 20-year history.

These thoughts and others were brought to the attention of the States by Federal Highway Administrator Rex Whitton in a 1963 speech. He outlined some of the problems and sketched the planning effort that would be required to analyze them and hopefully reach a concensusconsensus [sic] on how to meet them. AASHO authorized a high-level committee to cooperate with the Bureau of Public Roads to carry out the necessary studies and develop appropriate recommendations to be presented in a report to the Congress.

The Cooperating Committee, as it was designated, met with its Bureau counterparts in the spring of 1964 and agreed upon a format for the study. It was to be the most intensive study of highway needs yet undertaken, covering all roads and streets. The most significant new aspect was functional classification, with roads and streets segregated in three broad classes—arterial, collector, and local. Freeways would be a special category of the arterial group. The classification would be determined route by route by its estimated future traffic, not simply by volume alone but by the character of the traffic, trip length being an important determinant. This basis of classification had been used in a preliminary way in an earlier study by AASHO and the National Association of County Officials (NACO) in a review of rural highway needs, but little experience was available as a guide to urban street classification and none at all in areas yet to be urbanized. Since the period to be covered extended from 1972 to 1990 and with the rapidly increasing urbanization of the country, this latter situation presented a considerable problem. Fortunately, however, the urban transportation studies had by then progressed sufficiently in about 100 cities to permit the development of models that would show, on the basis of area and population, the number of lane-miles of streets needed in each category. So where the urban studies would not permit detailed estimates, at least gross figures could be produced by resorting to the models. With facts thus assembled, estimates could be made of the desirable extent of systems on a functional basis that could be compared with the systems then designated as “administrative” systems. (The study eventually con- firmed that the Primary Systems in most States were well selected, but that as anticipated, the Secondary Systems as administratively designated in many States were badly distorted.)

On the basis of the agreed upon format, the Bureau staff, with advice from the Committee as needed, prepared the necessary manuals, and approval to begin the study came in the summer of 1964. The target date for the report to Congress was set as January 1967.

Then began a cooperative approach to data collection on a national basis, heretofore unequaled in the transportation field. The National League of Cities and the National Association of Counties formally designated members to form a joint committee with AASHO to oversee the work of data collection and analysis. At its first meeting in early 1965, one member remarked that it was significant that for the first time officially designated representatives of State, county, and city governments had convened in a formal meeting. It was further significant that it met in the offices of the Bureau of Public Roads. It reflected intergovernmental cooperation in fact, not just in theory. While ultimately an important product emerged from this initial meeting, its bright promise was never fully realized.

It was during the period of this study that several factors appeared to complicate, delay, and confuse the planning of highway programs after 1972, the scheduled date of completion of the Interstate program. It might be said that prior to this study, highways had been planned in isolation. While the major planning studies, particularly in urban areas, recognized the need for coordination between highway and other modes of transportation and took those 296