Protesting Portland's Freeways: Highway Engineering And
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
PROTESTING PORTLAND'S FREEWAYS: HIGHWAY ENGINEERING AND CITIZEN ACTIVISM IN THE INTERSTATE ERA by ELIOT HENRY FACKLER A THESIS Presented to the Department ofHistory and the Graduate School ofthe University of Oregon in partial fulfillment ofthe requirements for the degree of Master ofArts June 2009 11 "Protesting Portland's Freeways: Highway Engineering and Citizen Activism in the Interstate Era," a thesis prepared by Eliot Henry Fackler in partial fulfillment ofthe requirements for the Master ofArts degree in the Department of History. This thesis has been approved and accepted by: Committee in Charge: Ellen Herman, Chair Jeffrey Ostler Matthew Dennis Accepted by: Dean ofthe Graduate School 111 © 2009 Eliot Henry Fackler IV An Abstract ofthe Thesis of Eliot Henry Fackler for the degree of Master ofArts in the Department of History to be taken June 2009 Title: PROTESTING PORTLAND'S FREEWAYS: HIGHWAY ENGINEERING AND CITIZEN ACTIVISM IN THE INTERSTATE ERA Approved: ---------ht _ Ellen Herman From its inception, the Oregon State Highway Department and Portland's political leaders repeatedly failed to address the city's automobile traffic problems. However, in 1955 the Highway Department published a comprehensive freeway plan that anticipated new federal funding and initiated an era ofunprecedented road construction in the growing city. In the early 1960s, localized opposition to the city's Interstate system failed to halt the completion ofthree major routes. Yet, politically savvy grassroots activists and a new generation oflocalleaders used the provisions ofthe National Environmental Policy Act and the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1973 to successfully stop the construction oftwo freeways in the mid 1970s. Though favorable legislation and the efforts oflocal politicians were instrumental in thwarting the Highway Department's plans, this study will focus on the crucial role played by the citizens who waged an ideological battle against recalcitrant highway engineers for Portland's future. v pressures resulting from globalization by engaging in subtle protests within in the maquiladoras, opting to participate in the informal economy, and utilizing community groups to facilitate social change. v CURRICULUM VITAE NAME OF AUTHOR: Eliot Henry Fackler PLACE OF BIRTH: Mansfield, Ohio DATE OF BIRTH: February 6, 1982 GRADUATE AND UNDERGRADUATE SCHOOLS ATTENDED: University ofOregon, Eugene, Oregon The College of Wooster, Wooster, Ohio DEGREES AWARDED: Master ofArts, History, 2009, University ofOregon Bachelor ofArts, History, 2004, The College ofWooster AREAS OF SPECIAL INTEREST: United States History PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE: Teaching Assistant, Department ofHistory, University ofOregon, Eugene, 2007-2009 Student Advisor, Department ofHistory, University ofOregon, Eugene, 2008 GRANTS, AWARDS AND HONORS: Oregon Heritage Fellowship, Oregon Parks and Recreation Department, 2009 Graduate Teaching Fellowship, University ofOregon, 2007-2009 Ohio Environmental Fellowship, Ohio Environmental Council, 2004 Cum Laude, The College ofWooster, 2004 VI ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to take this opportunity to thank the people who made this endeavor both possible and worthwhile. My sincerest gratitude goes to my advisors Ellen Herman and JeffOstler. Their challenging questions, gentle criticisms, and shrewd editing made this thesis immeasurably better. I would like to thank Matt Dennis for providing both formal and informal guidance these past two years. This Spring I have been lucky enough to get to know Brian Ladd. Brian's scholarship, advice, and insights have helped me to think about freeways and city streets in new and interesting ways. This project benefitted from the financial assistance ofthe Oregon Parks and Recreation Department, from the work ofthe late Ernie Bonner, and from a wonderful conversation with Val Ballestrem. Fellow graduate students at the University ofOregon have provided friendship and support. I would particularly like to thank Matthew Kruer, Emily Gilkey, Carrie Adkins, Clinton Sandvick, Feather Crawford-Freed, Becca Cherba, Luis Ruiz, Camille Walsh, and Chris Cornelius. I am forever indebted to JeffRoche and Tom Humphrey for their professional advice and personal encouragement, and to Nick Chiorian, Brendan Callahan, and Tom Stockdale for supplying the observations and questions that ultimately led me to this project. I would also like to thank my parents, Holly Harman Fackler and Todd Fackler, their respective spouses, and my siblings, Evan and Libby, for their support. Ann and Tom Stockdale, two ofthe most wonderful people I have ever met, are owed a special thank you for their love and encouragement. Finally, words cannot express how grateful I am to my wife, Jen. Without her none ofthis would have been possible. Vll For Jen, my driving buddy V111 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. INTRODUCTION . 1 II. THE EMERGENT CITY: PLANNERS, HIGHWAY ENGINEERS, AND PORTLAND BEFORE 1956 .. 9 III. THE MOBILE CITY: FREEWAY CONSTRUCTION AND FAILED OPPOSITION, 1955-1972 45 IV. THE LIVABLE CITY: FREEWAY REVOLTS IN PORTLAND, 1965-1978 78 V. CONCLUSION 111 VI. EPILOGUE: DISMANTLING HARBOR DRIVE 115 BIBLIOGRAPHY 118 IX LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. 1946 vehicle trip "desire" patterns, Portland, Oregon . 44 2. Portland's proposed freeway system, 1955 49 3. 52nd Avenue and 96 th Avenue alignment alternatives for Interstate 205 77 4. Mount Hood Freeway alignment in relation to housing 84 1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION In 1955 the Oregon State Highway Department published a report outlining the proposed locations of 14 limited-access freeways that would slice through Portland's century-old neighborhoods. The ISO-page document, entitled Freeway and Expressway System, Portland Metropolitan Area, anticipated the passage ofa new Federal-Aid Highway Act that would fund the long-anticipated Interstate Highway System. The following year, Oregon traffic engineers began building the state's portion ofthat system. As they oversaw the design and construction ofurban freeways over the next two decades, highway engineers and planning officials in the local and state government met resistance from citizens whose homes, businesses, and neighborhoods would be destroyed by the interstates. By the mid 1970s, after a decade ofwidespread resistance against planned freeways, neighborhood groups in southeast and northwest Portland successfully halted the construction oftwo routes and ushered in a new era ofcitizen participation in city planning. Portland's anti-freeway movement is the story oftwo paradigm shifts that led to a fundamental transformation oflocal planning practices and increased neighborhood activism. The first was an ideological shift that resulted from the imposition ofa massive highway system onto an already existing cityscape. The destruction caused by urban freeway building raised the ire ofresidents in the path ofthe bulldozers. Mounting concerns about the ecological impacts ofhuman consumption and automobile-centered 2 planning gave freeway protests an additional sense ofurgency and encouraged the support of local leaders. These environmental concerns had antecedents in earlier battles to preserve wilderness areas, but only in the 1960s and 1970s did Portlanders - and citizens across the country - become involved in efforts to actively reduce road construction and automobile usage in order to protect the urban environment. The second shift had far-reaching political consequences for Portland and ultimately set it apart from other cities. Because state highway engineers were given considerable funding and authority by the federal government, they dominated city planning after 1956. As a result ofthis bureaucratic control, residents ofAmerican cities found that they were effectively excluded from the decision-making process. As freeway projects threatened to carve up San Francisco, Boston, New Orleans, and dozens ofother cities, protesters fought to save their neighborhoods and gain a measure ofcontrol over transportation and land use planning. In their efforts to wrest control from the Oregon Highway Department, Portlanders achieved a victory unique among the urban freeway revolts: the institutionalization ofa neighborhood planning organization. In creating the Office ofNeighborhood Associations (now called the Office ofNeighborhood Involvement) the city of Portland gave residents a say in local planning matters. This move toward greater democratic participation remains the unique legacy ofPortland's anti-freeway movement. Portland today is often called an "ecotopia" or a planner's paradise, and for good reasons. Metro, the nation's only elected regional government, coordinates planning in the surrounding region while the Office ofNeighborhood Involvement (ONI) gives 3 neighborhood groups a voice in local planning. No freeways have been built in the city since the completion ofInterstate 205 in 1982, and city officials routinely reject plans for new parking garages, street widening, and other projects that would accommodate automobiles. At the heart ofthese planning principles is an "environmental imagination" shared by many Oregonians and rooted in a reliance on and appreciation for the state's diverse and verdant landscape. This environmental imagination has permeated state politics for most ofthe past century.l It is no coincidence that many ofthe leaders and citizens who eventually voiced concern over the social and environmental impacts of freeways were natives who took pride in their state? Thus, when freeway protesters coalesced in Portland in