Tuesday, December 2, 2025

What a Forgotten Baltimore Map Teaches Us About Louisiana's Looming Freeway Disasters

 

What a Forgotten Baltimore Map Teaches Us About Louisiana's Looming Freeway Disasters

Book cover: Road to Nowhere by Emily LiebRouting the I-49 Connectors through historic inner-city Lafayette and Shreveport neighborhoods deliberately destroys established communities following the same playbook that has devastated neighborhoods across the country.

For decades, communities in Lafayette and Shreveport have lived under the long shadow of the proposed I-49 Connector projects. In both Lafayette and Shreveport these controversial plans to route massive interstate highways through the hearts of our cities have been debated, studied, and fought over, leaving a legacy of uncertainty and division. These projects are not simply a choice between progress and preservation; they represent a deliberate decision to follow a historically destructive path, despite fifty years of painful lessons learned across America.

In her new book Road to Nowhere, historian Emily Lieb tells the story of a never-built highway in Baltimore. Her book provides us with not just a cautionary tale; it also gives a documented step-by-step playbook of how Louisiana is actively choosing to inflict destruction upon itself. Her research reveals that the destructive power of a freeway does not begin with its construction. In Baltimore, Shreveport, and Lafayette, it started the moment a line was drawn on the map.

1. The Real Damage Is Already Happening: A Freeway's Shadow Is as Destructive as Its Concrete

The central, devastating lesson from Baltimore is that the mere threat of a highway can inflict as much damage on a community as the physical road. Emily Lieb's work demonstrates that the decades-long planning phase—the period of uncertainty, property seizures, and official neglect—creates a deep and lasting "scar" on a neighborhood. This protracted threat triggers disinvestment, decays property values, and hollows out a community from the inside, regardless of whether the highway is ever actually built.

As Lieb states, the common understanding of urban destruction is incomplete:

The narrative is that highways that were built ruined cities. But no, it’s that highways that were planned ruined cities. There is no highway, but there certainly is a scar.”

This pattern of destruction-by-planning is mirrored in the ongoing sagas of the I-49 projects in Louisiana. Critics of the Lafayette Connector have pointed out the waste of spending "tens of millions of tax dollars on studies and design that will never be used." This endless cycle of planning and debate is not a harmless preliminary step; it is an active phase of blight, creating the very uncertainty and economic stagnation that destroyed Baltimore's Rosemont neighborhood decades ago.

2. The Myth of "Blight": Highways Don't Fix So-Called "Blighted" Areas; They Create Them

A common justification for routing highways through urban neighborhoods is the idea of "urban renewal"-clearing away supposed "blight" to make way for modern infrastructure. However, Lieb's research meticulously deconstructs this myth. Before the East-West Expressway was proposed, Baltimore's Rosemont was a "vibrant," "thriving" Black middle-class community with well-kept homes, local businesses, and a strong social fabric. It was the highway plan that systematically turned it into a "blighted" area.

Lieb argues powerfully that "blight is not something that happens... blight is something that powerful people impose on... and create." This is a cynical two-step process: planners first target a community, triggering disinvestment and decay through years of uncertainty. This manufactured decline is then cynically presented as pre-existing "blight" to justify the highway's construction. This is a historically destructive pattern now threatening to repeat itself in Louisiana. Routing the I-49 Connector through historic inner-city Lafayette or Shreveport neighborhoods is not a solution to blight; it is the deliberate destruction of established communities following a playbook that has devastated neighborhoods across the country.

3. An Outdated Blueprint: Urban Highways Were Designed to Target Minority Neighborhoods

The history of urban highway planning is inseparable from the history of racial segregation. When Baltimore officials sought an expert for their expressway system, they hired Robert Moses, a notorious planner known as the "father of negro removal." Moses callously dismissed the communities in the highway's path, stating the areas slated for destruction were "of no loss to Baltimore."

The racism of the process was explicit and systemic. Lieb’s research reveals a crucial sequence: Rosemont became a thriving Black middle-class community in the early 1950s precisely because Baltimore’s school board converted schools in the area from white to "colored," attracting Black families seeking better opportunities. Only after this demographic shift did highway planners redraw their maps. While Moses himself drew the initial 1940s map that avoided the then-white neighborhood, his white supremacist planning philosophy—which viewed communities as obstacles and residents as "eggs to be broken"—provided the blueprint for the city officials who later rerouted the highway directly through Rosemont after it had become a thriving Black community. This was a deliberate and predictable weaponization of infrastructure planning against a newly established Black community.

This is not an accident of geography, but a deliberate policy choice. It is the same choice being made today with the proposed routes for I-49. Local opposition to routing the I-49 Missouri-Arkansas Connector through the prosperous and predominantly white city of Bella Vista led to the Bella Vista I-49 Bypass. In contrast, local opposition in Louisiana has been ignored, repressed, and derogated.

4. The Future is Removal, Not Construction

While Louisiana officials actively pursue disruptive urban highways, forward-thinking cities across the United States are moving in the opposite direction. The era of slicing up cities with concrete is over. As the Shreveport-based community group Allendale Strong correctly states, "States are not building elevated freeways through cities any longer; they are removing them." Louisiana is choosing to squander billions on a demonstrably obsolete model of urban development.

A growing national movement is focused on dismantling the destructive infrastructure of the 20th century to reconnect and heal neighborhoods. Cities leading the way include:

  • Detroit (I-375)

  • Rochester (Inner Loop)

  • Syracuse (I-81)

  • New Orleans (Claiborne Expressway)

  • Baltimore (US 40)

  • Oakland (I-980)

These cities recognize that urban freeways are costly, obsolete, and damaging to a city's health and equity. By continuing to pursue the I-49 Connector projects, Louisiana is embracing a multi-billion dollar boondoggle that willfully ignores fifty years of painful lessons learned across the country.

Conclusion: Choosing a Better Road Forward

Emily Lieb's work proves that the scar of a planned but never-built highway is real, that "blight" is a condition manufactured by planners to justify destruction, and that the future of healthy cities lies in removing urban freeways, not building new ones. The urban interstate as model of development is a relic of a destructive past that has no place in the 21st century.

The Louisiana I-49 Connector projects do not present a choice between past and future, but between destruction and prosperity. Robert Moses planned from a "view from the sky," seeing people only as "eggs to be broken." In contrast, practical alternatives like the "business boulevard" proposed by Shreveport freeway fighters represent a "view from the street" built at a human scale, designed to serve communities and build local wealth. If both history and the nation's most innovative cities tell us the Louisiana Connectors are a disastrous mistake, why are we still letting an outdated map dictate Louisiana's future?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The historical insights in this article are drawn from the work of Emily Lieb, historian and author of the newly released book Road to Nowhere: How a Highway Map Wrecked Baltimore.


Saturday, July 19, 2025

Why do politicians support bad projects?

 Why do politicians support bad projects?

A conversation with Chat GPT

Michael Waldon, July 19, 2025



PROMPT: There are proposed new government projects in the US such as new urban interstate highways that would run through cities. Speculate on why some local politicians support bloated government projects in their communities that would do much more harm than good in their voters and communities? 


REPLY: This is a thoughtful and important question, and one that has surfaced repeatedly throughout U.S. history in debates over infrastructure, urban renewal, and land use. While every case is different, there are several recurring political, economic, and social reasons why some local politicians support large, potentially harmful government projects like new urban interstate highways. Here’s a breakdown of possible motivations and dynamics at play:


1. Economic Promises and Political Incentives

Jobs and investment claims: Big infrastructure projects often come with promises of economic development, job creation, and increased tax revenues. Politicians may support them to appear pro-growth, even if the long-term community impact is negative.

Short-term political gain: Politicians may support large projects to secure campaign donations, curry favor with state/federal agencies, or create ribbon-cutting moments they can point to in future campaigns, regardless of the broader consequences.


2. Influence of Powerful Interests

Construction and engineering lobbies: The road-building and engineering sectors have strong lobbies. Contractors, developers, and consultants benefit from large projects and may contribute to politicians’ campaigns or shape public messaging around the project.

Real estate speculation: In some cases, new infrastructure raises land values in areas targeted for redevelopment, creating profits for developers and landowners who may have relationships with local officials.


3. Misaligned Planning Priorities

Car-centric planning ideology: Some decision-makers still operate from outdated mid-20th-century urban planning ideals that prioritize car travel and suburban commuting over walkability, public transit, and livability.

Disconnect from affected communities: Local leaders may represent broader constituencies or business districts and ignore the needs and voices of those most affected—often low-income or minority communities who bear the brunt of displacement and pollution.


4. Federal Funding Dynamics

Use-it-or-lose-it funding: Federal transportation funds are often earmarked for highways and come with time limits. Local leaders may push to capture these funds, fearing that rejecting them would mean losing money to other regions or states.

Top-down project imposition: In many cases, projects originate at the state or federal level and are not fully shaped or controlled by local governments. Local politicians may feel pressured to “go along” or risk losing influence.


5. Lack of Community Power and Transparency

Limited civic engagement: If decision-making processes are opaque or if affected communities lack political power, harmful projects can advance with little resistance until it's too late.

Manipulated environmental review: Agencies and consultants may downplay environmental or social harms in official documents, skewing public understanding and weakening opposition.


Historical Parallels

We’ve seen this pattern before—most infamously with the mid-20th-century U.S. interstate highway system, which destroyed many inner-city neighborhoods (especially Black and immigrant communities) under the banner of progress. Similar critiques have emerged around recent projects like the I-49 connector in Louisiana or various highway expansions in Texas and California.


Conclusion

While some local politicians genuinely believe they are doing what’s best, others may be driven by distorted incentives, pressure from powerful interests, or outdated ideas of what makes a city thrive. The harm done—displacement, increased pollution, neighborhood destruction—often isn’t felt until after decisions are locked in. That’s why public engagement, transparency, and community-centered planning are essential in countering harmful projects and shaping more equitable alternatives.

Let me know if you'd like examples of current projects fitting this pattern or ways communities have successfully resisted them.

PROMPT: Please provide a map and/or visual showing where these types of projects and resistances are happening across the country.

REPLY: Here’s a map of the United States highlighting major interstate routes and urban freeway corridors—many of which have been either the focus of recent large-scale megaprojects or historic community resistance efforts (Bloomberg.com).


🗺️ Key Cities & Highway Projects Facing Resistance

Detroit, Michigan (I‑375)

Detroit is advancing a plan to remove the downtown I‑375 spur and replace it with a surface boulevard and open space. The project, estimated at $300 million, is explicitly framed as a way to reconnect neighborhoods and address its historically inequitable impact (Newsweek).

Seattle, Washington (SR‑99 / State Route 99 through South Park)

Community coalitions in Seattle’s South Park neighborhood are pushing to transform the aging, elevated SR‑99 into an equitable development corridor. A recent USDOT “Reconnecting Communities Pilot Program” grant ($1.6 million) supports community-based design and potentially full removal of the highway segment (CNU).

Rochester, New York (Inner Loop East)

Rochester successfully removed its eastern Inner Loop highway in 2017, replacing it with boulevards and mixed-use development, reconnecting neighborhoods and revitalizing downtown space (Mobilify). The city is now considering removing additional sections of the loop.

Syracuse, New York (I‑81 Viaduct)

Instead of rebuilding the aging elevated I‑81 through a primarily Black neighborhood, planners are pursuing the Community Grid Alternative, which will dismantle the viaduct entirely and restore the street grid and neighborhood connectivity (Mobilify).

New Orleans, Louisiana (Claiborne Expressway, I‑10 / I‑610)

The Claiborne Expressway, built in the 1960s, damaged New Orleans’ Tremé neighborhood. In recent years, advocates have campaigned for its removal and neighborhood restoration. Although no official removal plan exists yet, the issue is central to broader “Reconnecting Communities” efforts (WIRED).

Milwaukee, Wisconsin (Park East Freeway)

One of the earliest freeway removal success stories occurred when Milwaukee demolished its Park East Freeway in 2003. The reclaimed land spurred housing development and public space, inspiring other U.S. cities to consider similar moves (Financial Times).


🔍 Other Cities Exploring Removals or Studying Alternatives

  • Baltimore, MD: US 40 (“Highway to Nowhere”) is being studied for potential removal, retrofit, or transformation as part of broader connectivity and community restoration efforts (usa.streetsblog.org).

  • Oakland, CA: I-980 removal is under study with community-led planning from grant funding programs (usa.streetsblog.org).

  • Albany, NY: Interstate 787 is being evaluated for removal or redesign via feasibility studies supported by USDOT (usa.streetsblog.org).

  • Tulsa, OK: Officials are exploring removal of I-244, constructed over the historic Black Wall Street neighborhood, with Reconnecting Communities funding (usa.streetsblog.org).


📋 Summary Table

City / Highway

Status / Resistance

Approach & Vision

Detroit (I‑375)

Planning removal underway

Rebuild as boulevard to reconnect city

Seattle (SR‑99)

Community-led visioning with study funding

Flooding public space, equitable housing

Rochester (Inner Loop)

Completed eastern section removal

At-grade road, development & transit links

Syracuse (I‑81)

Planning Community Grid Alternative to replace elevated viaduct

Reconnecting street grid, plazas & retail

New Orleans (Claiborne)

Advocacy for removal continues

Undo neighborhood divisions of past

Milwaukee (Park East)

Removal completed in 2003

Now public open space and development

Baltimore (US 40)

Study for potential removal underway

Retrofit or boulevard conversion

Oakland (I‑980)

Feasibility studies funded

Community-driven alternatives

Albany (I‑787)

Evaluating removal feasibility

Frees waterfront, allows redevelopment

Tulsa (I‑244)

Studying removal impact on historic communities

Reconnect Black Wall Street corridor


These cases show a growing national movement—often part of USDOT’s Reconnecting Communities Pilot Program—to challenge the legacy of mid‑century highway projects. The strategy combines grassroots activism, equity‑focused planning, legal and environmental frameworks, and alternatives that prioritize people over vehicles (Wikipedia, Bloomberg.com, Esri, CNU, prrac.org, Mobilify, Wikibooks, WIRED, usa.streetsblog.org, expressnews.com).

Let me know if you'd like an interactive view or more details on a specific project!


Tuesday, January 24, 2023

I-49 Connector Civil Right Violation Complaint Accepted for Investigation

FWHA Civil Rights Title VI

Connector Comments readers may recall that in November 2021 Lafayette resident Ann Burruss wrote a letter to Secretary Pete Buttigieg opposing the plan for the Lafayette I-49 Connector. A staff member assigned to respond to her letter told Ann that her letter appeared to be a civil rights complaint. With Ann's consent, her letter was then processed as a complaint. Ann followed up on this complaint providing evidence that the Connector's corridor was indeed selected to follow the historic line of racial segregation in our city. With Ann's permission, her letter submitting this evidence is reprinted below. 

On January 18, 2023, Ann received a letter via email saying "that the FHWA Office of Civil Rights has accepted for investigation your complaint of discrimination." The investigation will focus on "Whether the Lafayette I-49 Connector Project creates potential disparate, adverse impacts to residents based on race, color, or national origin." Readers may wish to send their own letters supporting this complaint or providing additional evidence. Comments or supplemental evidence should reference complaint number DOT# 2022-0093 and should be submitted to:

Erik Lacayo
Title VI Program Analyst
Federal Highway Administration
Office of Civil Rights
(202) 913-3926
erik.lacayo@dot.gov

If you do send a comment or document, please let us know about it in the comments section at the bottom of this article. 



________________________________________


Federal Highway Administration                                    March 31, 2022
Office of Civil Rights (Attention: Erik Lacayo)
1200 New Jersey Ave., SE
Washington, DC 20590

Reference: HCR-20
DOT# 2022-0093

Subject: Complaint #2022-0093

Mr. Lacayo,
Enclosed are documents that I hope you will find useful.
  • Ordinance No. 127, City of Lafayette Louisiana, enacted October 22, 1923, 4 pages
  • 1928 Sanborn Fire Map close up, 1923 segregation areas in blue
  • 1928 Sanborn Fire Map reference
  • 1928 Sanborn Fire Map blow up, segregation areas in blue (can piece together and tape) 8 pages
  • I-49 Connector Alignment, overview
  • I-49 Connector Alignment folded map, streets in 1923 segregation area identified for cross reference
  • 1928 Sanborn Fire Map folded map, 1923 segregation area in orange, I-49 Connector alignment in pink

Again, I thank you and the department for investigating the I-49 Connector project for Civil Rights violations. To me, who has very little idea of how a Civil Rights violation is determined, the documents are a clear illustration that the 1-49 project as proposed is inherently unjust and in violation.

If there is any additional information I can provide, I will do my best. At this point this is what I have regarding the racially unjust impacts of the project. The path of this project follows a clearly defined racial segregation line from the past. Establishing that line in 1923 was all that was needed to etch in stone an economic and racial divide that exists in this city on these streets to this day. The ordinance was subsequently repealed because, I've been told, that white people lived within the zones designated as "negro communities" and did not want to move. Of course subsequent jurisprudence and federal law disallowed such ordinances, however, the damage was done. If this project is built through the center of our city this racist past will carry its racist impacts into our future.

Sincerely,

Ann Burruss