Aesthetic-based conflict in highway planning: Federal Highway Administration putting planners at risk
Douglas, Judy Carol
This item is only available for download by members of the University of Illinois community. Students, faculty, and staff at the U of I may log in with your NetID and password to view the item. If you are trying to access an Illinois-restricted dissertation or thesis, you can request a copy through your library's Inter-Library Loan office or purchase a copy directly from ProQuest.
Permalink
https://hdl.handle.net/2142/20232
Description
Title
Aesthetic-based conflict in highway planning: Federal Highway Administration putting planners at risk
Author(s)
Douglas, Judy Carol
Issue Date
1994
Doctoral Committee Chair(s)
Forrest, Clyde W., Jr
Department of Study
Urban and Regional Planning
Discipline
Urban and Regional Planning
Degree Granting Institution
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Degree Name
Ph.D.
Degree Level
Dissertation
Keyword(s)
Engineering, Civil
Transportation
Urban and Regional Planning
Language
eng
Abstract
The Department of Transportation's Federal Highway Administration aesthetic-based legislation, policies, regulations, guidelines, and procedures as well as their implementation are not only inadequate and inappropriate for avoiding conflict, but they actually contribute to conflict. The exploration of this hypothesis included: a comparison of urban/regional planning and street and highway planning; a review of aesthetic-based conflicts in street and highway projects in San Francisco, California, New Orleans, Louisiana, and Carbondale, Illinois; a definition of aesthetics; an identification of specific aesthetic-based legislation, policies, regulations, guidelines, procedures, and litigation; and development of a questionnaire.
The definition of aesthetics developed in this dissertation includes sensory, formal, and symbolic components. In addition, an aesthetic model indicates that these components intersect and are inter-related.
Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) are the aesthetic-based legislation reviewed in this dissertation. The aesthetic definition and model were used to determine if Section 4(f) and NEPA legislation, policies, regulations, guidelines and procedures were adequate or appropriate. Although Section 4(f) and NEPA legislation and policies include all three components of the aesthetic definition and model, the related regulations, guidelines, and procedures do not. While the regulations do not include an aesthetic definition, the guidelines for complying with Section 4(f) and NEPA redefine aesthetics as visual impact.
A questionnaire was distributed to 360 environmental officials at state's department of transportation. There were 188 useable returned questionnaires. Results of the questionnaire indicate 72% of the respondents agree with the aesthetic definition and model developed in this dissertation. However, only 40% of the respondents indicated aesthetic issues were always considered while complying with the requirements of Section 4(f), and only 26% indicated that aesthetics are always considered while complying with NEPA requirements.
The results of this investigation suggest that until the Federal Highway Administration revises its regulations and guidelines to provide a definition of aesthetics that includes sensory, formal, and symbolic components, aesthetic-based conflicts in street and highway project development will continue.
Use this login method if you
don't
have an
@illinois.edu
email address.
(Oops, I do have one)
IDEALS migrated to a new platform on June 23, 2022. If you created
your account prior to this date, you will have to reset your password
using the forgot-password link below.
