No, but such a process would be compatible with a far more aggressive/creative approach at facilitating the widespread cooperation (among public and private entities) needed to solve the problem.
Perhaps government has a role in highway planning, but I think it should act more like cooperation infrastructure provider rather than system designer.
>No, but such a process would be compatible with a far more aggressive/creative approach at facilitating the widespread cooperation (among public and private entities) needed to solve the problem.
That's pretty much what happens now in the environmental process. The problems tend to come because of political, engineering, legal and/or financial issues that get in the way.
It's not as though the government says "this road shall be built here!" and then does it. A problem is identified ("we need to move people from here to here"), several options are created ("we could build a transit line, expand an existing road, build a new highway, build a bridge, etc"), and then opinions from the community are sought as part of the Draft EIR/EIS.
One area that does need improvement is more consideration of projects on a regional basis (the effect on neighboring states for example rather than just looking at the immediate project area), but public and private entities are most certainly in the loop for current projects. If they weren't, these entities would just tie the project up in court.
Well, I think the ideal role of government would be to facilitate the sort of meta-cooperation necessary to solve the problem. The current planning/funding role clearly doesn't work.
Perhaps government has a role in highway planning, but I think it should act more like cooperation infrastructure provider rather than system designer.