Choose density

As reported by Frederick Melo May 14 (“Coalitions take sides on Ford site proposal”), Ford site density is now taking center stage as the property nears a sale. This is the latest edition of a standard movie on perpetual loop all across America since Henry Ford and public works departments made driving universally affordable to the middle class a century ago. We jealously guard our freedom to drive, fiercely resist alternatives and yet complain constantly about traffic and danger on our streets.

Just barely beyond living memory, no city on Earth had motor vehicles. There was stench and gridlock in the core from wagons and horses and carriages and the confluence of many streetcar lines from every corner of the city, prompting developers to create what were then called “garden suburbs” that conformed, in many ways, to what Highland Park is today. In these garden suburbs houses were detached, each surrounded by its own yard.

That worked, until human nature once again clogged the streets. Today, everyone views driving as a necessity but complains about the cumulative effects of everyone driving.

The logical antidote is congestion pricing. In several iconic cities of the world, it costs you a fee to drive in the core. In many metro areas in the United States, it costs you a toll to drive on a thruway or beltway. On a limited basis in the Twin Cities, there are toll lanes that bypass peak congestion, but Minnesota’s establishment has, by-and-large, rejected anything more, fearing the political backlash.

It would be in my interest to join the NIMBYs regarding the Ford site, but it is in my greater interest to join the advocates of density. At some point, we have to reject the paradoxical position that we can drive everywhere and still have low taxes and quiet neighborhood streets. These cherished preferences are universal, but contradictory.

I wish it was easier, but it is not. Hard choices now are unavoidable. We can go for low density and low tax revenue from the Ford site and watch our own property taxes and road rage continue to escalate. Or we can make the difficult choice to support real alternatives to driving and parking everywhere. We can opt for sanity, or hypocrisy.

Mathews Hollinshead, St. Paul