reaction of declining transit patronage and increased fares intensified the downward spiral of those utilities toward insolvency.
Although circumferential and bypass highways were expected to drain off traffic that did not need to go downtown, still large-scale highway building was thought to be required, and plans for it generated little opposition at first. Businessmen and city officials generally encouraged automobile commuting to in-town employment and did not oppose providing daytime storage space for the vehicles.
But as problems of city street congestion led to greater penetration of rural highways into the heart of central cities, more people were affected by the taking of right-of-way and by the construction and operation of highways. Organized opposition to the urban highway improvement program became a major factor in determining the course of Federal and State high- way transportation legislation in the 1960's.
A new political activism characterized this period that expressed new needs and priorities that were reflected in Federal legislation between 1962 and 1970 and that broadened the role of the Federal Government in the administration of highway construction programs. The Federal Aid Highway Act of 1962 provided Federal reimbursement to those States that could pay limited relocation allowances to persons and businesses affected by highway construction, and the 1968 Act provided all relocatees with Federal relocation payments.
261
