1916 to 1926: The Start of the Federal-State Joint Highway Effort
Evidence of the success of the small previous Federal-aid program for post road construction surely contributed to the passing of the Federal Aid Road Act of 1916 which provided for the improvement of any rural road over which the mails were carried.
One of the central features of this Act, in terms of the future, was the requirement that the States must have a highway department capable of designing, constructing, and maintaining the designated roads in order to share in the appropriation. Immediately this brought about the creation of highway departments in those States not meeting this requirement. Other provisions of the Act gave the States the authority, subject to Federal approval, to select the roads to be improved and the nature of the improvement, plus the responsibility of supervising the construction and the obligation to maintain the completed projects.[1]
A steam roller provides motive power for a scarifier on an Indiana road in 1916. Scarifiers were used to loosen the material on the top layer of the road. The surface was then graded and compacted.
In the early 1900’s, some counties and cities hired full-time caretakers to perform the maintenance functions previously done by statute labor. This man was one of 95 caretakers for a Pennsylvania county who received $50 per month to maintain from 3 to 5 miles of road.
A Need for Maintenance
With Federal funds assured for highway construction, the door was open to considerable activity in roadbuilding. By 1918, a feeling of well being was the mood of the day. In the 1918 fiscal year alone, 6,249 miles of Federal-aid roads had been or were being surfaced.[2] New surface treatments were being utilized, and equipment technology was advancing to make work easier and more productive. However, the development of heavy trucks and their usage during World War I brought this mood quickly to an end. Roads that were suitable for travel by passenger cars rapidly deteriorated as they were subjected to the loads imposed by 5- and 10-ton trucks. Prevost Hubbard, the chief chemist and expert on bituminous pavements for BPR described the situation in Public Roads:
Hundreds of miles of roads failed under the heavy motor-truck traffic within a comparatively few weeks or months. Roads with bituminous surfaces, bituminous macadam roads, and bituminous concrete roads all failed alike, together with other types used in State and county work. These failures were not only sudden but complete, and almost overnight an excellent surface might become impassable. . . . A very large proportion of the failures have been characterized by an almost simultaneous destruction of the entire road structure, and not merely the disintegration of the wearing course or pavement proper.[3]
The Bureau of Public Roads conducted extensive research on this subject and concluded that possible solutions to this problem required: (1) Stronger road surfaces and better drainage, with special attention to sub-drainage, and (2) continual adequate maintenance.
The Bureau recommended during this same period that really economic and efficient maintenance could be secured only by: (1) Patrols assigned to definite sections for which they would be responsible for all ordinary routine work, and (2) well-equipped and organized gangs or crews continuously employed throughout the season to perform all work which could not be economically performed by the patrol alone.[4] These recommendations became the basis for the structure of most of the State maintenance organizations.
448
- ↑ Public Roads Administration, The Public Roads Administration and Its Works (Federal Works Agency, Washington, D.C., Revised Nov. 1946) p. 3.
- ↑ Bureau of Public Roads Annual Report, 1918, p. 5.
- ↑ P. Hubbard, Efficiency of Bituminous Surfaces and Pavements Under Motor Truck Traffic, Public Roads, Vol. 1, No. 10, Feb. 1919, p. 25.
- ↑ A. P. Anderson, Modern Road Building and Maintenance (Hercules Powder Co., 1921), pp. 33, 103.
