The Social Cost of Urban Transportation

  • Lynn G. Llewellyn
Part of the Human Behavior and Environment book series (HUBE, volume 5)


Not far from Union Station, and the multimillion dollar Visitor Center erected in celebration of the Bicentennial, sits an old but stately building—an anachronism now largely unused and visibly isolated from more modern structures that testify to the rapid redevelopment of Northeast Washington, D.C. At its peak in early 1976, Saint Joseph’s nursing home sheltered 168 elderly poor, most of whom were over 85 years of age; another 350 men and women were on the waiting list maintained by the Little Sisters of the Poor. Unfortunately, two years earlier, the District of Columbia government had begun construction on a six-lane highway overpass only a few feet from the main entrance of the home. In part, the rationale for building the overpass was to improve the access to the Visitor Center and to ease the traffic congestion that would surely accompany the invasion of tourists for the Bicentennial festivities.


Noise Exposure Traffic Noise Reading Achievement Aircraft Noise Highway Construction 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Abt Associates. Socio-economic impacts related to the planning, construction and operation of urban transportation tunnel projects (Tech. Rep. DOT-FH-11-9351). Cambridge, Mass.: Author, 1979.Google Scholar
  2. Adams, B. Urban transportation policy. Speech presented to the Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass., Feb. 13, 1979.Google Scholar
  3. Adkins, W. G., & Eichmann, F. F. Consequences of displacement by right-of-way to 100 home owners (Bulletin 16). College Station: Texas Transportation Institute, 1961.Google Scholar
  4. Archea, J., & Margulis, S.T. Environmental research inputs to policy and design programs: The case of preparation for involuntary relocation of the institutionalized aged. In T. O. Byerts, S. C. Howell, & L. A. Pastalan (Eds.), Environmental context of aging: Lifestyles, environmental quality, and living arrangements. New York: Garland, 1979.Google Scholar
  5. Bierce, A. The devil’s dictionary. New York: Dover, 1958.Google Scholar
  6. Blissett, M. (ed.). Environmental impact assessment. Washington, D.C.: National Science Foundation, 1975.Google Scholar
  7. Bronzaft, A. L., & McCarthy, D. P. The effects of elevated train noise on reading ability. Environment and Behavior, 1975, 7, 517–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Buffington, J. L., Meuth, J. G., Schäfer, D. L. Pledger, R., & Bullion, C. Attitudes, opinions and experience of residents displaced by highways under the 1970 relocation assistance program (Tech. Rep. TTI-2-15-73-159-1). College Station: Texas Transportation Institute, 1974.Google Scholar
  9. Burkhardt, J. E., Boyd, N., & Martin, T. Residential dislocation: Consequences and compensation. Washington, D.C.: National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Federal Highway Administration, 1976.Google Scholar
  10. Cohen, S., Evans, G. W., Krantz, D. S., & Stokols, D. Physiological, motivational, and cognitive effects of aircraft noise on children. American Psychologist, 1980, 35, 231–243.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cohen, S., Glass, D. C, & Singer, J. E. Apartment noise, auditory discrimination, and reading ability in children. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1973, 9, 407–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Colony, D. C. Study of the impact on households of relocation from a highway right-of-way. Highway Research Record, 1972, 399, 12–26.Google Scholar
  13. Connor, D. M. A community approach to social impact assessment. Oakville, Ontario: Connor Development Services Limited, 1978.Google Scholar
  14. Council on Environmental Quality. Environmental quality: The second annual report of the Council on Environmental Quality. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1971.Google Scholar
  15. Council on Environmental Quality. Environmental quality: The tenth annual report of the Council on Environmental Quality. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1979.Google Scholar
  16. Crook, M. A., & Langdon, F. J. The effect of aircraft noise on schools in the vicinity of London Airport. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 1974, 34, 241–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Environmental Law Institute. President orders environmental review of international actions. Environmental Law Reporter, 1979, IX(1), 9 ELR 10001-10016.Google Scholar
  18. Environmental Law Institute. Noe v. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority. Environmental Law Reporter, 1980, X(4), 10 ELR 20247-20248. (a)Google Scholar
  19. Environmental Law Institute. Red Line Alert v. Adams. Environmental Law Reporter, 1980, X(5), 10 ELR 20314-20316. (b)Google Scholar
  20. Executive Office of the President. Agency preparation of urban and community impact statements (Circular No. A-116). Washington, D.C.: Author, Office of Management and Budget, 1978.Google Scholar
  21. Fellman, G. Sociological field work is essential in studying community values. Highway Research Record, 1970, 305, 123–132.Google Scholar
  22. Fellman, G., & Brandt, B. A neighborhood a highway would destroy. Environment and Behavior, 1970, 2, 281–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Finsterbusch, K., & Wolf, C. P. (eds.) Methodology of social impact assessment. Stroudsburg, Pa.: Dowden, Hutchinson and Ross, 1977.Google Scholar
  24. Fried, M. Grieving for a lost home. In L. J. Duhl (ed.), The urban condition. New York: Basic Books, 1963.Google Scholar
  25. Friedman, E. Crest Street: A family community impact statement (Policy Paper No. 2). Durham, N.C.: Duke University, Institute of Policy Sciences and Public Affairs, Center for the Study of the Family and the State, 1978.Google Scholar
  26. Glass, D. C, & Singer, J. E. Urban stress: Experiments on noise and social Stressors. New York: Academic Press, 1972.Google Scholar
  27. Glass, D. C, Cohen, S., & Singer, J. E. Urban din fogs the brain. Psychology Today, 1973, 6(12), 94–99.Google Scholar
  28. Grosjean, L., Lodi, R., & Rabinowitz, J. Noise and “pedagogic efficiency” in school activities. Experientia, 1976, 32, 575–576.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Guski, R. An analysis of spontaneous noise complaints. Environmental Research, 1977, 13, 229–236.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hanly v. Mitchell, 460 F. 2d. 640, 4 E.R.C. 1152, 2 E.L.R. 20216 (2d. Cir 1972).Google Scholar
  31. Herridge, C. F., & Low-Beer, L. Observations of the effects of aircraft noise near Heathrow Airport on mental health. Proceedings of the International Congress on Noise as a Public Health Problem, Dubrovnik, 1973, 599-607 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report No. 550/9-73-008).Google Scholar
  32. Horwood, E. M., Zellner, C. A., & Ludwig, R. L. Community consequences of highway improvement (NCHRP Report 18). Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences, Highway Research Board, 1965.Google Scholar
  33. Hunter, E. J. Autonomic reponses to aircraft noise in dyslexic children. Psychology in the Schools, 1971, 8, 362–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jamaica Bay Environmental Study Group. Jamaica Bay and Kennedy Airport: A multidisciplinary environmental study. Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences, 1971.Google Scholar
  35. Johnson, S. & Burdge, R. J. Personal and social adjustment to reservoir development. Lexington: Kentucky Water Resources Research Institute, 1974.Google Scholar
  36. Kasl, S. V. Effects of Housing on mental and physical health. Man-Environment Systems, 1974, 4, 207–226.Google Scholar
  37. Kemp, B. Social impact of a highway on an urban community. Highway Research Record, 1965, 75, 92–102.Google Scholar
  38. Key, W. H. When people are forced to move. Topeka: The Menninger Foundation, 1967.Google Scholar
  39. Langdon, F. J. The problem of measuring the effects of traffic noise. In A. Alexandre, J.-Ph. Barde, C. Lamure, & F. J. Langdon (Eds), Road traffic noise. New York: Wiley, 1975.Google Scholar
  40. Leavitt, H. Superhighway — superhoax. New York: Ballantine Books, 1970.Google Scholar
  41. Llewellyn, L. G. The social impact of urban highways. In C. P. Wolf (Ed.), Social impact assessment. Milwaukee: Environmental Design Research Association, 1974.Google Scholar
  42. Llewellyn, L. G., & Peiser, P. G. NEPA and the environmental movement: A brief history. In Managing the environment (EPA-600/5-73-0010). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1973.Google Scholar
  43. Llewellyn, L. G., Bunten, E., Goodman, C., Hare, G., Mach, R., & Swisher, R. The role of social impact assessment in highway planning. Environment and Behavior, 1975, 7, 285–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Llewellyn, L. G., Goodman, C, & Hare, G. (Eds.). Social impact assessment: A sourcebook for highway planners (8 vols.). Washington, D.C.: Federal Highway Administration, Environmental Division, 1981.Google Scholar
  45. Lukas, J. S. Effects of freeway noise on behavior and academic achievement of school children (Preliminary Report). Berkeley: California Department of Health Services, 1980.Google Scholar
  46. Matthiessen, P. How to kill a valley. The New York Review, 1980, 27(2), 31–36.Google Scholar
  47. McHarg, I. L. Design with nature. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1969.Google Scholar
  48. McKennell, A. C. Noise complaints and community action. In J. D. Chalupnik (Ed.), Transportation noises: A symposium on acceptability criteria. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1970.Google Scholar
  49. Mitchell, R.C. The public speaks again: A new environmental survey. Resources, 1978, 60, 1–8.Google Scholar
  50. Mogey, J., Donahue, M., & Wiersma, E. Social effects of eminent domain: Changes in households after involuntary relocation for Southwest Expressway(I-95), Boston, 1969–1970. Boston: Boston University, 1971.Google Scholar
  51. Novick, S. Spectrum — news of the month. Environment, 1973, 15(4), 21–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Pastalan, L. Involuntary environmental relocation: Death and survival. In E. H. Steinfeld (Chair), Action research in man-environment relations. In W. F. E. Preiser (Ed.), Environmental design research: Vol.2. Symposia and Workshops). Stroudsburg, Pa.: Dowden, Hutchinson, & Ross, 1973.Google Scholar
  53. Pastalan, L. Pennsylvania nursing home relocation program interim research findings. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Institute of Gerontology, 1976.Google Scholar
  54. Perfater, M. A. & Allen, G. R. Relocation due to highway takings: A diachronic analysis of social and economic effects. Charlottesville: Virginia Highway and Transportation Research Council, 1976.Google Scholar
  55. Rowland, K. F. Environmental events predicting death for the elderly. Psychological Bulletin, 1977, 84, 349–372.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Schultz, T. J. Synthesis of social surveys on noise annoyance. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1978, 64, 377–405.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Stack, C. B., & Holt, L. R. Organizing kinfolk: Crest Street resists a highway. Anthropology Resource Center Newsletter, 1979, 6, 3.Google Scholar
  58. Szalay, L. Surveying public images and opinions by the Associative Group Analysis. In L. G. Llewellyn, C. Goodman, & G. Hare (Eds.), Social impact assessment: A sourcebook for highway planners, (Vol. 5). Washington, D.C.: Federal Highway Administration, Environmental Division, 1981.Google Scholar
  59. Toffler, A. Future shock. New York: Random House, 1970.Google Scholar
  60. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The social impact of noise. Washington, D.C.: Author, Office of Noise Abatement and Control, 1971.Google Scholar
  61. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The urban noise survey (EPA 550/9-77-100). Washington, D.C.: Author, 1977.Google Scholar
  62. Ward, L. M., & Suedfeld, P. Human response to highway noise. Environmental Research, 1973, 6, 306–326.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Weinstein, N. D. Human evaluations of environmental noise. In K. H. Craik & E. H. Zube (Eds.), Perceiving environmental quality. New York: Plenum Press, 1976.Google Scholar
  64. Weinstein, N. D. Individual differences in reactions to noise: A longitudinal study in a college dormitory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1978, 63, 458–466.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Weinstein, N.D. Individual differences in critical tendencies and noise annoyance. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 1980, 68, 241–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Winder, J. S., & Allen, R. H. The environmental impact assessment project: A critical appraisal. Washington, D.C.: The Institute of Ecology, 1975.Google Scholar
  67. Wolf, C. P. Social impact assessment: The state of the art. In C. P. Wolf (Ed.) Social impact assessment. Milwaukee: Environmental Design Research Association, 1974.Google Scholar
  68. Wolf, C. P. Social impact assessment: The state of the art updated. Social Impact Assessment, 1977, 20, 3–22.Google Scholar
  69. Wolf, C. P. Getting social impact assessment into the policy arena. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 1980, 1, 27–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lynn G. Llewellyn
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Program Plans, Department of the InteriorU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceUSA

Personalised recommendations