Beautifying & Pedestrian Friendly Elevated Highways

[M II A II R II K]

Should we preserve the Gardiner?


Mar 31 2010



Read More: http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/your...-down-gardiner

Entire Blog: http://thestar.blogs.com/yourcitymyc...-creative.html

###########################################

Adam Zendel is a master’s student studying urban planning at York University’s Faculty of Environmental Studies. Born and raised in Toronto, he has a passion for the city and the built environment. His areas of interest include urban intensification, mixed-use development and redevelopment, retail spaces and transportation.

He writes:

“The Gardiner Expressway is one of the main transportation arteries that connect our city. While I would like everyone to arrive at each of their destinations by public transit, that is a completely unrealistic desire as cars are such an intrinsic part of our transportation network.

“I have heard of many different plans for dealing with the deliberately unkempt and deteriorating elevated section of the Gardener Expressway and I think that any plan that involves demolishing it and putting traffic at grade will be a huge mistake. We have already seen the increases in travel time for those who must use the east section of the Gardiner that was demolished and incorporated into Lake Shore Blvd. a number of years ago and I don’t think we want to repeat this mistake again.

“Burying the Gardiner — well, I think all I need to mention is Boston’s Big Dig and that idea can be sent out the window.

“A proposal to cover the elevated section of the Gardiner with a suspended green roof that would also function as an elevated park is called Toronto’s Green Ribbon. I like this idea as it retains one of the main arteries and improves on it."

###########################################

[M II A II R II K]

.

[mhays]

Having spent the mid-90s in park development, one of the #1 principles is that people don't go to parks in large numbers unless it's very easy to do so. An elevated park can work if it's not a big climb, and if a bunch of buildings open directly onto it. But in this case it would be several stories. Surely it would be used, but by very many people?

It looks like the project would require a major new structure. If so, my guess is this would be the most expensive park in town, per acre, due to large technical difficulties, starting with new foundations. Based on nothing but this post, it sounds implausible.

New York's high line had neither of these two problems.

This whole topic matches the discussions about Seattle's waterfront viaduct, discussed in another current thread. We're about a year from starting a deep bore tunnel, with demo of the viaduct after the tunnel opens.

[brickell]

But it still disrupts the grid and is a visual blight.

[The Chemist]

I'm not sure why, but I don't really find Shanghai's elevated freeway network to be visually blighting.

[HooverDam]

Phoenix once had a similar idea that thankfully never happened (they buried the freeway instead) except the park was under an elevated freeway (I cant believe they thought people would want to hang out under a freeway):





to get on and off the freeway people wouldve had to use giant 'heliocoils':

[Busy Bee]

Those heliocoils look kinda fun if you had a sporty car.

[mhays]

Good job Phoenix for burying the freeway.

[twoNeurons]

Parks near freeways can work if noise barriers are installed. You'd be surprised how much a wall blocks noise. There are houses right beside elevated freeways in Japan and you barely hear them.

[mhays]

I used to live a block from the same viaduct I mentioned in Seattle. That was fairly intense white noise due to reflected noise from the roof of the lower level. I kind of liked it. It drowned out other noise.

[llamaorama]

Sometimes I think the true elevated freeways-actual long viaducts over regular streets-aren't that bad aside from aesthetics. Actually I personally think they are kind of cool and fun to drive on(a selfish reason why I dislike sound barriers, they block the view), though this is clearly not an accepted thing among planners.

Seems like the problems come from the wide traffic sewers that block perpedicular side streets and choke areas with congestion, cutting off convenient local access for peds and also other auto users too.

I never understood why US cities didn't built soaring expressways like those in Asian cities. Rather than tear out entire neighborhoods with elaborate earth moving to build these wide divided roads, we could've built concrete viaducts on top of existing paths like old railroad tracks and through warehouse districts.

[mhays]

Building over a monopolized railroad is extremely difficult under US law. Based on what I hear about skybridge construction, etc., the railroad company has most of the power, even though they don't really own the land.

I agree that putting large amounts of traffic on the surface is worse.

Tunnels are far better. Let the local streets be narrow and pedestrian friendly, and let the pass-throughs use the tunnels. I mean in important core areas.

[nequidnimis]

Originally Posted by HooverDam

Phoenix once had a similar idea that thankfully never happened (they buried the freeway instead) except the park was under an elevated freeway (I cant believe they thought people would want to hang out under a freeway):

It works nicely in Oakland. This Google street view was just recorded at a time of day when the park was not busy but it is busy weekends. Underneath the freeway are basketball courts.

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sour...12,170.89,,0,5

There's a skateboard park underneath a freeway planned for SF.

[hammersklavier]

True elevated skyways seem to work well if there are good land uses located at the piers' feet.

But OTOH, the idea of elevating a green park ON TOP OF an elevated expressway is just flat-out infeasible. I do believe that the funds associated with that would be about the same as the funds associated with the Big Dig--and the Big Dig offers a far better pedestrian experience!

[brickell]

Originally Posted by HooverDam

Phoenix once had a similar idea that thankfully never happened (they buried the freeway instead) except the park was under an elevated freeway (I cant believe they thought people would want to hang out under a freeway):

Miami is planning on doing something similar. I-395 through downtown is a blight. Has been since the beginning. They were studying a cut highway but instead decided to make it twice as tall, with parkland underneath. Could be interesting but I'm not holding my breath.

[JDRCRASH]

Originally Posted by brickell

But it still disrupts the grid and is a visual blight.

Really? I mean, the car part, yeah, but if the 2nd deck was a park instead of a freeway, wouldn't it improve the look?

[brickell]

It'll still look like this from the bottom, which is where most people will see it.


src: http://www.civ.utoronto.ca/sir/default.htm


src: http://bowjamesbow.ca/2006/07/27/to-...ue-end-1.shtml

http://travel.webshots.com/photo/127...63411888OsNchQ

[niwell]

That idea has been around for a while and I've always thought it to be rather awful, not to mention fiendishly expensive. A much better plan would be to get rid of (to the greatest extent possible) Lakeshore Blvd and create a network of public spaces underneath the highway. This doesn't strictly need to be open space, but can consist of buildings under the envelope, small parks or just pedestrian friendly connectors.

Shawn Micallef from Spacing magazine actually posted an article on this yesterday: http://spacing.ca/wire/2010/04/01/oh...-the-gardiner/

I know there's an example in London of public amenities under the Westway but can't find any pictures. I've also seen pictures of highways in Japan where the envelope is used for light industrial structures. The latter is obviously not desirable in this part of Toronto, but still illustrates how the space can be more effectively used.

For more conventional park space here's an image for "underpass" park, underneath onramps into downtown in Toronto's West Don Lands development:


source: waterfrontoronto.ca

[llamaorama]

Would so many people really be hanging out down there like in the rendering? Sometimes I think we need to accept that cities will always have a gritty or utilitarian side and it should be embraced and not hidden away.

[jamesinclair]

"Adam Zendel is a master’s student studying urban planning at York University’s Faculty of Environmental Studies. Born and raised in Toronto, he has a passion for the city and the built environment. His areas of interest include urban intensification, mixed-use development and redevelopment, retail spaces and transportation."

Not a very good advertisement for the school, if he doesnt understand how induced demand works.