samagon Posted August 15, 2013 Share Posted August 15, 2013 I know parks over freeways have been a hot topic for the transportation sub forum, but this really doesn't fit, cause it's not Houston, but it's neat anyway. http://inhabitat.com/missouri-is-building-a-lush-public-park-over-the-interstate-70-freeway/#more-546634 St. Louis is getting a park to cover the freeway through the middle of town, and will make the river accessible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naviguessor Posted August 15, 2013 Share Posted August 15, 2013 Hey, thanks for finding and posting. The Arch is such an amazing landmark, still. nothing else like it. Caping the hwy and orienting the enterance towards downtown make perfect sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TowerSpotter Posted August 15, 2013 Share Posted August 15, 2013 Hey, thanks for finding and posting. The Arch is such an amazing landmark, still. nothing else like it. Caping the hwy and orienting the enterance towards downtown make perfect sense. It's kind of like the Dallas Klyde Warren Park to Margaret Hunt Hill Bridge. (Park to Arch) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloud713 Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 looks great. i really wish Houston would start doing this. our freeway system is one of the best in the world but it can also be a great divider in many areas. i was looking at google maps and there are already plenty of places where the highway is already submerged that could be decked over as is.the most obvious (IMO), the submerged portion of 59 with the arch bridges. it would be a shame for those arches to be hidden from the freeway, but you could just deck a small portion of the stretch (between the 2 middle bridges or something) and have a few bridges still exposed on either side.heres a submerged portion of i10 separating the north side of downtown from the near north side that could easily be decked over for a few blocks. maybe leave the middle road open to traffic, and deck it from the left bridge all the way to the rail road bridge. you would most likely close the Hardy bridge and put park space over it, connecting the left and middle left plots so there are two, two block wide parks, side by side.another that seems more obvious. the submerged portion of 288/59 south of downtown. you could definitely put one betweel Elgin and Tuam. there is already a row of parks along Elgin. you could link them all with "green trails" (or w/e they call the more vegative/well lit/wider sidewalk paths). or you could just deck it from Elgin all the way to McGowen. also the portion of 59 in downtown, south of the GRB is already submerged. there are a couple flyovers to 45 that would be coming through the ground and overhead, but you could still easily implement a park here.This one is another easy install for improving connections between the 4th ward and downtown. its no "park" since its just a small portion of 45 thats submerged, but i feel its an important connector. you could extend the bridge out like there were U turn lanes on both sides and have that extended part of the bridge be more "green trails" with wide sidewalks and nicely vegetated areas. i noticed this year at FPSF that the sidewalks along the Dallas St bridge are very narrow and to pass people you either have to step out into the street or squeeze up against the low railing over the highway below.and then we have the more dramatic alterations that could really improve connections between either side of the highway, but cost a pretty penny and create many headaches over traffic.submerging the stretch of 45 on the south side of downtown. it would be too costly to submerge the entire portion of 45 around downtown, and i feel like better connecting midtown is more important than the 4th ward right now.submerge 59 on the northern half of downtown between Rusk and Commerce St, and build a park over it connecting the East End and downtown. you could widen the park at the stretch where the large dark grey parking lot is between MMP and dynamo stadium, and have a large public park space connecting MMP and DS. or you could develop the parking lots into some residential towers overlooking the park. and of course replace the 45 bridges with some new signature bridges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TowerSpotter Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 I agree with all the other areas except for this one, has to do with the beauty of the bridges Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloud713 Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 I agree with all the other areas except for this one, has to do with the beauty of the bridges completely agree. its my favorite portion of highway in Houston, and will be even nicer once they get the new LEDs installed on the bridges, but its got a dense population in the area (more so than many of the other possible areas) so i went ahead and included it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samagon Posted August 16, 2013 Author Share Posted August 16, 2013 Some others will disagree, but the overgrown green on the walls is part of what makes that section of freeway so attractive, especially climbing up the light posts. I imagine when the trees grow in on i10 it will be a nice looking freeway to drive as well. I'm big on green though. I think Houston would have a hard time covering any freeway with a part mainly cause there's 4 lanes of feeder on each freeway. so you'd have no parking, and still need to cross 4 lanes of traffic to access the park. it's not very inviting. As an aside... When I was a kid I always thought the huge slabs of concrete used for the train crossing just inside the Washington overpass were tennis courts on top of the freeway and thought "how cool is that". Then we drove under it when a train was crossing and I thought "I hope no one is playing tennis up there right now" followed shortly by "oh". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloud713 Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 there are only 2 lanes of feeder road on either side of the possible i10 location. 3 lanes at the 45 W Dallas bridge. no different than crossing any suburban street. the 59 portions would have 4 lanes though. but people cross Houstons downtown streets every day and they are 4 lanes wide. just throw up a few yellow flashing lights and signs with a lighted pedestrian crosswalk and it would be fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TowerSpotter Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Are what if we just made a huge will over a highway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloud713 Posted August 17, 2013 Share Posted August 17, 2013 huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TowerSpotter Posted August 18, 2013 Share Posted August 18, 2013 I meant, Or why don't they make a huge hill over a highway, just a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloud713 Posted August 18, 2013 Share Posted August 18, 2013 oh. man i wish Houston would do this on 45 between downtown and midtown and 59 north of GRB between the East End and downtown. the other areas i pointed out are just prime for cheap/easy conversions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TowerSpotter Posted August 18, 2013 Share Posted August 18, 2013 oh. man i wish Houston would do this on 45 between downtown and midtown and 59 north of GRB between the East End and downtown. the other areas i pointed out are just prime for cheap/easy conversions.Yea I agree, I would also love to see midtown connected to Downtown as well as montrose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jt16 Posted August 18, 2013 Share Posted August 18, 2013 Some others will disagree, but the overgrown green on the walls is part of what makes that section of freeway so attractive, especially climbing up the light posts. I imagine when the trees grow in on i10 it will be a nice looking freeway to drive as well.I'm big on green though.I think Houston would have a hard time covering any freeway with a part mainly cause there's 4 lanes of feeder on each freeway. so you'd have no parking, and still need to cross 4 lanes of traffic to access the park. it's not very inviting.As an aside... When I was a kid I always thought the huge slabs of concrete used for the train crossing just inside the Washington overpass were tennis courts on top of the freeway and thought "how cool is that". Then we drove under it when a train was crossing and I thought "I hope no one is playing tennis up there right now" followed shortly by "oh".The overgrowth is the problem. It's clear NOBODY is maintaining this growth and you can see huge sections where the growth is so heavy it's pulled completely off the wall and laid down. Now, instead of green you have graffiti on a wall to state at. There are full on trees growing out of the wall where they shouldn't be and will eventuay comroomise the integrity of the walls. That takes years of neglect to happen. On the access roads the vines are actually draped on the road below from the freeway overhead. This stretch has SO much potential if anyone, just anyone cared at all to maintain it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TowerSpotter Posted September 27, 2013 Share Posted September 27, 2013 Does anybody know if this is still on? FibroCITY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLWM8609 Posted September 30, 2013 Share Posted September 30, 2013 I don't think it's ever been "on", as in being a planned construction project. It's just a proposal by Perkins+Will. Does anybody know if this is still on? FibroCITY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.