Future of the Gardiner Expressway - Nanos Research

The following describes additional alternativesillustrated by the 12 case studies. These casestudy alternatives may offer ideas for newunique alternatives or design variations on thefour initial alternatives.Rebuild• Highway removal studies have beeninitiated when elevated structures havebecome unsafe or damaged either bynatural disaster or reaching the end ofuseful life. This was the case, in particular,after earthquakes in San Francisco andSeattle.Infillsome case studies, however, the preferredalternative reduced traffic capacity.In Chattanooga, Tennessee, for example,studies showed that an existing parkwayhad excess capacity. A new boulevard,therefore, was designed to accommodatelower traffic volumes than the demolishedhighway.• Studies to remove waterfront elevatedstructures have considered the opportunityto modify the waterfront edge through infill.In these instances, alternatives toreconstruct and reestablish an elevatedhighway’s structural integrity wereconsidered. This alternative maintains the“status quo”.Remove Plus• In some case studies, highway removaloffered opportunities to create new largescalepublic amenities or reclaimed landfor redevelopment. In Seoul, Korea, forexample, the Cheonggyecheon Expresswaywas replaced with a 6-kilometer (3.75miles) linear park.An example is the Westway proposal forManhattan’s Hudson River waterfront. Itproposed replacing an elevated highwaywith a tunnel buried underneath infill –thereby adding 178 acres of new waterfrontland.Air-rights• New construction on elevated highway airrightshas also been considered. Studiesfor the East River Esplanade, for example,considered building new residential towersover F.D.R. Drive on Lower Manhattan’seast side.Reduce• A key issue in highway removal studiesis whether future scenarios shouldaccommodate traffic volumes (vehiclesper daily) at or above existing levels. InSECTION III: alternatives 13