DOCSLIB.ORG

Riverside South Planning Corporation Proposal to Complete Riverside South – July 2009

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Riverside South Planning Corporation Proposal to Complete Riverside South – July 2009 Riverside South Planning Corporation Proposal to Complete Riverside South – July 2009 The Department of City Planning (DCP) is considering a proposal from Extell for the development of Riverside South between 59th and 61st Streets (Parcels L/M/N). The development will be built under a “special permit” (rather than “as-of-right”) which means the City can require the developer to provide public benefits as a condition of approval. The City Planning Commission (CPC) decisions on this development will shape the long-term future of the entire neighborhood and the waterfront park. The Riverside South Planning Corporation (RSPC) has developed an alternative master plan that looks comprehensively at the area, beyond the boundaries of Parcels L/M/N. It provides for a public park between 59 th and 60 th Streets, connects the new development to the local community, to the waterfront and to the 59 th Street IRT Powerhouse. In contrast, the Extell plan creates a “center” with an inward looking development around a private park, turning its back on the local community, the waterfront park and the Powerhouse. The RSPC site plan illustrates the many advantages of creating a new public park between 59th and 60th streets connecting West End Avenue to the Hudson River. By reaching toward the inland street grid, the park balances and complements the significant public access at 72nd street and establishes the ideal location for the proposed new Metro-North railroad station. It serves as a sunlit foreground and gathering place for the historic IRT Powerhouse which may become a major neighborhood and regional community facility. As the line of the new Riverside South buildings turns east, facing 1 the new park along 60th street, they gracefully return to the existing streetscape and infrastructure on West End Avenue, and connect to the recently energized residential streets to the east and south. At its western end, where access is currently restricted, the new park provides a generous and inviting entrance to regional waterfront recreation by connecting with Riverside South Park and Riverside Park to the north and with the Hudson River Park to the south. RSPC, a coalition of civic organizations (detail on last page), has been working on the planning for Riverside South development since before 1990 with the advice of community advocates, architects, city planners and green development experts. RSPC proposes a seven part program for completing the Riverside South Development: 1. Create a open public park between 59th and 60 Streets – cluster the new development between 60th and 61st Streets, limiting the density to the allowable 2.38 million square feet; 2. Build sustainable development utilities below the new park. Space provided for: - Rail Station with a freight spur - Cogeneration - Truckless waste removal for the new development. 3. Convert the 59 th Street IRT Powerhouse to a Community Cultural Center; 4. Relocate the elevated Miller Highway placing it below grade; and thereby make possible completion of Riverside South Park; 5. Set Aggressive Green Building Standard based on PlaNYC policies and programs; 6. Provide School Space in buildings on Parcels J or K; 7. Provide 20% Affordable Housing. 2 1. Proposal for a new Public Park In order to grant a special permit for a “general large-scale development (pursuant to Section 74-743), the CPC must find that the proposed plan would create a better relationship among buildings, open areas, surrounding developments and shorelines, and must benefit “the neighborhood and the City as a whole”. In 1992 the CPC approved detailed Design Controls to keep buildings low around the Powerhouse so that the new buildings did not overwhelm it. The Design Controls were part of its basis for reaching the finding that the proposed plan would create a better relationship among buildings, open areas, surrounding developments and shorelines. Extell now proposes to abandon these Design Controls and to bury the view of the 59 th Street Power Plant behind Buildings 3, 4 and 5, which are respectively 560, 415 and 451 feet tall. The buildings in Extell’s plan for Lots L/M/N are too large and the layout does not adequately connect to the local area or consider the needs of the local residents. Extell’s plan creates a barrier to waterfront access, provides only limited private park that is dominated by the shadows of the tall buildings, buries the view of the 59 th Street IRT Powerhouse and creates a “dead end” at 59 th Street and the waterfront. Extell proposes a “center” that looks inward, and turns its back on the local community and the 59 th Street IRT Powerhouse. We think that this design precludes a finding by the CPC that the Extell plan creates a better relationship among buildings. The RSPC has developed an alternative master plan that looks comprehensively at the area, beyond the boundaries of Parcels L/M/N. We propose a plan that provides for a new public park between 59 th and 60 th Streets, connects the new development to the local community, to the waterfront and to the 59 th Street IRT Powerhouse, and creates a powerful and exciting view corridor to the waterfront for the local community. We propose that the new buildings be clustered between 60 th and 61 st , set back from the Powerhouse to preserve the view of this important landmark. 3 The new park will connect the local community to the waterfront with a bridge across the relocated Miller Highway and preserve the view of the 59th Street IRT Powerhouse, a proposed landmark. The park is level with West End Avenue providing a space below for sustainable development facilities. The proposed Park will be a vast courtyard for the 800-foot long Cultural Center and can include a series of play areas and play fields and a long pedestrian street -- with cafes, local retail shops, outdoor dining, kiosks, community facilities – looking out on the park and the Powerhouse. The number of families with children in the neighborhood has increased exponentially creating a need for more park space and improved access to Riverside South Park. We envision school use in the park. In the RSPC plan, the new buildings are located between 60 th and 61 st Streets, and the density is limited the 2.37 million square feet that is currently authorize, not increased to 3.14 million square feet proposed by the developer, equivalent to an additional high-rise building. The increase proposed by the developer is the equivalent of two fifty-story residential high rise buildings. We have asked City Planning to require Extell to study this RSPC alternative layout for Parcels L/M/N as part of the work for the SEIS. 2. Below Grade Sustainable Development The new development at Riverside south should be built to a high standard for sustainability and should contribute to the Mayor’s Climate Change goals. Because the site is strategically located between the River and the railroad, the City should examine the beneficial impacts of building sustainable utilities below the development: • A Railroad Station – part of the Mayor’s and MTA’s plan for mass transit improvements: • Cogeneration providing clean efficient energy by creating an energy district served by cogeneration with capacity to provide adequate power for the Con Edison Steam system: • Truckless Waste Removal using rail spur. 4 Rail Station, Cogeneration and Energy District to serve 4.6 million square feet RSPC recommends that the below grade area between 59 th and 61st Streets be evaluated for dedication to sustainable development functions that are included in the Mayor’s PlaNYC including: 5 • Metro-North Station - The Empire Connection, a rail line along the Hudson River that connects Spuyten Duyvil with Penn Station, runs through the Riverside South site. The Mayor has identified initiation of service on this line as part of his transit infrastructure improvements in PlaNYC. Metro-North commissioned a September 2002 report by Parsons Brinckerhoff. The report identified the option of building a rail station at 59 th Street and West End Avenue as one of the two attractive alternative locations for a rail station on the line. We have requested that Extell study the impacts of buildings around the space required for a railroad station. We believe the impacts will be very beneficial for the project and will reduce congestion and greenhouse gasses (GHG) by shifting more people to mass transit. This shift will help offset other gasses produced by the project and help toward the goal of making the project carbon-neutral. • Cogeneration for an Energy District and Con Edison Steam System – The Mayor’s PlaNYC establishes a policy that any new development that is over 300,000 square feet should evaluate the creation of an Energy District that would provide electricity, cooling and heating for the new development. We propose the consideration of energy district that would serve a total of 4.6 million square feet of new development as follows: 2.38 million square feet of new development on Parcels L/M/N, 1.4 million square feet of new development on Parcels J and K, 0.8 million square feet of new development on the Durst property (between 57 th and 58 th Streets). A cogeneration plant built under the new park could increase the energy efficiency of the new development. The RSPC has requested that the Scope of Work for the SEIS provide for a study of a cogeneration plant that is designed to meet the requirements of the new energy district and to replace the power produced in the 59 th Street Power Station in cooperation with the New York City Economic Development Corporation. • Truck-less waste removal system for the new development – The RSPC has requested that the Scope of work for the SEIS include consideration of a truck-less solid waste removal system for the new development.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Case Studies of Urban Freeways for the I-81 Challenge
    Case Studies of Urban Freeways for The I-81 Challenge Syracuse Metropolitan Transportation Council February 2010 Case Studies for The I-81 Challenge Table of Contents OVERVIEW................................................................................................................... 2 Highway 99/Alaskan Way Viaduct ................................................................... 42 Lessons from the Case Studies........................................................................... 4 I-84/Hub of Hartford ........................................................................................ 45 Success Stories ................................................................................................... 6 I-10/Claiborne Expressway............................................................................... 47 Case Studies for The I-81 Challenge ................................................................... 6 Whitehurst Freeway......................................................................................... 49 Table 1: Urban Freeway Case Studies – Completed Projects............................. 7 I-83 Jones Falls Expressway.............................................................................. 51 Table 2: Urban Freeway Case Studies – Planning and Design Projects.............. 8 International Examples .................................................................................... 53 COMPLETED URBAN HIGHWAY PROJECTS.................................................................. 9 Conclusions
    [Show full text]
  • Chittagong Strategic Urban Transport Master Plan Corridor Improvement Pre-Feasibility Study
    Chittagong Public Disclosure Authorized Strategic Urban Transport Master Plan (P155253) Public Disclosure Authorized Corridor Improvements Pre-Feasibility Study 19 November, 2018 Public Disclosure Authorized Prepared by: Prepared for: Public Disclosure Authorized e.Gen Consultants Ltd., Bangladesh in association with Integrated Transport Planning Ltd, United Kingdom Chittagong Strategic Urban Transport Master Plan Corridor Improvement Pre-Feasibility Study Contents 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 2 Rationale for corridor selection ....................................................................................................... 2 2.1 Corridor options ........................................................................................................................... 2 2.2 Evaluation methodology ............................................................................................................ 16 3 Corridor Approach Definition ........................................................................................................ 19 3.2 Defining a Corridor Improvement Strategy ............................................................................... 25 3.3 Developing the Public Transport hierarchy ............................................................................... 26 3.4 Potential for phased introduction ............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Compound Interest Interesting Bingos (7S Then 8S) Made from COMPOUND WORDS (Two Words, Not Prefixes / Suffixes) Compiled by Jacob Cohen, Asheville Scrabble Club
    Compound Interest Interesting bingos (7s then 8s) made from COMPOUND WORDS (two words, not prefixes / suffixes) compiled by Jacob Cohen, Asheville Scrabble Club 7s -WAY(S) AIRWAYS AAIRSWY AIRWAY, passageway in which air circulates [n] ANYWAYS AANSWYY anyway (in any way) [adv] ARCHWAY AACHRWY passageway under arch [n -S] AREAWAY AAAERWY sunken area leading to basement entrance [n -S] BELTWAY ABELTWY highway around urban area [n -S] BIKEWAY ABEIKWY route for bikes [n -S] COGWAYS ACGOSWY COGWAY, railway operating on steep slopes [n] DOORWAY ADOORWY entranceway to room or building [n -S] ENDWAYS ADENSWY endwise (lengthwise) [adv] FAIRWAY AAFIRWY mowed part of golf course between tee and green [n -S] FISHWAY AFHISWY device for enabling fish to pass around dam [n -S] FLYWAYS AFLSWYY FLYWAY, established air route of migratory birds [n] FOLKWAY AFKLOWY traditional custom of people [n -S] FOOTWAY AFOOTWY footpath (path for pedestrians) [n -S] FREEWAY AEEFRWY express highway [n -S] GANGWAY AAGGNWY passageway [n -S] GATEWAY AAEGTWY passage that may be closed by gate [n -S] HALFWAY AAFHLWY being in middle [adj] HALLWAY AAHLLWY hall (large room for assembly) [n -S] HEADWAY AADEHWY forward movement [n -S] HIGHWAY AGHHIWY main road [n -S] JETWAYS AEJSTWY JETWAY, trademark [n] KEYWAYS AEKSWYY KEYWAY, slot for a key [n] LANEWAY AAELNWY lane (narrow passageway) [n -S] LEEWAYS AEELSWY LEEWAY, lateral drift of ship [n] LIFEWAY AEFILWY way of living [n -S] LOGWAYS AGLOSWY LOGWAY, ramp used in logging [n] OILWAYS AILOSWY OILWAY, channel for the passage of
    [Show full text]
  • A Case Study of the Spaces Below the Interstate-10 Overpass at Perkins
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Master's Theses Graduate School 2003 Restructuring the spaces under elevated expressways: a case study of the spaces below the Interstate-10 overpass at Perkins Road in Baton Rouge, Louisiana Ramon Irizarry Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses Part of the Landscape Architecture Commons Recommended Citation Irizarry, Ramon, "Restructuring the spaces under elevated expressways: a case study of the spaces below the Interstate-10 overpass at Perkins Road in Baton Rouge, Louisiana" (2003). LSU Master's Theses. 1273. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses/1273 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Master's Theses by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. RESTRUCTURING THE SPACES UNDER ELEVATED EXPRESSWAYS: A CASE STUDY OF THE SPACES BELOW THE INTERSTATE-10 OVERPASS AT PERKINS ROAD IN BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Landscape Architecture in The School of Landscape Architecture by Ramón Irizarry B.S., University of Puerto Rico, 1998 August, 2003 AKCNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis would not have been possible without the collaboration and guidance of my major advisor, Max L. Conrad. I would like to thank my graduate committee, Bruce G. Sharky and Dennis “Buck” Abbey for their support and constructive criticism.
    [Show full text]
  • Interstates/Highways to Boulevards Research
    Lorem ipsumInterstates/Highways to Boulevards dolor sit amet, Research Cum eu mollis numquam, ut veri iisque pro. Magna animal et sit, purto etiam errem an eos. Vel magna pertinacia at, ex est nonumy dolorem, ei qui paulo torquatos quaerendum. Pri erroribus referrenturThe ex.CoPIRG Foundation and groups counter to the widening Est te populoof the semper, Central harum semper70 id project his, ad qui illumhave reformidans.referenced Est duis consectetuer highway at.-to - Unum putantboulevard minimum conversions no cum, eu quot delenitiin their vim. Debitis argument maiorum for quo ei. urban Pri prompta freeway euismod inermisremoval id, no legimus. Below incorrupte are mei, hinc examples primis nostro of no highw per. ays that have been Nam modusconv melioreerted to boulevards or removed, as well as projects that cu. Ut dolore noster has, alterum corrumpit percipitur duo ne, eam te summo nostrudare under debate scriptorem. Blandit principesand have not been removed. patrioque an sed. Scripta persius cu ius, an duo numquam fabulas periculis. Vidit mentitum et per, in mel solet partiendo. Ius in autem corpora luptatum, ad vix option blandit, pri tale viderer molestie ad. Mazim quodsi lucilius ne nec. Tollit scriptorem vel ea, eu mei erat voluptaria, eos ei tale equidem. Ex eos facilis sadipscing. Cu quis fuisset prodesset quo, mel cu enim mentitum, ad vix dissentiunt consequuntur. Est etiam luptatum vulputate no, nonumy delectus scaevola cu est. Meis nobis necessitatibus ad vix. Quo invenire praesent laboramus et, ne duo meis tempor ullamcorper.
    [Show full text]
  • Loma Prieta Earthquake
    Case Studies of the Access and Mobility Impact of Freeway Removal Principal Investigator Graduate Research Assistant Dr. Norman Garrick Jason Billings University of Connecticut University of Connecticut Civil, U-2037, Storrs, CT 06269 Civil, U-2037, Storrs, CT 06269 [email protected] [email protected] Abstract: Throughout the United States, there is a growing movement to remove selected sections of freeways from city centers. Largely seen as a way to restore life and vitality to these areas, this strategy has the potential for numerous benefits including: 1) eliminating a physical and psychological barrier that divides city neighborhoods, 2) opening up land for redevelopment, 3) removing an aesthetic eyesore that takes away from a city’s character, 4) providing direct access to city businesses by restoring road networks and enhancing traffic circulation patterns. Even though the aforementioned benefits are intriguing by themselves, this concept also has the potential to reduce carbon emissions and improve air quality within these cities. Removing freeways decreases total vehicle miles traveled by promoting walking, biking and mass transit use. Therefore, freeway removal can be seen as another mechanism to contend with the growing environmental issues facing the world. A handful of freeway sections have been removed or relocated from some cities within the United States and abroad. These cities provide a unique opportunity to investigate how such a major undertaking affects access and mobility of all transportation system users. A surprising view that has emerged is that removing these freeway sections has not resulted in traffic disruption as conventional theory would suggest. Instead, it appears that the overall traffic volume in many of these areas has actually decreased.
    [Show full text]
  • Non-Chemical Methods of Snow and Ice Control on Highway Structures
    NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM REPORT 4 NON-CHEMICAL METHODS OF SNOW AND ICE CONTROL ON HIGHWAY STRUCTURES HIGHWAY RESEARCH BOARD NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES - NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL HIGHWAY RESEARCH BOARD 1964 Officers WILBUR S. SMITH, Chairman DONALD S. BERRY, First Vice Chairman J. B. MCMORRAN, Second Vice Chairman D. GRANT MICKLE, Executive Director W. N. CAREY, JR., Deputy Executive Director FRED BURGGRAF, Consultant Executive Committee REX M. WHITTON, Federal Highway Administrator, Bureau of Public Roads (ex officio) A. E. JOHNSON, Executive Secretary, American Association of State Highway Officials (ex officio) LOUIS JORDAN, Executive Secretary, Division of Engineering and Industrial Research, National Research Council (ex officio) R. R. BARTELSMEYER, Vice President, H. W. Lochner & Co., Chicago (ex officio, Past Cliairman 1962) C. D. CURTISS, Special Assistant to the Executive Vice President, American Road Builders' Association (ex officio. Past Chairman 1963) E. W. BAUMAN, Managing Director, National Slag Association DONALD S. BERRY, Chairman, Department of Civil Engineering, Northwestern University W. A. BUGGE, Parsons Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Bechtel, San Francisco MASON A. BUTCHER, County Manager, Montgomery County, Md. J. DOUGLAS CARROLL, JR., Deputy Director, Tri-State Transportation Committee, New York City HARMER E. DAVIS, Director, Institute of Transportation and Traffic Engineering, University of California DUKE W. DUNBAR, Attorney General of Colorado JOHN T. HOWARD, Head, Department of City and Regional Planning, Massachusetts Institute of Technology PYKE JOHNSON, Retired LOUIS C. LUNDSTROM, Director, General Motors Proving Grounds BURTON W. MARSH, Executive Director, Foundation for Traffic Safety, American Automobile Association OSCAR T. MARZKE, Vice President, Fundamental Research, U. S. Steel Corporation J. B. MCMORRAN, Superintendent of Public Works, New York State Department of Public Works CLIFFORD F.
    [Show full text]
  • SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, and ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS of ELEVATED, DEPRESSED, and at -GRADE LEVEL FREEWAYS in TEXAS by Jesse L
    Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. FHWAJTX -97/1327-6F 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF ELEVATED, November 1997 DEPRESSED, AND AT-GRADE LEVEL FREEWAYS IN TEXAS 6. Perfonning Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Perfonning Organization Report No. Jesse L. Buffmgton, Sharada R. Vadali, Katie N. Womack, Richard A. Zimmer, Research Report 1327-6F Wayne G. McCully, Michael Nikolaou, and Carol A. Lewis 9. Perfonning Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Texas Transportation Institute The Texas A&M University System II. Contract or Grant No. College Station, Texas 77843-3135 Study No. 0-1327 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Texas Department of Transportation Final: Research and Technology Transfer Office September 1992 - August 1996 P.O. Box 5080 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Austin, Texas 78763-5080 15. Supplementary Notes Research performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation and the U.s. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. Research Study Title: Social, Economic, and Environmental Effects of Elevated and Depressed Freeways 16. Abstract To answer questions being raised by abutting residents and businesses about proposed elevated and/or depressed freeway improvements in the urban and suburban areas of Texas, a four year study has been conducted to estimate the social, economic, and environmental effects of such freeway designs. Eight existing, two under constnlction, and one approved for constnlction freeway sections have been studied on a before, during, and after constnlction basis.
    [Show full text]
  • Innovative Roadway Design Making Highways More Likeable
    September 2006 INNOVATIVE ROADWAY DESIGN MAKING HIGHWAYS MORE LIKEABLE By Peter Samuel Project Director: Robert W. Poole, Jr. POLICY STUDY 348 The Galvin Mobility Project America’s insufficient and deteriorating transportation network is choking our cities, hurt- ing our economy, and reducing our quality of life. But through innovative engineering, value pricing, public-private partnerships, and innovations in performance and manage- ment we can stop this dangerous downward spiral. The Galvin Mobility Project is a major new policy initiative that will significantly increase our urban mobility and help local officials move beyond business-as-usual transportation planning. Reason Foundation Reason Foundation’s mission is to advance a free society by developing, applying, and promoting libertarian principles, including individual liberty, free markets, and the rule of law. We use journalism and public policy research to influence the frameworks and actions of policymakers, journalists, and opinion leaders. Reason Foundation’s nonpartisan public policy research promotes choice, competition, and a dynamic market economy as the foundation for human dignity and progress. Reason produces rigorous, peer-reviewed research and directly engages the policy process, seeking strategies that emphasize cooperation, flexibility, local knowledge, and results. Through practical and innovative approaches to complex problems, Reason seeks to change the way people think about issues, and promote policies that allow and encourage individuals and voluntary institutions to flourish. Reason Foundation is a tax-exempt research and education organization as defined under IRS code 501(c)(3). Reason Foundation is supported by voluntary contributions from indi- viduals, foundations, and corporations. The views are those of the author, not necessarily those of Reason Foundation or its trustees.
    [Show full text]
  • Restoring Claiborne Avenue Alternatives for the Future of Claiborne Avenue
    Restoring Claiborne Avenue Alternatives for the Future of Claiborne Avenue A Report to the Claiborne Corridor Improvement Coalition and Congress for the New Urbanism Prepared by Smart Mobility Inc. and Waggonner & Ball Architects 15 July 2010 CLAIBORNE CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT COALITION The mission of the Claiborne Corridor Improvement Coalition is to plan and advocate for the transformation of the Claiborne Corridor into a healthy, vibrant boulevard that will not only serve as an anchor for the Corridor’s neighborhoods, but for the whole city of New Orleans. This report is the result of the efforts of the Coalition to gather information and inform the community about the alternatives for the Claiborne Avenue/I‐10 Corridor. The Coalition was formed by NEWCITY Neighborhood Partnerships, a coalition of developers, funders, neighborhood organizations, service providers, churches & faith‐ based groups, schools & universities, and government agencies focused on educational, economic, health, and housing development in the Tremé/Lafitte and Tulane/Gravier neighborhoods. The report has been prepared for the Coalition by the Congress for the New Urbanism, a national leader in promoting walkable, neighborhood‐based development as an alternative to sprawl, with assistance from the National Endowment of the Arts and the Ford Foundation. Members: Vaughn Fauria, NewCorp Inc., Co‐Chair, Claiborne Corridor Improvement Coalition (CCIC) Lisa Amoss, Broad Community Connections Bill Borah, Smart Growth for Louisiana Arianne Cousin, Urban Development Research Center Jack Davis, Smart Growth for Louisiana, Co‐Chair, CCIC Clifton James, Urban Development Research Center, Co‐Chair, CCIC Jim Kelly, Providence Community Housing/Catholic Charities, Co‐Chair, CCIC Nick Roosevelt, NEWCITY Neighborhood Partnership Daniel Samuels, Architect John Norquist, Congress for the New Urbanism Nora Beck, Congress for the New Urbanism Report Prepared for: Consultant Team: Lucy Gibson, P.E.
    [Show full text]
  • Freeways Without Futures 2021
    Freeways Without Futures 2021 FREEWAYS WITHOUT FUTURES 2021 / 1 Table of Contents P4 / Introduction P8 / Freeways Without Futures P10 / Brooklyn-Queens Expressway, New York, New York P12 / Claiborne Expressway (I-10), New Orleans, Louisiana P14 / Inner Loop North, Rochester, New York P16 / I-244, Tulsa, Oklahoma P18 / I-275, Tampa, Florida P20 / I-345, Dallas, Texas P22 / I-35, Austin, Texas P24 / I-35, Duluth, Minnesota P26 / I-5, Seattle, Washington P28 / I-81, Syracuse, New York P30 / I-980, Oakland, California P32 / Kensington Expressway, Buffalo, New York P34 / North Loop (I-35/70), Kansas City, Missouri P36 / Scajaquada Expressway, Buffalo, New York P38 / The Great Highway, San Francisco, California P40 / Graduated Campaigns P42 / Conclusion P46 / Further Reading 2 Acknowledgments The primary author of this document is Cover photo: New development along Ben Crowther, Program Manager at the Rochester, New York’s former Inner Loop Congress for the New Urbanism. Lynn (the right-of-way of the former highway Richards, President and CEO at the is now the grass lots to the right of Union Congress for the New Urbanism, Margaret Street). Credit: Stantec O’Neal, Deputy Director at the Congress for the New Urbanism, Rob Steuteville, Senior Communications Advisor at the Congress for the New Urbanism, and Lauren Mayer, Communications Associate at the Congress for the New Urbanism provided extensive editorial support. Selections for this report were made by a national advisory committee consisting of: Nana-Yaw Andoh, Ph.D. candidate, Taubman College
    [Show full text]
  • Rosslyn Esplanade Study Final Report
    Rosslyn Esplanade Study Final Report DRAFT Scheme 5 - Final Plan With Full Build-Out The Lukmire Partnership, Inc. Rosslyn Esplanade Study Final Report The Lukmire Partnership, Inc. Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the following people who participated in the development of the concepts of this Study. Without the strong support of the County staff generally, this work would not have been a success. Principal County staff members who contributed their time and energy include Robert Atkinson and Betts Abel, Office of Development, Department of Economic Development; Freida Wray, Office of Planning, Department of Community Planning, Housing & Development; David Robinson, Department of Public Works. The Waterview development team of Kathleen Webb, JBG / TrizecHahn, John Milliken, Venable, Baetjer & Howard and Peter Aaron, Pei Cobb Freed provided valuable input, keeping us within the realm of the practical. David Murphy of the US Park Service was an honest critic, providing objective and accurate analysis of issues affecting the surrounding area. Cecilia Cassidy, John Corely, Tom Corns and other members of Rosslyn Renaissance provided a diverse and engaged group of end users; they formed the backbone of review and public support for the ideas expressed in the Study, and proved to be keen observers of the urban issues in Rosslyn. Carrie Johnson, Chair and members of the Waterview Site Plan Review Subcommittee (SPRS) who provided generously of the committee’s time allowing us to present multiple versions of the Study’s recommendations, helped to refine its purpose and scope. Credits The following persons have contributed to this report: William E. Evans, AIA, The Lukmire Partnership, Inc., Gregory S.
    [Show full text]