Karin Liljegren on June 27, 2008, at 10:27PM – #1

This is fantastic! Exactly the direction that our newly revitalizing city needs - keep it comin'.

Bert Green on June 27, 2008, at 10:52PM – #2

The best part is weighing the cost against the economic benefit/return. Thats the right way to see it, and a good reason to build it.

Urban Trojan on June 27, 2008, at 11:41PM – #3

The height of the Hill Street crossing is substantially higher than that of the Broadway crossing. A cap between these two bridges would have a significant slope which would present problems of access for the elderly and the disabled.

Perhaps there could be a gap in the cap between these two bridges and instead, construct a huge geodesic structure. It might not be a full sphere, perhaps only partial. The inside and bottom of this sphere would be open to the freeway beneath. The structure could be dynamic with operating parts, be an eye-catching contraption, perhaps even a symbol. A symbol for the beginning years of the new millennium? The city?

The gateway structures are so much student naivete. So much square footage needs to be located at transit stations. As well, the Music Center intends to construct a building where it's annex is now located. Tall buildings need to be kept to the south of the 101.

The east end portal looks interesting - as one approaches from the east along the 101. The students' informal layout lends dynamism and harkens back to the informal layout of streets of the original pueblo.

David Kennedy on June 28, 2008, at 12:03AM – #4

It is not clear to me from the diorama, do the cross street pass through the park or do they get capped as well?

Otherwise, when can we get started?

Jerard on June 28, 2008, at 12:21AM – #5

Conceptually, I like the spirit of this model because of it's simplicity. (Unfortunately I had a business meeting so I couldn't attend)

The one thing that I'm wondering right off the bat in the pictures is, Will the park close off most of the north south streets (Broadway, Spring, Main) or will the park be elevated over the existing freeway streets?

The reason why I ask is that this park will defeat its own purpose if the mounds covering the freeway are way too high thus creating the exact affect the current freeway trench is doing, in essence creating a compact version of Griffith Park.

In addition the El Monte Busway in concept continues along Arcadia and Aliso Streets so there should be some ideas of using the capping of the park to improve busway operations by either extending the Busway to Spring Street and make that bus only. Improving the transit access which would enhance the park.

Benjamin Pezzillo on June 28, 2008, at 08:49AM – #6

Ambitious. It will be interesting to see the engineering that will support this level of landscaping above a live freeway and withstand seismic activity.

Apart from that, my biggest concern would be the actual construction phase and keeping the vehicles below safe from falling materials without closing the road.

The mechanics of ventilating the capped section of freeway will be interesting to me too.

Tina Chen on June 29, 2008, at 10:12PM – #7

Build it!!

....or you're a Whore!!

Urban Trojan on June 30, 2008, at 08:53PM – #8

On second thought: what is to prevent a solution such as this from becoming or evolving into the conditions now present at Pershing Square?

Brett on July 01, 2008, at 08:25AM – #9

Pie in the sky thinking....we've got a better chance of colonizing Jupiter. Haven't these guys heard of EIR and this is EQ country.....I mean come on it takes the city 15 years to get a damn building approved, what makes you think this would fly? Well at least it'll be a great place for all the homeless crackheads and gangbangers to hang out at....how long til it's riddled with graffitti?? I guess it's a nice dream time.....let's design a fwy for the moon next

guest on July 01, 2008, at 12:20PM – #10

Nice, but I wouldn't want to be in that tunnel in an earthquake. If in previous earthquakes we've seen bridges fall, this could also collapse in the next earthquake, causing many deaths.

guest on July 01, 2008, at 12:27PM – #11

If it does get built they should put a big Angel as big as the statue of liberty overlooking the city to protect it in case of any natural disasters. Makes sense to do this in the city of Angels.

Desert Bruin on July 01, 2008, at 12:44PM – #12

Perhaps a 'cap' should only happen between Alameda and Spring. Otherwise, widen the other bridges so that they can have a landscaped promenade for pedestrians out beyond the edge of the sidewalks.

A solid cap over such a lengthy stretch of freeway will cause a driving hazard for any and all motorists with vision problems, those with eyes that cannot quickly adjust to rapidly changed light conditions. This is present along a stretch of subteranean freeway in downtown Phoenix, despite the addition of high intensity lighting.

Otherwise, I would go in the high-tech direction for crossing over between the cathedral and the high school of the performing arts. A techie sort of looking pedestrian bridge would complement the look of the high school. A solid, landscaped cap all along the downtown stretch of this freeway would be a major maintenenace item and become a refuge day and night for the homeless.

Ginny-Marie Case on July 01, 2008, at 01:24PM – #13

Worried that the tunnel might fall in an earthquake?

What do you think the skyscrapers downtown will do?

Either way - let's not sit around and worry about the "what ifs"

I love the concept, and maybe if we can start small and add on to it over the years...it can be something amazing.

It's either that, or we all invest in massive sledge hammers to start dismantling a parking lot (or two) and replanting it with grass.

dawna on July 02, 2008, at 11:59AM – #14

ginny, i'm with you! i get so discouraged by rampant naysaying. why not think about what IS possible, or how to make things like this brilliant and forward-thinking idea possible?

in the meantime, i have a sledgehammer ready.

John Crandell on July 02, 2008, at 01:53PM – #15

Sledgehammers: Well, there is this Western Redbud tree that has managed to survive on the west side of Broadway just about where the north portal of the old tunnel once stood. It is surrounded by concrete and asphalt and it is amazing that is has survived. Be carefull with those sledgehammers!

Let's imagine that instead of a cap, that the existing bridges are widened +/- 40 ft. on each side. The outside edges of the deck could be wavy-gravy in plan view, i.e. - could have a curve or curves to them. Of course there would be room for wider sidewalks but in particular, the structure could be engineered so that the remainder can be densely planted with groundcovers, shrubs and trees. One could hear the traffic, but see landscape green and blue sky instead. Cascading water can help mask the din.

YES: instead of a solid cap, why not a large, techie type spherical or pyramidal object at one point over/above the open portion of freeway? Don't worry though, I'm not suggesting anywhere near a 'Steel Cloud.'

If it had been built, The Cloud would have become for L.A. what the Golden Gate Bridge is for San Francisco (no complement intended).

Benjamin Pezzillo on July 02, 2008, at 03:13PM – #16

Downtown skyscrapers are engineered to sway and give during an earthquake. Only the glass and facades should pop out as the energy is released through the top of the towers (so head inside, not outside and keep a good pair of boats, heavy gloves and hardhat in your Downtown office!).

Cars will largely be worthless on Downtown Surface streets. Freeways will hopefully be slightly better off as there is, generally, not much to fall onto them from above or the sides.

Thus, the concern near a major transportation infrastructure node (this patch of 101) so close to a rail node is that the less there is to clean-up, the better the region will be in the aftermath of the inevitable 'big one'.

It's not gloom and doom on the park project, just a caution to build it safe and additional costs that might be associated with that.

Im not POTUS on July 02, 2008, at 04:27PM – #17

Did anyone at the presentation mention if this will also be a HAZMAT Exclusion area like the Phoenix, AZ. structure? CalTrans can't allow HazMat loads to pass through. Anyone remember the 5 FWY truck lane fire in Santa Clarita???? That means fuel tankers, pressurized tankers (Oxygen, Propane etc.) and even trucks carrying more than 5 batteries have to exit the 101 and use surface streets to go around. Big trucks rumbling around 1st, Temple, Ceasar C, will make traffic flow worse.

None of the safety prone, anti terror fearing stakeholders like the Fed Building, Fed Prison, Union Station, Cathedral, Music Center, High School... I can go on... will like the idea of HAZMAT trucks exiting Alameda or Temple to bypass the park.

We have so many officials scared of their own shadows making policy decisions. If this fear mongering passes, you have a chance to see this built. But not realistic for the time being.

It is a nice idea, but there will be many chances to develop soon-to-be abandoned high rise projects inside downtown proper. Lots of developers will be looking for public funded boondoggles to palm off their now worthless condo schemes parcels.

chattycathy on July 03, 2008, at 10:20AM – #18

I would love to walk from the civic center to Olvera Street or Chinatown without having to cross freeway entrances. You couldn't build this fast enough for me. But alas, no one can be taking this too serious if all they're doing is making it a student project. Let's get real, and let's get going....

Juanito on July 03, 2008, at 04:23PM – #19

Gracias, 'I'm Not POTUS'! You have made a quite valuable contribution with raising the issue of (banned) transport of hazardous materials through a covered over freeway, a tunnel of half a mile length.

The ramifications of this aspect plus the cost of massive ventilation equipment that would be required with a solid cap should lead us to proceed in another direction. Clearly, there are more imaginative options available. We need to think within the sphere of urban design on this problem, not from within a suburban landscape mode.

Juanito on July 03, 2008, at 10:17PM – #21

If you're eastbound on the San Berdoo Freeway out of Downtown, there ain't no transition to the northbound I-5. For a truck going northbound on the 101 into Downtown, merging with the westbound lanes of the San Berdoo and having to make a mandatory exit on Alameda to avoid a tunnel, would require a trucker to get over/across the two lanes very quick to make the offramp. It's bad enough trying that maneuver in a passenger car. When you walk into a movie theater and the flick has already started and you can't see a thing, imagine what it would be like for an elderly driver on the 101 and traffic is speeding full-bore, with narrow lanes plus vehicles merging in from the onramps and they can't see the lane deviders, not everyone has turned on their headlights and they can't see the cars around them. Right: they drift over the line or they stomp on the brakes and a chain reaction of rear enders ensues. Otherwise, there aren't transition lanes from the northbound I-5 to the southbound 110 and vice-versa.

The visual experience of arriving in Downtown in a car either northbound on the 101 or westbound on the San Berdoo is arresting, once these two arteries merge. It is a spectacular panoply with City Hall and the backdrop of all of the office towers of the financial district. Why not add to and extend that experience with good urban design for motorists as they proceed up to the Four Level? My thought is that the dynamism of the freeway traffic is an element that we should work with, rather than cover up.

In one of her novels, Joan Didion remarks of her abhorence in days of yore, driving her old Corvette southbound on the Harbor Freeway from the Four Level. One has to quickly sidestep, get across lanes in order not to have to exit on Fourth or Wilshire. Those residing in the Bunker Hill Towers are familiar with the screetch of tires and the crunch of metal.

So, imagine driving through Downtown on the 101 and it has been adapted as if it were the setting for a Star Wars sequel, that the urban motorist has been given consideration, in addition to pedestrians walking along the surface streets or bridges above.

JDRCRASH on July 22, 2008, at 02:33PM – #22

BUILD IT!!!!

BTW, does anybody know how tall those skyscrapers would be?

Benjamin Pezzillo on July 22, 2008, at 10:58PM – #23

It would be very interesting to see something like the living roof of the California Academy of Sciences building come about as a result of this project -- a prototype for an ecologically balancing cover for urban freeways.

A lighter, airier plant supporting frame might be more feasible than a park that supported public space and large amounts of landscaping while also trapping noxious exhaust.

Of course, people would probably then complain about the dirt and water from plants dirtying their cars...

Vaughan Davies on October 11, 2008, at 08:15AM – #24

Good News...the PARK 101 Steering Committee developed to investigate getting it designed and built met this week to kick-off the process. Led by Doug Failing Director of Caltrans District 7, and supported by the Urban Design Department of LA City Planning, the CRA, Council Districts, Downtown LA neighborhood council(DLANC), Project Restore, EDAW and others, the committee is to begin work.....come out and support this, and give us your ideas. Vaughan.

Urban Trojan on October 12, 2008, at 07:02PM – #25

Lets hope they go light of infrastructure and heavy on imagination.