Double Layered City High Line
Lee, Yo Soup Advisor : prof. Mark Linder, prof. Bruce Colman 3. 29. 2013 Syracuse University School of Architecture
Contents Abstract
5
History of the High Line
11
Existing Conditions
15
Issued Article
21
Claim & Guide Line
23
Analysis of Manhattan
25
Analysis of Blocks near by High Line
27
Analysis other Paths
29
Project Analysis
31
Program Analysis
37
Urban Green connection Lee, Yo Soup Thesis Preparation Abstract 2013 School of Architecture, Syracuse University Context / Topic : Highline Why many people are fanatical in the high line? In 2009, the High Line had completed the construction. The high Line, a new park atop an elevated rail structure on Manhattan's West side, is among the most innovative urban reclamation project in memory. The park has became a local treasure and an international icon, as well as in important generator of economic growth for Manhattan. (new york times) It has been providing eco friendly walk ways, resting places with benches, and upper level view from Mid town to Hudson River. However, after four years later the completion of the park, it is bringing new problems in lower Manhattan. According to the park's Web site, 3.7 million people visited the High Line in 2011, only half of them was New Yorkers. It is now overcrowding - not just of the High Line, but of the streets around it in lower Manhattan. And moreover, the real estate boom has its victims as well: many well-established businesses in West Chelsea have closed due to loss of neighborhood customer base or rent increases. (http://www.nycedc.com/) Now, the park is making another problem in Manhattan. Claim : z The project I am proposing, "Urban Green Connection," will analyze the effects of High Line and review the requirement of urban connections in the view point of sociological aspects such as population, programs, and density. Experience around the globe tells us that cities live by continuously evolving-conserving and building on memorable features while adapting to changing social and economic circumstances. However, the High Line has become a tourist-clogged catwalk and a catalyst for some of the most rapid gentrification in the city’s history. Context research : problems caused from crowding high line The problem is that linear parks don't really ever function as parks, a place to hang around and enjoy nature, they are often built (like the highline) in a place that does not lend itself to mature planet growth and the spaces themselves are not 'static' in short they become expensive, fancy, shrub lined, bike lanes. The Highline project is that it is a raised linear park, with all of the problems that separating pedestrian flow from the ground produced in large urbanism projects in the 50's and 60's. In addition, according to the New York City Economic Development Corporation published a study last year stating that before the High Line was re-developed, the residential properties were valued 8 percent below the overall median for Manhattan. Between 2003 and 2011, property values near the park increased 103 percent. (http://www.nycedc.com/) compact development Real urbanism seeks what is unique and original in any neighborhood, district, city, and region. It recognizes that planning for the redesign of existing places must address the origin and history of those places. It is a contextual and layered approach to creating a plan that reflects the economic and social underpinnings unique to that community in that place and time. (getting the real urbanism p9) "Compact" means "closely united or collected" or "concentrated in a small area." Compact development puts buildings and programs closer together so that they occupy less land than conventional development, both compactness and density are relative terms. (p21) However, in the project high line, the linear paths are consisted of paved pedestrian way, planting areas with divers planting, and sitting areas. It was not considered the impact of the buildings and pedestrian walkway of ground level. So in terms of sociological point of view, it does not have any reason to walk on. It has the reason in psychological aspect that people want to walk on spacious area or want to be relaxed in hectic urban condition.
city planning-Density The High Line was the forces shaping the zoning. The design group fighting to keeping new buildings as low as possible, and a group pushing for more affordable housing. There was also a smaller group pushing for the retention of manufacturing space, not just for the galleries, but also to support a continued manufacturing sector. (High Line p. 65) However, the reality was moving the development rights away from High Line sites was going to mean that some buildings were going to be taller. The recent residential project are constructing with high density nearby High Line comparing with exsisting conditions. Often when the city or a developers put out a rezoning plan, they propose big buildings, which they can then negotiate down with various constituencies. The developers wanted greater density and taller buildings. The community wanted shorter buildings. There wasn't much room to negotiate. (p66) Therefore, the High Line is being embedded between buildings and losing the function of connection in lower Manhattan. In addition, without controlling the density of the region, the sight of view is being narrow for pedestrians. method for evidence 3 : community Urban design models that advance density and diversity encourage development that makes available a range of lifestyle options - a variety of housing, employment, living, recreational, and cultural environment. The inspired design in High Line should not be reserved only for wealthy residents and upscale neighborhoods. It must meet the requirements of lower-income households and neighborhoods as well. Urban designs and development plans can promote the economic vitality spurs job creation in both existing and developing neighborhoods. a good plan can put new homes new homes near jobs and can make jobs more accessible by transit. such plans can provide for creational and cultural activities. (getting real about urbanism contextual design for cities p 30) significance of claim Throughout the urban planning, the creation of iconic places such as a landmark buildings, assemblies of inspiring architecture, and noteworthy green spaces has been vital to the formation of strong communities and rooted urban identities. Such places generate commerce and culture, and promote vital living environments. (getting real about urbanism contextual design for cities p 120) In this point of view of urban planning, the High Line was built the lack of economic and social assets.
1
2
4
3
5
Selected Annotated Bibliography Ronald F. Ferguson and William T. Dickens. "Urban Problems and Community Development". Brookings Institution Press. 1999. Bernard Zyscovich. "Getting real about Urbanism - Contextual Design for Cities". ULI-the Urban Land Institute. 2008. Kevin Archer. "The City-the basics" Routledge. 2012. M. nadarajah and Ann Tomoko yamamoto. "Urban Crisis". United Nations University Press. 2007. Michael B.Katz. "Why Don't American Cities Burn?". University of Pennsylvania Press. 2011. Joshua David and Robert Hammond. "High Line-The inside story of New York City's Park in the Sky". FSG Originals. 2011. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/22/opinion/in-the-shadows-of-the-high-line.html?smid=pl-share Annik La Farge. “On the High Line”. Thames & Hudson Inc. 2012 James Corner and Ricardo Scofidio. “Designing the High Line : Gansevoort Street to 30th Street.” Friends of the High Line. 2011
Figure credits Fig. 1. Joel Stemfeld, The Design Observer Group, 2000 Fig. 2. Iwan Baan, Museum of Fine Arts Boston, 2011 Fig. 3. Iwan Baan, The Design Observer Group, 2011 Fig. 4. Photographer unknown, The Design Observer Group, 1934 Fig. 5. Jeremiah Moss, New York Times, 2012
1
2
In 1847, the City of New York authorized street-level railroad tracks down Manhattan’s West Side. For safety, the railroads hired men the "West Side Cowboys" – to ride horses and wave flags in front of the trains. Yet so many accidents occurred between freight trains and other traffic that 10th Avenue became known as "Death Avenue". Train passing underneath the Bell Laboratories Building, seen from Washington Street in 1936.
After years of public debate about the hazard, in 1929 the city and the state of New York and the New York Central Railroad agreed on the West Side Improvement Project, which included the High Line. The 13-mile (21 km) project eliminated 105 street-level railroad crossings and added 32 acres (13 ha) to Riverside Park. The High Line opened to trains in 1934. It originally ran from 34th Street to St. John's Park Terminal, at Spring Street. It was designed to go through the center of blocks, rather than over the avenue, to avoid the drawbacks of elevated trains. It connected directly to factories and warehouses, allowing trains to roll right inside buildings.
Time Line 1847 - 1980 1847 The City of New York authorizes streetlevel railroad tracks down Manhattan’s West Side, already a bustling industrial waterfront. Soon, trains from Hudson River Rail Road and other lines begin to serve the factories and warehouses on the waterfront and along Tenth and Eleventh avenues.
1920s Death Avenue West Side Cowboys
1927 Plans an Elevated Line
1931 CONSTRUCTION BEGINS
1933 THE FIRST TRAIN RUNS ON THE HIGHLINE.
1934 THE HIGH LINE OFFICIALLY OPENS
1934 - 1960
delivering freight to the R.C. Williams & Company warehouse. At this time, the High Line is referred to simply as an elevated track.
the New York Times estimates its cost at $85M.
The High Line is fully operationall from West Thirty-fourth Street to St. John’s Park Terminal on Clarkson Street.
1980 THE LAST TRAIN
3
4
In the mid-1980s, a group of property owners with land under the line lobbied for the demolition of the entire structure. Peter Obletz, a Chelsea resident, activist, and railroad enthusiast, challenged the demolition efforts in court and tried to re-establish rail service on the Line.
The park extends from Gansevoort Street north to 30th Street where the elevated tracks turn west around the Hudson Yards development project to the Javits Convention Center on 34th Street. Open daily from 7 am to 10 pm, the park can be reached through nine entrances, four of which are accessible to people with disabilities.
Time Line 1980 - 2009 1980 THE LAST TRAIN
1983
1984 BUY THE LINE FROM CONRAIL FOR TEN DOLLARS
1991 DEMOLISHES THE SOUTHERNMOST FIVE BLOCKS OF THE HIGH LINE
1999
2003 DESIGN COMPETITION
2006 CONSTRUCTION BEGINS
2009 ON JUNE 8, HIGH LINE OPENS
High Line Costs: Section 1 and 2 Design and construction of opened area -
$152.3 million $86.2 million
Funding: $112.2 million from the City $20.3 million from the Federal Government $400,000 from the State Remaining funds will be raised privately by Friends of the High Line To date Friends of the High Line have raised $44 million
Composion of the Path
PIT
PLAINS
BRIDGE
MOUND
RAMP
FLYOVER
0% : 100%
40% : 60%
50% : 50%
55% : 45%
60% : 40%
100% : 0%
MOSSLAND
TALL MEADOW
WETLAND
WOODLAND THICKET
MIXED PERENINIAL MEADOW
YOUNG WOODLAND
Sources from Designing the High Line
Completion
Total Surface Area : 296,000 square feet Total Acreage : 6.7 Acres Total Length : 1.45 miles without Post Office spur 1.52 miles with Post Office spur columns : 475 Buildings traveled Through : 2 Buildings Traveled Over : 13 Buildings sidings : 9 City Blocks Crossed : 22 Publicly Owned Lots Traversed : 2 Privately Owned Lots Traversed : 31 Total street Crossing : 25 Maximum Width : 88 feet Minimum Width : 30 feet Rail Easement : 20 feet above the track Load Capacity : 4 fully loaded freight trains Heght : 0 feet to 29 feet above grade Materials : Steel Frame, reinforced Concrete Deck,. Gravel Ballast, Metal Handrails
Plan
Crowded Cat Walk Separation Upper Level & Ground Level
Urban Density
Regular Access
Private Private
Public
Extention
Extention
Private
Separation
Residential
Private
Private
Private Public
Public
GL
GL
GL
Residential Park Extention
Commercial
Residential Park Extention Commercial
Commercial
Plan
Result Costs: Section 1 and 2 - $152.3 million Design and construction of opened area - $86.2 million Funding: $112.2 million from the City $20.3 million from the Federal Government $400,000 from the State Remaining funds will be raised privately by Friends of the High Line To date Friends of the High Line have raised $44 million
+38.10’
Costs: ? Funding: ?
Private
Issues of High Line
Public
Private
Project Strategy GL
Separation Crowded Cat Walk
Private
Private Public
GL
Private
Private Public
House Gentrification
GL
Residential
Commercial
+38.10’ Residential
Separation Upper Level & Ground Level
Park Extention Commercial
Residential Park Extention Commercial
Regular Access
Urban Density
Extention
Extention
Current Condition
29th St
29th St
26th St
26th St 24th St
24th St
20th St
20th St
18th St
18th St 13th St
13th St
August 21, 2012
Disney World on the Hudson By JEREMIAH MOSS
WHEN the first segment of the High Line, the now-famous park built atop an old elevated railway on the West Side of Manhattan, opened in 2009, I experienced a moment of excitement. I had often wondered what it would be like to climb that graffiti-marked trestle with its wild urban meadow. Of course, I’d seen the architectural renderings and knew not to expect a wilderness. Still, the idea was enticing: a public park above the hubbub, a contemplative space where nature softens the city’s abrasiveness. Today it’s difficult to remember that initial feeling. The High Line has become a tourist-clogged catwalk and a catalyst for some of the most rapid gentrification in the city’s history. My skepticism took root during my first visit. The designers had scrubbed the graffiti and tamed the wildflowers. Guards admonished me when my foot moved too close to a weed. Was this a park or a museum? I felt like I was in the home of a neatnik with expensive tastes, afraid I would soil the furnishings. But the park was a hit. Fashion models strutted up and down. Shoppers from the meatpacking district boutiques commandeered the limited number of benches, surrounded by a phalanx of luxury clothing bags. I felt underdressed. That rarefied state didn’t last, though. As the High Line’s hype grew, the tourists came clamoring. Originally meant for running freight trains, the High Line now runs people, except where those people jam together like spawning salmon crammed in a bottleneck. The park is narrow, and there are few escape routes. I’ve gotten close to a panic attack, stuck in a pool of stagnant tourists at the park’s most congested points. Not yet four years old, the High Line has already become another stop on the must-see list for out-of-towners, another chapter in the story of New York City’s transformation into Disney World. According to the park’s Web site, 3.7 million people visited the High Line in 2011, only half of them New Yorkers. It’s this overcrowding — not just of the High Line, but of the streets around it — that’s beginning to turn the tide of sentiment. Recently, an anonymous local set off a small media storm by posting fliers around the park that read: “Attention High Line tourists. West Chelsea is not Times Square. It is not a tourist attraction.” A local newspaper talked to a 24-year-old who reported that young people who once met for dates at the park now say, “How about doing something that doesn’t involve the High Line?” But the problem isn’t just the crowds. It’s that the park, which will eventually snake through more than 20 blocks, is destroying neighborhoods as it grows. And it’s doing so by design. While the park began as a grass-roots endeavor — albeit a well-heeled one — it quickly became a tool for the Bloomberg administration’s creation of a new, upscale, corporatized stretch along the West Side. As socialites and celebrities championed the designer park during its early planning stages, whipping community support into a heady froth, the city rezoned West Chelsea for luxury development in 2005. The neighborhood has since been completely remade. Old buildings fell and mountain ranges of glassy towers with names like High Line 519 and HL23 started to swell — along with prices. The New York City Economic Development Corporation published a study last year stating that before the High Line was redeveloped, “surrounding residential properties were valued 8 percent below the overall median for Manhattan.” Between 2003 and 2011, property values near the park increased 103 percent. This is good news for the elite economy but not for many who have lived and worked in the area for decades. It’s easy to forget that until very recently, even with the proliferation of art galleries near the West Side Highway, West Chelsea was a mix of working-class residents and light-industrial businesses.
But the High Line is washing all that away. D&R Auto Parts saw its profits fall by more than 35 percent. Once-thriving restaurants like La Lunchonette and Hector’s diner, a local anchor since 1949, have lost their customer base. Hardest hit have been the multigenerational businesses of “gasoline alley.” Mostly auto-related establishments that don’t fit into Michael R. Bloomberg’s luxury city vision, several vanished in mere months, like species in a meteoric mass extinction. Bear Auto Shop was out after decades; the Olympia parking garage, after 35 years, closed when its rent reportedly quintupled. Brownfeld Auto, on West 29th Street near 10th Avenue, lost its lease after nearly a century. Today it’s another hole in the ground. Its third-generation owner, Alan Brownfeld, blamed the High Line for taking away the thriving business he’d inherited from his grandfather. “It’s for the city’s glamorous people,” he said. Mr. Brownfeld is right, for now. But just as the High Line’s early, trendy denizens gave way to touristic hordes, Chelsea’s haute couture moment may be fleeting. As big a brand as Stella McCartney is, she can’t compete with global chains like Sephora, which are muscling into the area’s commercial space. Within a few years, the ecosystem disrupted by the High Line will find a new equilibrium. The aquarium-like high rises will be for the elite, along with a few exclusive locales like the Standard Hotel. But the new locals will rarely be found at street level, where chain stores and tourist-friendly restaurants will cater to the crowds of passers-by and passersthrough. Gone entirely will be regular New Yorkers, the people who used to call the neighborhood home. But then the High Line was never really about them. Jeremiah Moss is the pen name of the author of the blog Vanishing New York.
POLITIC 1925 Manhattan Borough President Julius Miller outlines a plan for a doubledecked elevated highway, running from 72nd Street to Canal Street, for rail and vehicular graffic. It would be paid for by the New York Central Railroad in return for adjusted easements and land rights. The New York Times begins to refer to these grade-crossing elimination plans as “the west side improvement.” It later becomes the railroad’s and the city’s official name for the project.
1933 THE FIRST TRAIN RUNS ON THE HIGHLINE. The first train runs on the High Line, delivering freight to the R.C Williams & Company warehouse. Officials toast the train’s arrival and listen to a speech by New York Central Railroad presidnet F.E. Williamson: “ This simple ecent today may well mark a transformation of the West Side that will affect its development for the better for decades to come.”
1870s Community anger grows because of noise, smoke, and danger from trains. To pacify residents, crossing guards are stationed at all intersections 24 hours a day.
1868
1847
1869
The City of New York authorizes streetlevel railroad tracks down Manhattan’s West Side, already a bustling industrial waterfront. Soon, trains from Hudson River Rail Road and other lines begin to serve the factories and warehouses on the waterfront and along Tenth and Eleventh avenues.
Cornelius Vaderbilt consolidates his railroad holdings, including the Hudson River Railroad, to form the New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company.
1928
1926
1896 The original St. John’s Park Terminal is built at Laight and varick Streets to receive Hudson River Railroad freight.
New York State extends the railroad’s franchise from 50 to 500 years.
1908
1914 the New York Central Railroad and the City agree to construct an elevated rail corridor from 57thStreet to Canal Street, and to cover the tracks north of 57th Street to Inwood, creating a platform for Riverside Park.
Congestion of rail, ship, and street traffic strangles commercial activity on the West Side. 500 people protest against the dagerous conditions of “Death Avenue,” the name used for the parts of 12th, 11th, and 10th Avenues where the trains run at grade. Citizens’ groups form to rally around the cause, including the Social Reform Club’s Committee of 50, which later becomes the League to End zDeath Avenue.
1924 Death Avenue West side Cowboys
1911 At the Municipal Art Society’s city Plan Exhibit, Calvin Tompkins, City Commissioner of Docks, unveils his plan for an elevated freight line from 72nd Street to St. John’s ParkTerminal, as well as a freight terminal with float bridges at 30th Street. West Street would become a three-tiered roadway with trucks, trains and cars divided by level.
ECONOMY
The New York City Grade Crossing Elimination Act becomes law, creating the legal framework for the West Side Improvement. The West Side Engineering Committee presents a plan to the New York City Board of Estimate, which includes the elevation of the railroad’s tracks from Spring to 30th Street. Hearings on the paln are held before the transit Commission. the Board of Estimate approves Borough President Miller’s elevated auto highway.
1917 Implementation of the grade-crossing elimination plan is delayed by the United States’ involvement in World War I
The New York City Transit Commission orders that all grade crossing must be removed between Spuyten Duyvil, at Manhattan’s northern tip, and 60th Street.
Governor Al Smith signs an amendment to the New York State constitution into law, alloowing $300 million in bonds to be issued to fund grade-crossing elimination. A companion bill is passed to provide $50 million for grade-crossing elimination in New York City. Borough president Miller revises his plan, separatingthe elevated motorway from the railway. Mayor James J.Walker creates the West Side Engineering Committee to work with the railroad to develop a plan to remove rails from West Side strees. among the palns preposed to him is a scheme by M.H. Wingler consolidating airplane, freight, and ship commervce into one building.
1927 Plans an Elevated Line Governor Smith signs a bill to speed up grade-crossing elimination in New York City. The City and the railroad reach a preliminary agreement for the exchange of real estate and easements that will allow the removal of freight lines from New York City’s streets. The railroad proposes the “erection of an elevated line from... Canal Street, north to the Thrtieth Street yard...”
1931 CONSTRUCTION BEGINS Construction of the new St. John’s Park Terminal begins. It is the southernmost part of the West Side Improvement and is expected to cost $12 million. Ther terminal is designed to accept 190 rail cars from the High Line directly into its second story. Its planned 3.6 million 1929 square feet of space covers four blocks, bounded by Clarkson, Washington, The Transit Commission approves an combined with the new industrial and order for 93 New York Central gradecrossing on the West Side, pending final warehouse space in the Starrett-Lehigh Building (1931) and the Port Authority’s agreements between the City and the Union Inland Terminal No.1 (1932), railroad. Construction begins on Julius is expected to add nine million square Miller’s elevated motorway. The Board feet of terminal space to the West Sideof Estimate ratifies the West Side plan, and contracts between the City and the but only three of the 12 planned stories railroad are signed. The paln is approved of the St. John’s Park Terminal are ever by the Interstate Commerce Commission, built. By new, the railroad has purchased 95 percent of the land required for its new including a “double track viaduct north right-of-way in 30 separate transactions. from Spring Street to Thirtieth Street.” The initial construction contract is signed, Less than a dozen have required and the first spikes are removed from the condemnation. “Death Avenue” tracks by Mayor Walker, “to be gold-plated end to a forty-year controversy between the city andthe railroad.”
1934 THE HIGH LINE OFFICIALLY OPENS The High Line officially opens on June 28. The New York Times estimates its cost at $85 million. Officials herald it as “one of the greatest public improvements in the history of New York.” Railroad president F.E. williamson calls it an example of the progress possible from “whole hearted cooperation between public authorities and private interests.”
Tran
1968 Penn Central takes over the New York Central Railroad.
1983 1980
Conrail publishes a “notice of insufficient revenues” with regard to the High Line. Congress passes the National Trails System Act, allowing out of use rail lines to the “rail-banked”-used as pedestrian or bike trails while held for future transportatiion needs. Because a rail-banked corridor is not considered abandoned, it can be sold, leased or donated to a trail manager without reverting to adjacent landoweners.
THE LAST TRAIN The last train runs down the High Line carrying three boxcars of frozen turkeys.
1961 A plan to demilish the southern section ot the High Line is announced, in association with the pplanned redevelopment of 14 blocks along Hudson Street in the West Village.
1934-1960 The High Line is fully operational. A decline in rail traffic causes the New York Central Railroad to sell St. John’s park Terminal and to halt service on the southernmost section of the HighLine, south of Bank Street.
1937 The second phase of the West Side Improvement opens-including the Henry Hudson parkway and an underground rail cut from 30th Street to 60th Street. The earlier sections of the Improvement were spearheaded by Governor Smith, but this northern section was largely planned and financed by Robert Moses, head of the State Parks Commission.
nsportation
1963 The City demolishes the High Line south of Bank Street. As a result of advocacy by author/urban theorist Jane Jacobs and the Committee to save the West Village, the Department of City Planning drops plans for a 14-block urban renewal project on land formerly occupied by the rail viaduct. Jacobs’s group proposes a low-rise 475-unit devellopment in its place.
1976 West Village Houses, the affordable lowrise residences chapioned by jane Jacobs and the Committee to sace the West Village, are completed, though their aesthetic merits are hotly debated. The federal government forms Consolidated Rail Corporation, or Conrail, form the remains of six rail carriers in the Northeast and Midwest, includding Penn Central. The High Line becomes Conrail’s property
1981 The Northeast Rail Services Act creates a three-phase process for Conrail to divest itself of unprofitable freight lines: 1. Declare it cannot make a profit on the Line. 2. file a Notice of Intent to abandon and wait 90 days for a purchaser who wants to use the line for rail service, with preference given to government agencies seeking to adopt the line for any public purpose. 3. go through a 120-day waiting period in which the line can be sold to any buyer, regardless of intention, for no less than 75 percent of its value.
2003 DESIGN COMPETITION
1984
2000
BUY THE LINE FROM CONRAIL FOR TEN DOLLARS Amtrak begins negotiating to acquire the line’s easement north of 34th Street. When the deal and resulting construction is ultimately completed in the early 1990s it will allow Amtrak to use the former freight line for passenger service and consolidate its operations at penn station. South of the 34th Street, the line remains in Conrail’s and /or Oblets’s control.
FHL submits a proposal for a planning study to the Design Trust for public Space. The Design Trust awards fellowships to two architects, Casey Jones and keller Eastering, to undertake two separate investigations of the factors involved in reusing the High Line as a public park. Jones’ project results in this publication. The Save Gansevoort Market community group forms to preserve the unique character of the meat packing district, which includes part of the High Line.
1991 DEMOLISHES THE SOUTHERNMOST FIVE BLOCKS OF THE HIGH LINE Rockrose Developemnt Corporation demolishes the southernmost to Gansevoort Street. This is the result of negotiation with conrail, in which Rockrose agreed to pay for the demolition and the property value of the easeemnt. But CPO’s request to the ICC for adverse abandonment of the entire line, which would require the railroad to pay for demolition, is rebuffed.
1986 The City files papers with ICC opposing the acquistion of the High Line by Obletz. The petition, supported by an affidavit from Mayor Koch, claims that an active rail line will conflic with the City’s plans for West Side redevelopment.
1987 The ICC reverses its earlier decision: it now believes that Obletz and his foundationdo not have the resources to run a railroad. The sale agreement is nullified.
1992 The ICC allows the High Line to be declared adversely abandoned, but only if CPO can meet a number of conditions ensuring the complete financing and insurance of the line’s demolition. Conrail’s contribution obligation is capped at $7 million. CPO would have to prove it could cover all addtional costs and indemnify the railroad against any claims related to abandonment or demolition.
Residential
2006 CONSTRUCTION BEGINS
2009 ON JUNE 8, HIGH LINE OPENS
Issue 1- Gentrification
Context 1- Real Estate
Population / Real Estate Market in Lower Manhattan
Real Estate Customer in Lower Manhattan
BUILDING ARCHITECT
WKH KLJKOLQH EXLOGLQJ K SHWHU KHQVFKLHQ D[HO V KHGPDQ
PRUULV DGOPL
Z WK VWUHHW
ADDRESS
DATE
BLOCK/LOT
has become home to luxury apartments, upscale retail, bars and bistros, resident are looking to work where they live. The changing character of the neighborhood is especially noticeable in The High Line Building, where a 10-story glass tower is being constructed on top of a former three-story meatpacking plant. The original structure, clad in beige brick, was built for New York Central Railroad and sits among the High Line. It receives its namesake from the fact that the rail actually runs 103 feet through the building. The completed project is seeking a LEED rating, or Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, meaning that it hopes to meet a set of standards for environmentally sustainable design, which include lighting, plumbing and insulation.
Condition 1
Condition 1 BUILDING ARCHITECT
QDELVFR FRPSOH[ ADDRESS Z WK WK VWUHHW QLQWK DYHQXH URPH\Q VWHYHU DATE BLOCK/LOT DOEHUW J ]LPPHUPDQ MDPHV WRUUDQFH ORXLV ZLUVFKLQJ MU
of various media and technology companies was originally the home of the National Biscuit Company (Nabisco), which invented the Oreo cookie here in 1912. Nabisco built and acquired the series of buildings in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. It was the largest baking center in the world at the time and had a visitors’ gallery from which the entire baking operation could be seen. The main complex, which stretches from 9th to 11th avenues along 15th and 16th streets, is connected by pedestrian bridges. Railroad tracks ran from the Hudson River docks through the cookies and crackers. In the 1930s, straight-line ovens began replacing the old vertical ovens, requiring an unbroken area on a single level which surpassed the available space in the Chelsea bakeries. By 1959 Nabisco had relocated to New Jersey and sold the complex. In the 1990s, a syndicate of investors bought and revived the principal buildings. The development of Chelsea Market, a collection of restaurants, cafes, gourmet grocers, wholesale markets, and other epicurean delights, helped turn the neighborhood into a fashionable part of the displays the building’s lost industrial charac-
Condition 3
Condition 4
ter, with bare brick walls, century-old windows, cast-iron pipes and columns, old signage, rough-
Overal Introduction This project involves the construction of a tower whose lower levels are composed of commercial, cultural, and community spaces and whose upper floors, from the fifth to 27th, are officetels, which are residences that could also be used as offices during the day.
Land Use Strategy
Giving a unique perspective on the tall building, Boutique Monaco pushes beyond the extruded glass box, creating a dynamic and varied massing with its 15 voids distributed throughout its overall “U”-shaped form.
To ensure the maximum building footprint ratio (40%) as well as optimal natural light conditions (southern exposure),
Footprint Ratio 40%
Floor Area Ratio 900%
Exposure Surfaces
Design Process
a "U"-shaped plan is extruded into a 27-story tower consistent with the Domino Matrix to reach a height of 100 meters (328ft), the maximum height allowed by law. If this plan with a maximum footprint ratio had been simply repeated vertically, the floor space would have exceeded the legally allowed amount by approximately 10%. To reduce this mass then, missing matrices are introduced to meet maximum floor area ratio throughout the building, with a pattern of carved out space.
In utilizing these voids to introduce gardens throughout the tower, the architects have provided a rich living experience for the tower’s residents, and a facility which is all-too-often a rarity for high-rise living—access to private, open green space. These gardens lend an added quality critical to the balance of urban life.
Full Volume
Missing Space
Commercial Structure
Connection
Gardens
Mass These 15 missing spaces allow the building to gain more exterior surfaces and corners for enhanced lighting and viewing conditions. The spaces created by missing matrices are landscaped with trees that are visible from the inside and outside of the building. Inside the tower, a total of 49 different types of units, 172 units in total, are arranged heterogeneously to reflect/exploit rich spatial conditions. For example, in the area created by the 15 missing matrices, there are 40 units with bridges that divide public (living/dining area) and private spaces (bedroom) within individual units, along with 22 units with gardens. In addition, protruding spiral staircases are planned within the missing matrices, further adding to the heterogeneousness of the interior.
The careful consideration and varying design of the individual residential units goes well beyond the typical extrusion of an efficient floor plate, avoiding a homogenizing effect and creating a fantastic variety of units with differing spatial configurations that relate to their context within the overall building form. The Boutique Monaco is, in many ways, light years ahead of the average, commercial high-rise tower.
Commerce
Residence
South Elevation
Basement Parking
South Bridge Units
Grarden Units
East Elevation West Elevation
5th Plan
9th Plan
13th Plan
17th Plan
21st Plan
25th Plan
6th Plan
10th Plan
14th Plan
18th Plan
22nd Plan
26th Plan
7th Plan
11th Plan
15th Plan
19th Plan
23rd Plan
27th Plan
8th Plan
12th Plan
16th Plan
20th Plan
24th Plan
Solidam
BUILDING ARCHITECT
WKH KLJKOLQH EXLOGLQJ K SHWHU KHQVFKLHQ D[HO V KHGPDQ
PRUULV DGOPL
Z WK VWUHHW
ADDRESS
DATE
BLOCK/LOT
has become home to luxury apartments, upscale retail, bars and bistros, resident are looking to work where they live. The changing character of the neighborhood is especially noticeable in The High Line Building, where a 10-story glass tower is being constructed on top of a former three-story meatpacking plant. The original structure, clad in beige brick, was built for New York Central Railroad and sits among the High Line. It receives its namesake from the fact that the rail actually runs 103 feet through the building. The completed project is seeking a LEED rating, or Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, meaning that it hopes to meet a set of standards for environmentally sustainable design, which include lighting, plumbing and insulation.
Condition 1
Condition 1 BUILDING ARCHITECT
QDELVFR FRPSOH[ ADDRESS Z WK WK VWUHHW QLQWK DYHQXH URPH\Q VWHYHU DATE BLOCK/LOT DOEHUW J ]LPPHUPDQ MDPHV WRUUDQFH ORXLV ZLUVFKLQJ MU
of various media and technology companies was originally the home of the National Biscuit Company (Nabisco), which invented the Oreo cookie here in 1912. Nabisco built and acquired the series of buildings in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. It was the largest baking center in the world at the time and had a visitors’ gallery from which the entire baking operation could be seen. The main complex, which stretches from 9th to 11th avenues along 15th and 16th streets, is connected by pedestrian bridges. Railroad tracks ran from the Hudson River docks through the cookies and crackers. In the 1930s, straight-line ovens began replacing the old vertical ovens, requiring an unbroken area on a single level which surpassed the available space in the Chelsea bakeries. By 1959 Nabisco had relocated to New Jersey and sold the complex. In the 1990s, a syndicate of investors bought and revived the principal buildings. The development of Chelsea Market, a collection of restaurants, cafes, gourmet grocers, wholesale markets, and other epicurean delights, helped turn the neighborhood into a fashionable part of the displays the building’s lost industrial charac-
Condition 3
Condition 4
ter, with bare brick walls, century-old windows, cast-iron pipes and columns, old signage, rough-
Issue 2- Pass & Connectiton
Context 1- Connections
High-Line Official Plan for Upper Level
Demolition Part
- Benefits of preservation and reuse outweigh the benefits of demolition - Design for reuse should focus on pedestrians rather than rail, light rail, or bicyclists. - Commercial potential exists in spaces alongside the High Line, and limited commercial activity offers potential benefits to the High Line, but the High Line must not become a primarily commercial enterprise. - Reuse as public open space offers the greatest number of benefits to the largest constituency.
Transit Reuse
- This study determined that transportation systems involving freight or passenger trains, subway trains, light-rail, or motorized, rubber-wheeled vehicles do not currently constitute the most beneficial reuse scenario for the High Line. Light rail might be benefical to the community at a future date, and a transit system using rubber-tired vehicleswith electric motors offers many of light-rail’s potential future benefits at a lower cost, but there are not currently enough destinations along the line to merit the investment in either system. Given the potential for density increases along the corridor, designs for the High Line’s reuse should consider that light-rail or rubber -wheeled transit may be desirable.
Commercial Reuse
- Conceiving of the High Line as a linear mall, with a publicly accessible transportation corridor at the center, granked by a series of retail uses along its length, might appeal to economic development interests and provide a revenue stream to support the publoc space, but it would compromise many of the line’s most appealing features its contemplative quality, its ability to convey its history of transportation use, and its sense of a place apart from the city as we commonly experience it. It would be unappealing to the community, which values open-space that is not over-commercialized.
Open Space
- Open space reuse is consistent whth rail-banking. the most viable and mos cost-effective plan for acquiring the easement. open space reuse opens up the possibility of numerous related initiatives that could enhance the far West Side as it grows in upcoming decades. It would complement any of the redevelopemnt proposals at the 30th street rail yards. It would create the opportunity to organize growth on the far West Side around public open space and sustainable transportation. It would encourage arts-related uses, reinforcing the neighborhoods’ reputation as a cultureal hub.
Sources from Reclaiming the High Line
High Line
Path Toronto Under Ground Connection
Roppongi Hills Connection Artelligent City
Section Analysis - High Line
29th Street
28th Street
26th Street
20th Street
29th Street
Site Layers
Building Volums
Elements
Sites 30th Street
29th Street 28th Street
26th Street 25th Street
24th Street
23th Street
22th Street
21th Street 20th Street 19th Street 18th Street 17th Street 16th Street
15th Street
14th Street
Layer 1 : Blocks Ground Level Layer 2 : Upper Level Path
Green Space Vacant Space Buildings Traveled Through
13th Street
12th Street Gansevoort Street
Site Public transportation
Access Location
Land use
1 E
Woodland Flyover
C
Lawn / Seating Steps Meadow
SECTION 2
Curve / Wildflower Fileds Cut-out
Planting Concept
1
Sundeck / Preserve Plaza / Overlook Woodland Plaza / Overlook
SECTION 1
Grassland
Thicket
Chelsea Historic District
L
Primary Access Location
Gansevoort Market Historic District
1
2
3
A
C
E 1&2 Family Residential
Secondary Access Location
Multi-family Residential
Historic Area
Mixed Use Open Space & outer recreation Commercial Institutions Industrial Parking Transportation / Utilities Vacant Lots
Programs Access (Existying)
Residential
Park
Special program Square
Ground Level
Program
Green Space
Bike Combination Upper Level
Bike Combination Ground Level
Ground Level Vertical Park
Bus & Infra
Basic Form of Project 30th
Grouond Shape
Wall Separation
29th
28th
27th
26th
25th
24th
23th
22th
21th
20th
19th
18th
17th
13th
Master Plan
Ground Pieces 30th
29th
28th
27th
26th
25th
24th
23th
22th
21th
20th
19th
18th
17th
15th
Volume Plan
Wall
Volume
Sociological Changes
High Line
High Line Official plan for Upper Level
Total Surface Area : 296,000 square feet Total Acreage : 6.7 Acres Total Length : 1.45 miles without Post Office spur 1.52 miles with Post Office spur - Benefits of preservation and reuse outweigh the benefits of demolition
columns : 475 Buildings traveled Through : 2 Buildings Traveled Over : 13 Buildings sidings : 9 City Blocks Crossed : 22 Publicly Owned Lots Traversed : 2 Privately Owned Lots Traversed : 31 Total street Crossing : 25 Maximum Width : 88 feet Minimum Width : 30 feet Rail Easement : 20 feet above the track Load Capacity : 4 fully loaded freight trains Heght : 0 feet to 29 feet above grade Materials : Steel Frame, reinforced Concrete Deck,. Gravel Ballast, Metal Handrails
- This study determined that transportation systems involving freight or passenger trains, subway trains, light-rail, or motorized, rubber-wheeled vehicles do not currently constitute the most beneficial reuse scenario for the High Line. Light rail might be benefical to the community at a future date, and a transit system using rubber-tired vehicleswith electric motors offers many of light-rail’s potential future benefits at a lower cost, but there are not currently enough destinations along the line to merit the investment in either system. Given the potential for density increases along the corridor, designs for the High Line’s reuse should consider that light-rail or rubber -wheeled transit may be desirable.
- Design for reuse should focus on pedestrians rather than rail, light rail, or bicyclists. - Commercial potential exists in spaces alongside the High Line, and limited commercial activity offers potential benefits to the High Line, but the High Line must not become a primarily commercial enterprise. - Reuse as public open space offers the greatest number of benefits to the largest constituency.
1. Population increased
2. Temporal Staying
3. Keep Lower Price Leasing
Demolition Part
Transit Reuse
- Open space reuse is consistent whth rail-banking. the most viable and mos cost-effective plan for acquiring the easement. open space reuse opens up the possibility of numerous related initiatives that could enhance the far West Side as it grows in upcoming decades. It would complement any of the redevelopemnt proposals at the 30th street rail yards. It would create the opportunity to organize growth on the far West Side around public open space and sustainable transportation. It would encourage arts-related uses, reinforcing the neighborhoods’ reputation as a cultureal hub.
- Conceiving of the High Line as a linear mall, with a publicly accessible transportation corridor at the center, granked by a series of retail uses along its length, might appeal to economic development interests and provide a revenue stream to support the publoc space, but it would compromise many of the line’s most appealing features its contemplative quality, its ability to convey its history of transportation use, and its sense of a place apart from the city as we commonly experience it. It would be unappealing to the community, which values open-space that is not over-commercialized.
4. Diverse Unit Demand
Open Space
Commercial Reuse
5. Program change
Analysis of Chealsae & High Line
Building Volums
Land use
Public transportation
Ground Level of Green Space
High Line Planting Concept
Access Location
Project Site
30th Street Curve / Wildflower Fileds Cut-out
30th Street
1
28th Street
C
E
SECTION 2
26th Street 25th Street
1
23th Street
28th Street
26th Street 25th Street
24th Street
Lawn / Seating Steps Meadow
24th Street
29th Street
Woodland Flyover
29th Street
23th Street
22th Street
Chelsea Historic District
Thicket
22th Street
21th Street
21th Street 20th Street
20th Street
SECTION 1
17th Street 16th Street
L
15th Street 1&2 Family Residential Multi-family Residential
1
2
3
Mixed Use Open Space & outer recreation
A
C
E
Green Space
12th Street
Institutions Industrial
Vacant Space
Parking
Buildings Traveled Through
Transportation / Utilities
17th Street 16th Street
15th Street
Primary Access Location
Vacant Lots
Gansevoort Market Historic District
14th Street
13th Street
Secondary Access Location 12th Street
Historic Area
Plaza / Overlook
Commercial
13th Street
18th Street
Woodland
14th Street
19th Street
Grassland
18th Street
Sundeck / Preserve Plaza / Overlook
19th Street
Gansevoort Street
Gansevoort Street
History of High Line
1
2
In 1847, the City of New York authorized street-level railroad tracks down Manhattan’s West Side. For safety, the railroads hired men the "West Side Cowboys" – to ride horses and accidents occurred between freight trains known as "Death Avenue". Train passing underneath the Bell Laboratories Building, seen from Washington Street in 1936.
After years of public debate about the hazard, in 1929 the city and the state of New York and the New York Central Railroad agreed on the West Side Improvement Project, which included the High Line. The 13-mile (21 km) project eliminated 105 street-level railroad crossings and added 32 acres (13 ha) to Riverside Park. The High Line opened to trains in 1934. It originally ran from 34th Street to St. John's Park Terminal, at Spring Street. It was designed to go through the center of blocks, rather than over the avenue, to avoid the drawbacks of elevated trains. It connected directly to factories and warehouses, allowing trains to roll right inside buildings.
1847
1920s Death Avenue West Side Cowboys
4
In the mid-1980s, a group of property owners with land under the line lobbied for the demolition of the entire structure. Peter Obletz, a Chelsea resident, activist, and railroad and tried to re-establish rail service on the Line.
The park extends from Gansevoort Street north to 30th Street where the elevated tracks turn west around the Hudson Yards development project to the Javits Convention Center on 34th Street. Open daily from 7 am to 10 pm, the park can be reached through nine entrances, four of which are accessible to people with disabilities.
Time Line 1980 - 2009
Time Line 1847 - 1980 The City of New York authorizes streetlevel railroad tracks down Manhattan’s West Side, already a bustling industrial waterfront. Soon, trains from Hudson River Rail Road and other lines begin to serve the factories and warehouses on the waterfront and along Tenth and Eleventh avenues.
3
1927 Plans an Elevated Line
1931 CONSTRUCTION BEGINS
1933 THE FIRST TRAIN RUNS ON THE HIGHLINE.
1934 THE HIGH LINE OFFICIALLY OPENS
1934 - 1960
delivering freight to the R.C. Williams & Company warehouse. At this time, the High Line is referred to simply as an elevated track.
the New York Times estimates its cost at $85M.
The High Line is fully operationall from West Thirty-fourth Street to St. John’s Park Terminal on Clarkson Street.
1980 THE LAST TRAIN
1980 THE LAST TRAIN
1983
1984 BUY THE LINE FROM CONRAIL FOR TEN DOLLARS
1991 DEMOLISHES THE SOUTHERNMOST FIVE BLOCKS OF THE HIGH LINE
1999
2003 DESIGN COMPETITION
2006 CONSTRUCTION BEGINS
2009 ON JUNE 8, HIGH LINE OPENS
Case Study
Program Case Study
Case Study 1 - Urban Connections High Line
z Gw Gi Gz TG G G G G G G
z|u
TGslkG G G TGslkG G TGslkG G TG G G G G G G TG G G G G G G G G
Path Toronto Under Ground Connection
~pmpGov{zwv{
i|zGhyyp}hsGkpzwsh hjGjvu}ly{ly spno{lk hk}ly{pzltlu{z
zols{lyGspno{pun
ltlynluj Gwovul wv~lyGnypk
Roppongi Hills Connection Artelligent City Solar Bus Station / Cell Phone Recharger
Container Space
Basement Parking
Commerce
Residence
Case Study 2 - Multi Layered Residential
Bridges
Upper Level Open Space
Full Volume
Missing Space
Commercial Structure
Connection
Urban Open Space
Bicycle Station
LED Bike Path - Ground Level
Small Amphitheater
Gardens
Case Study 3
Ground LevelStragegy
Bike Lane Type
Bike Lane Plan in Broadway
Bike - Transportation System City Bike in New York City Bike
City Bike Route Map
City Bike Station
47-60 37-45 26-35
Bike Lane Type
Bike Lane Plan in Broadway
Site
Resions of Manhattan
Land Use of Manhattan
Special Purpose District
The Connection of Manhattan
Inwood
Fort George Hudson Heights
Washington Heights
Sugar Hill
Hamilton Heights
Manhattan Ville Harlem
East Harlem
Morningside Heights
Spanish Harlem
Manhattan Valley
Carnegie Hill
Upper Central Westside Park
Yorkville Upper Eastside
Lincoln Square Clinton
Lenox Hill Midtown Turtle Bay
Theater District
Hell’s Garment Kitchen District
Murray Hill Rose Hill
Kips Bay
Chelsea Inwood Inwood
Meat Packing District
west Village
Greenwich East Village Village NOHO SOHO
Alphabet City
Major Zoning
Nolita Bowery Lower Eastside Chinatown
Tribeca
Commercial Residential
Two Bridges
Park
Civic CTR Battery Park City
Industrial Financial District
1&2 Family Residential Multi-family Residential Mixed Use Open Space & outer recreation Commercial Institutions Industrial Parking Transportation / Utilities Vacant Lots
Special purpose district
1. Columbus Circle
1. Columbus Circle
Broadway 1
Broadway 2
Green Connection of Manhattan
Urban Open Space in Manhattan
Density Comparison
Annual Visitors : Whole Length : Programs : DayTime / Night Time :
2. Briant Park
2. 47th Street Time Square
3. Medison Square Park
3. 33rd Street
4. Union Square
4. 24th Street
5. City Hall Park
5. 17th Street
6. Battery Park
6. 10th Street Special purpose district
Resions of Manhattan
Land Use of Manhattan
Simplified Landuse Plan of Manhattan
Urban Open Space in Manhattan
Special Purpose District
City Bike Route Map
Broadway
City Bike Station
Inwood
Fort George Hudson Heights
Washington Heights
Sugar Hill
Hamilton Heights
Manhattan Ville Harlem
East Harlem
Morningside Heights
Spanish Harlem
Manhattan Valley
Carnegie Hill
Upper Central Westside Park
Yorkville Upper Eastside
Lincoln Square Clinton
Lenox Hill Midtown Turtle Bay
Theater District
Hell’s Garment Kitchen District
47-60 37-45 26-35
Murray Hill Rose Hill
Kips Bay
Chelsea Inwood Inwood
Meat Packing District
west Village
Greenwich East Village Village NOHO SOHO
Alphabet City
Nolita Bowery Lower Eastside
Chinatown
Tribeca
Two Bridges Civic CTR
Battery Park City
Major Zoning
Financial District
1&2 Family Residential Multi-family Residential
Commercial
Mixed Use Open Space & outer recreation
Special purpose district
Residential
Commercial Institutions Industrial
Park
Parking
Industrial
Transportation / Utilities Vacant Lots
Broadway Manhattan Bus Map
Special Purpose District / Subway Connection
Urban Open Space in Manhattan
1. Columbus Circle
Urban Open Space & Bike Lane Broadway Green Connection of Manhattan Density Comparison
Annual Visitors : 2. Briant Park
Whole Length : Programs : DayTime / Night Time :
3. Medison Square Park
4. Union Square
5. City Hall Park
6. Battery Park
Special purpose district
Street view on the High Line East West
30th
View on the High Line Ground Level
30th
29th
29th
28th
28th
27th
27th
26th
26th
25th
25th
24th
24th
23th
23th
22th
22th
21th
21th
20th
20th
19th
19th
18th
18th
17th
17th
16th
16th
15th
15th
14th
14th
13th
13th
12th
12th
Gansvoort svoort St.
Gansvoort St.
Low Line
Existing Condition
Upper Layer Pedestrian Walk way Upper Level Bike Path
Lower Layer Ground Level Bike Path
High Line Pedestrian Walk way (GL + 38’)
Ground Level Bike Path (Depth : 5ft)
Ground Level Resting Area
Bike Lane - Ground Level Type 1
27th St.
Type 2
28th St.
Type 3
29th St.
27th St.
26th St.
23rd St.
25th St.
22nd St.
20th St.
24nd St. 21st St. 19th St. 18th St. 17th St. 16th St.
12th St.
Bike Lane - Upper Level
Pedestrian Walk Connection Connect to Open Space
27th St.
28th St.
29th St.
30th St.
Ramp Up to Upper Level 29th Street
Upper Level Bike Lane Connect to Housing
10th Av.
Vertical Connection
Residential / Amphitheater
Residential / Open Space
Upper Level Bike Connection Pedestrian Walk Connection Connect to Amphitheater
Upper Level Connection 28th Street
22th St.
21th St.
20th St.
19th St.
10th Av.
Vertical Connection Ramp Down to Street Level 27th Street
Residential / Amphitheater Upper Level Bike Connection
Residential / Open Space
12th
15th
Housing 2 Luggage Center 29th
Amphitheater 1 28th
Amphitheater 2 27th
26th
Vertical Park 1
25th
24th
Market Vertical Park 2
23rd
Vertical Park 3
22nd
21st
20th
Open Library Amphitheater 3 19th
Housing 1 18th
17th
16th
15th
14th
13th
12th
High Lene
Ground Level
17th
19th
Housing 1 Ground Level
Upper Level
Housing 2
Ground Level
Upper Level
Housing Units
Type
A
B
A-1
B-1
B-2
C
21st
Amphitheater 1
Ground Level
Upper Level
Ground Level
Upper Level
Ground Level
Upper Level
Open Space
Amphitheater 2
22nd
23rd
Vertical Park 1
Ground Level
Upper Level
Vertical Park 2 / Market
Ground Level
Upper Level
Ground Level
Upper Level
Vertical Park 3
25th
27th
Open Library
Luggage Keeping
28th
29th
Bike Lack 1
Bike Lack 2
30th
Bike Line & Programs
12
13
Ground Level Bike Lane Start
18
Upper Level Bike Lane down
19
Housing
20
Housing
22
Amphitheater 3 Open Library Bike Ramp down
23
Bike Ramp up
24
Vertical Park 3 Market
27
Vertical Park 2
28
Vertical Park Bike Ramp Down
29
Housing Amphitheater 1
30
Housing Open Space Bike Ramp Up
Layer 1 : Upper Level Pedestrian Walk Way Bike Lane Connections to Programs
17th
18th
19th
20th
21st
22nd
23rd
24th
25th
26th
27th
28th
29th
16th 15th
Layer 2 : Ground Level 14th
Bike Lane Passthrough all Blocks 13th 12th
Layer 3 : Urban Context
12th
15th
17th
19th
21st
22nd
23rd
25th
27th
28th
29th
30th
Housing Luggage keeping