Under the Elevated

in partnership withA project of theReclaiming Space,
Connecting
Communities

Reclaiming Space,
Connecting
Communities
March 2015
in partnership withA project of the

Under the Elevated: Reclaiming
Space, Connecting Communities
is a project of the Design Trust for
Public Space in partnership with
NYC Department of Transportation
(DOT). This publication incorporates
aspects of the project and is
authored by the Design Trust. The
views, concepts, designs, and
recommendations presented in
the publication do not necessarily
represent those of DOT.
Design Trust for Public Space
designtrust.org
NYC Department of
Transportation
nyc.gov/dot
Under the Elevated Fellows
Neil Donnelly
Graphic Design Fellow
Susannah C. Drake
Urban Design Fellow
Krisanne Johnson
Photo Urbanism Fellow
Chat Travieso
Participatory Design Fellow
Douglas Woodward
Policy Fellow
Design Trust Staff
Megan Canning
Deputy Director
Susan Chin, FAIA
Executive Director
Rosamond Fletcher
Director of Programs
Ozgur Gungor
Communications Associate
Kelly Mullaney
Development Manager
NYC Department of
Transportation Staff—Urban
Design, Art & Wayfinding (UDAW)
Wendy Feuer
Assistant Commissioner
Neil Gagliardi
Director of Urban Design
Erin Maciel
Project Manager
Nicholas Pettinati
Project Manager
Patrick Smith
Project Coordinator
Technical Advisor
BuroHappold Engineering
Authors
Caroline Bauer, Susannah C. Drake,
Rosamond Fletcher, Chat Travieso,
Douglas Woodward
Editorial Contributor
Thomas J. Campanella
Editors
Caroline Bauer, Rosamond Fletcher
Book Design
Neil Donnelly
Creative Direction
Megan Canning
© 2015 by the Design Trust for
Public Space. All rights reserved.
No portion of this publication can
be reproduced without the prior
permission of the Design Trust for
Public Space.
ISBN 978-0-9777175-2-1
Printed and bound in the USA by
PrintCraft, Inc.
This publication was printed on
recycled paper containing 10%
postconsumer recycled fiber,
reflecting the Design Trust’s
commitment to protecting our
environment.
↑p.1:NeilDonnelly

6
Preface:
Design Trust for
Public Space
7
Preface:
NYC Department of
Transportation
14
The Spatial Ecology
of the New York
Elevated by
Thomas J.
Campanella
24
Introduction:
700 Miles
32
Section I:
Site Strategies
Potential Use
El-Space Assets
Site Typologies
Pop-Up > Pilot > Permanent Framework
56
Section II:
Opportunities and
Alignments with
Citywide Plans
From a Catalogue of Issues to
a Catalogue of Opportunities
Neighborhood Revitalization
Environmental Sustainability
Mobility
100
Section III:
Program to Policy
El-Space Program
Program Design
Program Development and
Implementation
122
Conclusion:
Next Steps
124
Acknowledgments

6
Preface:
The Design Trust for
Public Space
Have you ever walked underneath an elevated highway,
rail, or subway line, such as the Brooklyn Queens
Expressway or the 2/5 subway line in the Bronx, and
observed how dark, noisy and forbidding those spaces
can be? Or ever thought about how the tracts of parking
or storage beneath these structures divide neighborhoods
and serve as barriers to local economic vitality? There are
nearly 700 miles of elevated transportation infrastructure
in New York City, and over 7,000 miles in cities across the
country—vast residual space.
In 2002, the Design Trust for Public Space published
Reclaiming the High Line—the study that catalyzed
efforts to save and reprogram the decommissioned rail
line. In the report we asserted that “spaces under the
High Line must be given equal or greater attention as
programming for the High Line’s upper deck” because
of their importance in shaping the urban context at the
ground level. Several of these privately owned parcels
have since been integrated into adjacent residential,
hospitality, and cultural developments. The presence of
elevated lines in underserved communities across the
five boroughs is even greater where public and private
investment of this scale has been lacking.
The Design Trust approached the NYC Department of
Transportation (DOT) in 2013 to embark on a partnership
to significantly improve these places. With the Under the
Elevated: Reclaiming Space, Connecting Communities
project, we explored how these atypical, multijurisdictional
public spaces beneath and adjacent to elevated
infrastructure could be transformed from a blighting
influence to valuable community assets. This study has
envisioned how to increase the vibrancy and resiliency of
neighborhoods in all five boroughs, and cities everywhere.
Under the Elevated has aimed to develop innovative
strategies for the maintenance of this aging inventory
of infrastructure with multifunctional uses that provide
alternative ways of moving through the city. Public-private
partnerships and agency initiatives will play a key role
in reclaiming these undervalued spaces to spur positive
change citywide.
The Design Trust was founded in 1995 to unlock the
potential of New York City’s shared spaces. Today we
are a nationally recognized incubator that transforms and
evolves the city’s landscape with public agencies and
community collaborators. Our work can be seen, felt, and
experienced throughout all five boroughs—from parks
and plazas to streets and public buildings.
We thank DOT, our Design Trust Fellows, the National
Endowment for the Arts, and the many individuals,
organizations, and funders who have generously
contributed to the Under the Elevated project.
Susan Chin, FAIA
Executive Director, Design Trust for Public Space

7
Preface:
NYC Department of
Transportation
NYC Department of Transportation (DOT) is proud to
join the Design Trust in publishing Under the Elevated:
Reclaiming Space, Connecting Communities. This
visionary project surveyed New York City’s 700 miles of
elevated infrastructure to see how we might reimagine the
often dark, uninviting, and underutilized spaces beneath
our city’s subway lines, highways, and bridges. Our goal
is simple—to make these often forlorn spaces more active
and attractive assets for residents and neighborhoods
throughout the five boroughs, especially in highly
impacted and physically disconnected communities.
Under the Elevated puts New York City at the forefront of
the growing national and international trend of addressing
and reclaiming aging elevated transportation infrastructure
and the spaces—or “el-space” —associated with it. It is
the first major urban initiative to propose a comprehensive
approach in dealing with these spaces citywide.
Mayor Bill de Blasio’s focus on underserved
neighborhoods makes it an especially opportune moment
to look intently at New York City’s el-space. Our 700
miles of remarkable elevated infrastructure have clearly
contributed to the expansion and economic growth of
New York City, but that infrastructure has also negatively
impacted many communities, especially low-income
and minority neighborhoods physically separated and
isolated by elevated highways and rail lines. Under the
Elevated calls upon us to try to tackle those impacts and
reconnect those neighborhoods.
As part of this effort, DOT has also begun experimenting
with improvements to el-space, including installing
lighting, seating, and art the past year in Manhattan’s
Chinatown and the Morrisania neighborhood in the
Bronx. In the coming months, we will expand our efforts
and develop a toolkit that can be further tested at multiple
sites throughout the city. Ultimately, we hope to create
an innovative program to manage and enhance el-space
through physical improvements, temporary installations
and a variety of programming citywide.
I wish to thank the Design Trust and Fellows, the
dedicated, creative, and resourceful team at DOT who
spearheaded and contributed to this effort, and the
numerous City agencies who were also our partners in
creating Under the Elevated.
Polly Trottenberg
Commissioner, NYC Department of Transportation
↓©KrisanneJohnsonfortheDesign
TrustforPublicSpace
pp.8–9:BroadwayandFlushingAvenue
undertheelevatedJMZsubwayline
pp.10–11:SalsadancingatLaPlacita
delaMarquetaunderneaththeMetro-
NorthraillineinEastHarlem
pp.12–13:CornerofParkAvenueand
East116thStreetneartheMetro-North
raillineinEastHarlem

14 Essay
BrightonBeachBoulevardin1996
(©ErikHuber)
ThirdAvenueElevatedRailwayat18th
Street(MarjorieCollins,1942)

15
The Spatial Ecology
of the New York
Elevated
by Thomas J. Campanella
No piece of urban infrastructure creates a more complete
ecology of place than the elevated railway. Skyscrapers
and bridges may soar and leap, but they are machines
for work and conveyance alone. Elevated highways are
almost always a blight in the city, for they were built to get
people in and out of town and offer little but darkness and
pigeon excrement to the streets below. The el is enmeshed
in the rhythms and pulse of the city. It embeds in a place
rapid transit, moving passengers above but within the
urban landscape. In contrast, the subway strips you of your
bearings, swallowing you underground in one place and
releasing you in another with no connective spatial tissue
between. Moreover, an entire urban-social ecosystem
comes to life in the protective shade of the el, like the rich
and teeming understory beneath a canopy of forest trees.
The demesne of the elevated—I’ll call it “el-space” here—
is neither tranquil nor serene, but it is not without poetry.
The root of its allure is the close juxtaposition of human life
and heavy industrial infrastructure. The elevated railroad
is a relic of a muscular age before zoning, OSHA, and
the nanny state, when people—especially the immigrant
poor—were forced to live in hazardous proximity to
the factories and mills in which they worked. In the
Progressive Era, reformers and city planners fought to
separate—for good reason—home and workplace, getting
helpless flesh away from heavy machines and hazardous
industry. They tried to purge New York of the “el evil,”
too, and succeeded in Manhattan, where no such steel
remains except as impelled by topography—along upper
Park Avenue, on Nagle and 10th Avenues in Inwood,
and in the Manhattan Valley, where a spectacular arched
structure still carries trains over 125th Street. But as with
so many things, reformist zeal waned with distance from
City Hall. Most of the “outer borough” els survived the
demolition campaigns of the 1930s and 1940s.
These els in Brooklyn, Queens, and the Bronx are still
heavily used. Even in this era of smartphones and
Instagram, the century-old infrastructure is as essential to
getting around Gotham as it was in 1914. There are 168
miles of elevated track throughout the city, fully one-fifth
of the entire MTA system total. (Chicago has a mere 36
miles; Boston demolished its last el in 2004.) The lines
run deep into the soul of New York City, for nowhere in the
world has the el secured a more important place in the
history, culture, and artistic life of a metropolis. That is as
it should be; the el, like the teddy bear and the manhattan,
is a Gotham original. The world’s first true elevated
railroad was built by Charles T. Harvey in 1868 as a
short, one-track run above Greenwich Street, powered
“by means of propelling cables attached to stationary
engines.”1 Harvey’s attempt to extend his West Side and
Yonkers Patent Railway up Ninth Avenue raised a howl
1 QuotedinJamesBlaineWalker,
FiftyYearsofRapidTransit(NewYork:
LawPrintingCompany,1918).
2 WilliamD.Middleton,
MetropolitanRailways:RapidTransit
inAmerica(Bloomington:Indiana
UniversityPress,2003),26–27.
3 QuotedinMiddleton,
MetropolitanRailways,26.
4 RobertM.Fogelson,Downtown:
ItsRiseandFall,1880–1950(New
HavenandLondon:YaleUniversity
Press,2001),50.
5 Ibid.,53.
6 “TheElevatedRailway’s
Critics,”NewYorkTimes,June21,1878.
7 “TheNever-TiringEdison,”New
YorkTimes,July12,1878.
8 “ElevatedRailwayNoises,”New
YorkTimes,June3,1879.
9 “ThirdRailonElevated,”New
YorkTimes,August4,1900.
of protest from merchants and property owners. But
rising demand for rapid transit—and the immense profits
therein—eventually gave its advocates the upper hand.
By the 1870s, America’s downtown streets were being
choked to death by traffic. It became clear to officials that
growth could be sustained only by building rapid transit
systems unfettered by street-level congestion—operating
in exclusive rights-of-way underground or overhead.
Given the immense cost of tunneling or trenching,
lifting the tracks above the street became the favored
solution—at least for a time. In New York, politically
well-connected entrepreneurs formed companies to
build more than 80 miles of elevated track along Second,
Third, Sixth, and Ninth Avenues in Manhattan. By the
1880s, some 2,000 trains a day were speeding around
the city in the world’s first rapid transit system. In
September 1883, cars began rumbling over the Brooklyn
Bridge. The first el on the Brooklyn side—the Lexington
Avenue Line—opened two years later, running from
Fulton Ferry to East New York.2 Though the line was
shut down in 1950, a section between Alabama and Van
Siclen Avenues is still in use today, the oldest in the city.
Despite William H. Vanderbilt’s claim that “[n]obody will
go upstairs to take a train,” New Yorkers took quickly
to skimming above the city on the rooftop railway.3 El
ridership jumped from two million in 1876 to 60 million
in 1880, tripling to 180 million by 1890. Put another
way, in a year New York’s els were moving three times
the population of the United States at the time.4 For all
the el’s popularity, of course, no one wanted it in their
front yard. With each new line came fresh opposition
from residents and businesspeople, who claimed the
els plunged streets into perpetual darkness, created
a constant din, and dropped soot and coal dust on
everything below. Reformers like Charles Stover—
father of the American playground movement—argued
that public health impacts would be grievous, that the
noisome trains might even “stunt the growth of children
and cause hysteria, deafness, and paralysis in adults.”5
One critic claimed that the Sixth Avenue el was a “fearful
plague” that rendered any attempt at sleep “a ghastly
dream in which the roar of Niagara, the wild shriek of
the tornado, and the war-whoops of a thousand Indians
mingle in one fearful diapason.”6 Its racket even attracted
the attention of Thomas Edison, who conducted a series
of experiments using a “self-registering phonometer” that
he developed specifically for measuring sound levels
along the line.7 Across town, the Third Avenue el was
hardly better, where the “constant puffing of the high-
pressure engines … could be heard fully a mile away.”8
Ingenious proposals were brought forth to quiet el-space—
filling the support columns with sawdust; lining the rails
with rubber, wood, and felt; casing the wheels with paper.
Nothing worked. Electrification—first in Brooklyn and
citywide by 1900—eliminated the el’s worst offender, the
steam locomotive, with its noisy pistons and smoke and
soot. As the Times put it in 1900, the Sixth Avenue el’s
new electric trains would “move smoothly, with little noise,
and without jolts and cinders; heat slopping and odors will
be nuisances of the past.”9 In New York, compensating

16
1923BMTcrashonAtlanticand
FlatbushAvenues(OsmundLeviness,
viastuffnobodycaresabout.com)
Essay
affected property owners became the law after 1882,
but that did little to counter resistance from those along
chosen routes. What muted protest there was from the
business community was proof that—far from scaring off
trade—the el delivered a flood of new customers to shops
along the way. For “wherever travel goes,” admitted a
Sixth Avenue shopkeeper in 1878, “there goes trade.”10
Others opposed els out of fear, and not without reason.
El-space was replete with hazards, and collisions, fires,
and falling cars were commonplace. Electrification only
increased the number of mishaps, which now included
electrocutions. The worst accident on a New York el
occurred on September 11, 1905, when a crowded
six-car train took a curve too fast at Ninth Avenue and
53rd Street. The motorman braked hard, hurling one car
into a building and another to the street below. Twelve
passengers were killed and more than 40 severely
injured. The city’s deadliest mass transit disaster, on
November 1, 1918, also involved an elevated train. That
night, a Brighton Beach local train operated by a driver
just hired to replace striking workers (and given a mere
two hours’ training) descended too fast into Brooklyn’s
Malbone Street tunnel near Prospect Park, derailing the
cars and killing 93 passengers. (Malbone Street was
renamed Empire Boulevard to forget the tragedy.)
Nor were streets beneath the els particularly safe, what
with double-parked trucks and pedestrians jaywalking
between columns. The vertical supports themselves were
often the cause of terrible accidents. As a young man in
1920s Brooklyn, my grandfather witnessed just such a
tragedy beneath the Culver Line on McDonald Avenue.
A group of boys had been racing streetcars on their
bicycles, the challenge being to zip ahead of the car just
before it reached the next pylon. It was a perilous game
of chicken, for the streetcars would pass these columns
with only inches to spare. But dodging streetcars was
old Brooklyn sport, namesake of the borough’s most
beloved team—originally the Brooklyn Trolley Dodgers.
One boy made a fatal misjudgment of time and space,
reaching the column just as the streetcar got there; he
was crushed to death in an instant.
The obstacle-course hazards of el-space could make
for thrilling cinema. The white-knuckle car chase in The
French Connection (1971) is routinely listed as one of
the best chase scenes in Hollywood history. It was as
recklessly filmed as the scene it depicts, shot without
permits, training, or safety precautions. Essentially a
“stolen shot,” it featured Bill Hickman, king of Hollywood
stunt drivers and the man also responsible for the
chase in Steve McQueen’s Bullitt (1968). In The French
Connection, Gene Hackman’s character—a renegade
cop named “Popeye” Doyle—pursues a criminal on a
northbound D train above him. The movie was filmed
under a 26-block stretch of elevated track in Brooklyn,
Hickman leading Doyle’s commandeered Pontiac at
speeds of up to 90 miles per hour—dodging pylons,
mounting sidewalks, and causing several accidents,
and even colliding with a city bus. The chase ends with
Doyle gunning down his quarry on a staircase at the
New Utrecht Avenue–62nd Street station.11
Filmmakers were hardly the only artists enthralled by
the el and its urbanism. Poets, painters, and writers
had come to see the el as the rolling essence of city
life. Childe Hassam, Reginald Marsh, Charles Sheeler,
Guy Pène du Bois, Edward Hopper, and many artists
of the Ashcan school—Bellows, Sloan, Shinn, Beal,
Reiss—all painted the el, captivated by this machine-
age magic carpet clattering above the urban fray. John
Sloan was the painter laureate of the New York el and
its muscular romance. In Election Night (1907), The City
from Greenwich Village (1922), and the magisterial Six
O’Clock, Winter (1912), Sloan’s elevated trains thunder
like rail-bound comets above the tumult of crowded city
streets. Sloan and other artists were captivated by the
contrasts of el-space—especially between the priapic
thrust of the trains and the receptive warmth of domestic
space only yards from the tracks. Equally alluring was
the latent voyeurism of el-space, the glimpses it afforded
into the passing lives of strangers. The el created a form
of mechanized intimacy not unlike that of the anarchic,
sexualized rides of Coney Island.
On summer nights, especially, open windows exposed a
hidden private world to all but the weariest el rider. They
might even expose a crime. In Reginald Rose’s 1954
teleplay Twelve Angry Men, a jury deliberates a murder
case hinging on the testimony of a woman who claims to
have witnessed the killing through the darkened windows
of an empty passing elevated train. Among the most
nuanced depictions of el-space and its public-private
tension are those in Edward Hopper’s paintings. Hopper
10 “RapidTransitandTrade,”New
YorkTimes,June18,1878.
11 TheFrenchConnectioncar
chasesequence:http://www.youtube.
com/watch?v=ugrhPlRcWo4

17The Spatial Ecosystem of the New York ElevatedTheCityfromGreenwichVillage(John
Sloan,1922).©2014DelawareArt
Museum/ArtistsRightsSociety(ARS),
NewYork+NationalGalleryofArts

18 Essay
SixO’Clock,Winter(JohnSloan,1912).
Oiloncanvas,26 ¹⁄8×32in.;66.3575×
81.28cm.Acquired1922.ThePhillips
Collection,Washington,D.C.
NightWindows(EdwardHopper,1928).
Oiloncanvas,29×34"(73.7×86.4
cm).GiftofJohnHayWhitney.The
MuseumofModernArt.DigitalImage©
TheMuseumofModernArt/Licensedby
SCALA/ArtResource,NY

19The Spatial Ecosystem of the New York Elevated
would ride the city’s trains at night, peering into passing
buildings, catching “flashes of unearned intimacy,”
writes David Apatoff—“lonely people staring at the walls
… desperate couples … people whose privacy was
protected only by their anonymity.”12 His most evocative
work in this genre is Night Windows (1928). In it, Hopper
creates a powerful contrast between the dark masculinity
of the elevated and the tender sexuality of the domestic
realm passing so close and yet so far away in an
adjacent building.
The work depicts a woman in a pink slip as she bends
just out of view, perhaps over a washbowl, her body
sculpted erotically by a raking light. Writing in a review
of Hopper’s 1933 show at MoMA, Mary Morsell noted
that the picture “crystallizes superbly that momentary
sense of the mystery and intensity of the thousands of
lives pressing close to each other, all oblivious to the
revelations of undrawn blinds.”13 In New York City today,
a postmodern replay of this urban erotics is enabled by
that gentrified scion of the Gotham el in gilded Chelsea,
the High Line. Strollers on the once-rusting hulk, now
a feted linear park, are subjected to a nightly “window
show” by affluent exhibitionists at the Standard Hotel,
who strut and hump against the plate glass for all to see.
El-space is almost universally described as dark and
oppressive, an inaccurate cliché. Unlike elevated
highways, which do blot out the sky and plunge
everything underneath in darkness, the quality of light
beneath elevated tracks is often exquisite. It comes
down combed and filtered through the ties, and strikes
pavement and facades below like the dappled light of
elmshade. This, and the sense of enclosure created by
columns on either side, yields an effect reminiscent of
an avenue of mature trees, a kind of sturdy steampunk
Elm Street. This, I think, is one of the reasons the city’s
remaining el corridors are such vibrant places: Roosevelt
Boulevard through Woodside and Jackson Heights (7
train); 86th Street through Bensonhurst and Bath Beach
(D and F trains), and, arguably the finest example
of el-space anywhere, Brighton Beach Boulevard
between Coney Island Avenue and Ocean Parkway
(B and Q trains). This last stretch pegs the meters
of good, walkable urbanism. It is one of the densest
neighborhoods south of Prospect Park, and yet a stone’s
throw from the sea and one of the most storied beaches
in the world. The mix of ethnicities here is among the
richest in the city—Azerbaijanis, Ukrainians, Georgians,
Latinos, and Chinese. The shopfronts are cluttered with
signs in Cyrillic script, advertising cheap calling cards,
Russian tchotchkes, or the latest CD from a Georgian
boy band. On a late Friday afternoon, an elderly woman
wrapped in black sells fresh-baked pide from a sidewalk
stall; across from her, by the corner, a man hawks a
load of cheap Chinese sweaters. Sunset comes fast; the
Sephardic matrons rush about to shop before Shabbos.
Overhead the silvered cars of the Q train, glinted pink
and purple by the setting sun, roll back and forth from the
city to sea, a mechanized magic carpet whose rumble-
roar of steel-on-steel is as comforting as a locomotive
whistle on a deep rural winter night.
GoingHomeNearBloomingdales
(LionelS.Reiss,1946).©Collectionof
TheNew-YorkHistoricalSociety
12 DavidApatoff,http://
illustrationart.blogspot.com/2007/10/
edward-hoppers-version-of-internet.html
13 MaryMorsell,“Hopper
ExhibitionClarifiesaPhaseofAmerican
Art,”TheArtNews32(November4,
1993),12.

24
ELEVATED INFRASTRUCTURE
SOURCE: PLUTO 2003/DOITT 2009
0
N
1m 2m 4m
Elevated Transit Infrastructure in
New York City
Elevated highway Elevated rail
↑©KrisanneJohnsonfortheDesign
TrustforPublicSpace
pp.20–21:WilliamsburgBridgePlaza
busterminalneartheelevatedJMZ
subwayinBrooklyn
pp.22–23:Broadwayneartheelevated
JMZsubwaylineinBrooklyn
Sources: Pluto, 2003 / DoITT, 2009 (Melissa Alexander)

25
Introduction:
700 Miles
In a dense city like New York, the residual space
beneath the nearly 700 miles of elevated transportation
infrastructure can no longer be an afterthought. The
millions of square feet of these sites, nearly four times
the size of Central Park, arguably encompass one of the
most blighting influences on the city’s neighborhoods,
yet also constitute one of the last development frontiers.
This substantial inventory—cataloged for the first
time by the Under the Elevated study—represents an
untapped public asset that has the potential to radically
transform New York’s urban fabric.
Under the Elevated, a project of the Design Trust for
Public Space in partnership with NYC Department of
Transportation (DOT) has three objectives:
1 Assess the inventory of space beneath elevated
transportation infrastructure to identify shared
problems and opportunities
2 Develop realistic, context-specific design and
programming recommendations and test them
3 Explore strategies for DOT to influence the
development of sites citywide
THE INVENTORY
Forty percent of the city’s subway lines are elevated,
including the 1/2/3 line, the 4/5/6 line, the 7 line, the
A/C/E line, the B/D/F/M line, the G line, the J/Z line, the
L line, the N/Q/R line, and the S line. Rail routes with
elevated structures include AirTrain, Amtrak, Long Island
Rail Road, Metro-North and the Staten Island Railway.
The following typical cross sections—pulled from the
study’s inventory—provide a sampling of the physical
and spatial assets beneath New York City’s elevated
transportation infrastructure.

26 Introduction
Typical Cross-Sections
of Elevated Subway
Lines in New York City
L Van Sinderen Ave
Brooklyn
N 31st St
Queens
7 Queens Blvd
Queens
7 Roosevelt Ave
Queens
D Stillwell Ave
Brooklyn
D 86th St
Brooklyn
D New Utrecht Ave
Brooklyn
J Z Fulton St, Jamaica Ave
Queens
M Myrtle Ave
Queens
M Palmetto Ave
Queens
J M Z Broadway
Brooklyn
F Q Coney Island segment
Brooklyn
F McDonald Ave
Brooklyn
1 Broadway, 122nd St
Manhattan
1 Broadway
The Bronx
4 River Ave, Jerome Ave
The Bronx
2 5 White Plains Road
The Bronx
3 98th St, Livonia Ave
Brooklyn
F G Gowanus Expressway
Brooklyn
A C Pitkin Ave, Liberty Ave
Queens
A Rockaway Fwy
Queens
(MelissaAlexander,ZoëPiccolo)

27700 Miles
Typical Cross-Sections
of Elevated Rail Lines
in New York City
Metro-North Railroad
Manhattan, The Bronx
Long Island Rail Road
Brooklyn
Amtrak
Manhattan
Amtrak
The Bronx
Amtrak
Brooklyn, Randall’s Island
Long Island Rail Road
Queens
AirTrain
Queens
Staten Island Railway
Staten Island
(MelissaAlexander,ZoëPiccolo)

28 Introduction
Cross-Sections of
Elevated Highways
and Bridges in
New York City
(RobertCabral,RuchaMandlik,
ZoëPiccolo)
ZoëPiccolo)
Gowanus Expressway
Riverside Drive Viaduct
Gowanus Expressway
Commercial ResidentialSidewalk SidewalkStreet
Parking
Street
Parking
3rd Ave:
Three Lane, One-Way
Parking 3rd Ave:
Three Lane, One-Way
Seven Lane, Two-WayHOV Lane
92'
80'
Commercial Sidewalk Street Parking Sidewalk Vacant Lot12th Ave: Two-Way Street
Riverside Dr Viaduct:
Four Lane, Two-Way StreetSidewalk Sidewalk
Street
Parking
Street
Parking

29700 Miles
ZoëPiccolo)(NicolasGrefenstette,ZoëPiccolo)
Manhattan Bridge
Harlem River Drive
Harlem River Dr Viaduct: Four Lane, Two-WaySidewalk Sidewalk
60'
Vacant Lot Sidewalk Street
Parking
Street
Parking
Sidewalk Holcombe Rucker ParkW 155th St: Two-Way, Two Lane
150'
100'
24' 24'
One-Way, Two Lane
Roadway
One-Way, Two Lane
Roadway
Two-Way Subway LineTwo-Way Subway Line
Bikeway Walkway
Three Lane Roadway
36'

Introduction30
CLEAVING NEIGHBORHOODS
New York City’s elevated train tracks and roadways
were built primarily during two periods: elevated rails or
“els” and associated bridges during the late 1800s and
early 1900s, through predominantly private enterprise
driven by the impact of the industrial revolution in the
United States; major arterials (highways, expressways,
and parkways) and associated bridges from the 1930s
to 1960s, spurred primarily by federal investments in
transportation infrastructure.14 The hulking structures
were, for the most part, constructed as expeditiously as
possible, without input from local communities.
The engineers, speculators, and promoters who
championed els placed fantastic, shadow-free illustrations
of light and airy structures as advertisements in Harper’s
Weekly and Scientific American, among other publications,
to build popular demand. When constructed, the affected
communities’ reaction was mixed. On the one hand the
physical structures divided their neighborhoods and
brought noise, darkness, and dirt to the environs; on the
other hand, the els brought people and commerce to the
areas, creating vibrant local streets.
In the early 20th century, as New York City grew to be the
richest city in the world, the City was able to tear down
many of the elevated tracks serving millions of residents
and move the majority of this network underground
into what we know and experience as today’s subway
system. Mayor Fiorello H. La Guardia led this effort
during the 1930s and ’40s on the premise that demolition
of the els would raise property values in affected areas.
The construction of underground subways was vastly
more expensive than building above the grade, but it
eliminated the noise, pollution, and safety issues that
fueled local concerns. Today, nearly one hundred percent
of active elevated subway service is located outside of
Manhattan. All boroughs used to share the inconvenience
imposed by the elevated trains, but now outer-borough
communities bear the brunt of this burden.
The construction of highways, expressways, and
parkways in New York City was spearheaded by
Robert Moses. The notorious planner built 416 miles
of parkways, 13 bridges, and 15 expressways between
1924 and 1968. Many of these arterials, with significant
elevated portions, were inserted into existing urban
fabric, while some of the routes in the outer boroughs,
such as Queens, served as a catalyst to form new
planned communities.
During this period, Moses’s vast centralized power
enabled an opaque and top-down ethos of urban
planning that remained the status quo until the early
1960s, when Jane Jacobs, author of the seminal
The Life and Death of Great American Cities and
perhaps Moses’s most famous opponent, spearheaded
resident opposition of his proposed elevated Lower
Manhattan Expressway. Pointing to the demise of many
neighborhoods after the construction of the South
Bronx Expressway, Jacobs warned that cleaving the
thriving, yet middle-to-low income neighborhoods of
lower Manhattan with a noisy and polluting highway
would destroy their character. By then, the majority of
New York City’s nearly 700 miles of elevated highways,
bridges, and rail lines that stand today, in 2014, had
already been built or funded. Jacobs successfully
thwarted the Lower Manhattan Expressway in 1962. In
the following years, public agencies began to realize
that massive aboveground infrastructure projects stood
at odds with active, pleasant streetscapes, and citizens
began to realize they had a voice in shaping their
surroundings. The last elevated highway in the city, the
Bruckner Expressway, was completed in 1967.
14 Federalinvestmentin
transportationinfrastructureinthe
1950sand’60sledtotheconstructionof
over7,000milesofelevatedhighways
andbridgesincitiesnationwide.

31700 Miles
CONNECTING COMMUNITIES
To reconnect communities divided and affected by
elevated infrastructure and turn this vast resource
into a positive element of our daily experience, the
City must develop a comprehensive and transparent
approach with actionable policies. Transforming the
massive inventory of these spaces requires intensive
coordination to untangle the jurisdictional complexity of
each site. A single space in this network may involve
DOT, NYS Department of Transportation, Metropolitan
Transportation Authority, NYC Department of Parks
& Recreation, and NYC Department of Environmental
Protection, among others. Yet the potential impact of
this challenging work cannot be understated.
Just think about how upgrades to sites beneath the rail
lines in East New York can affect the success of the
area’s mixed-use housing slated for development in
the next ten years. Redesigned space can offer better
access to local retail and additional short- and long-term
amenities for the broader community. Under highways
such as the Gowanus Expressway, modular bioswales
can help reduce combined sewer overflow (CSO) events
in the priority area, while organizing the streetscape into
a pedestrian-oriented waterfront gateway for residents
of Sunset Park. As the city increases in density, it is
time for the City to rethink and comprehensively plan
for these spaces in resourceful and creative ways.
By partnering with DOT—the agency responsible for
managing and maintaining New York City’s streets and
the majority of space under elevated transportation
infrastructure throughout the five boroughs—the Design
Trust has aimed to focus on the assets of the inventory
and the resources that can be tapped through a
widespread initiative. The City cannot afford to discount
these spaces any longer.

33
Site
Strategies
Potential Use
Urban space is too valuable not to use productively.
Sites beneath elevated infrastructure offer immense and
diverse opportunities to the City and city-dwellers. City
and state agencies can use the sites strategically to push
forward ecological and technical infrastructure initiatives,
new forms of connective public space, strategically
located recreational areas, and innovative models of
public-private land use. At the same time, community
organizations can champion the introduction of localized
amenities, such as wayfinding, and open space for
festivals and markets. For example, in Manhattan’s
Financial District, the Pier 15 and East River Waterfront
Esplanade project, commissioned by NYC Economic
Development Corporation (NYCEDC), connects a section
of waterfront property under the elevated FDR Drive to
the newly redesigned Pier 15. The multifirm design15
features a series of new public gathering places under
the highway, including benches, recreational areas,
and a dog run. By simply painting the underside of the
highway lavender and installing upward-facing lights
to highlight the intricacies of the structure, the project
makes this space more inviting and draws foot traffic
from the adjacent Seaport.
In Flushing, Queens, the Highway Outfall Landscape
Detention (HOLD) System, invented by DLANDstudio and
made a reality through a partnership with the Regional
Plan Association with grants from the NYC Department of
Environmental Protection (DEP) and Long Island Futures
Fund for development on NYC Department of Parks &
Recreation (Parks) property, utilizes a low-cost, flexible,
plant-based system to collect and filter stormwater from
drainpipes on the elevated highways that run through
Flushing Meadows Corona Park. This modular green
infrastructure system absorbs and filters pollutants such as
oil, heavy metals, and grease out of the water that drains
off the elevated highways, rendering runoff cleaner as it
enters the city’s waterways. The system’s ability to retain
water during heavy rain also helps reduce flooding.16
While both the FDR project and HOLD System are the
result of significant public and private investment, New
Yorkers have long embraced desolate areas under the
el for a variety of informal uses. Skateboarders are
a classic example of citizens claiming these spaces
as their own. They have gravitated to the smooth
embankments, columns, and concrete walls of bridge
landings over City-sanctioned skateparks. In the 1970s,
skateboarders reclaimed a dirty and desolate square of
Pearl Street under the archways of the Brooklyn Bridge
in Manhattan’s Chinatown as a skatepark. Over time,
the “Brooklyn Banks” evolved into one of the best-known
skateparks in the world, which attracted thousands of
skaters, and eventually tourists, to a former no-man’s-
land. While the Banks was not much of a park to
nonboarders, the 24/7 activity generated by the skaters
made the neighborhood a safer, and more enjoyable,
place to walk.
15 PhaseIoftheesplanade
includedSHoPArchitects,PC,Ken
SmithLandscapeArchitects,andHDR
andArupengineers.
16 DLANDstudio,“HighwayOutfall
LandscapeDetentionSystem.”http://
www.dlandstudio.com/projects_holds_
flushing.html

34 Section I
PublicspacesundertheFDRdrive
developedaspartoftheEastRiver
WaterfrontEsplanadeproject(John
MuggenborgPhotography)
TheHOLDSystemcollectsandfilters
stormwaterfromdrainpipesonthe
elevatedhighwaysthatrunthrough
FlushingMeadowsCoronaPark.
(DLANDstudio)

35Potential Use
The“BrooklynBanks”evolvedintoa
skatepark.(RasmusZwickson)
The Banks is currently closed as it is now contained within
a security zone, and the Brooklyn Bridge itself is under
repair; the plaza’s fate remains uncertain. Skateboarding
activist Steve Rodriguez, a staunch advocate for the
reopening of the Banks, asserts that if the City is going to
make some changes, they “should work with the people
who use the space…. By luck or serendipity, the plaza,
built before the first wave of skateboarding’s craze arrived,
came equipped with everything a street rider could want
from a supersize playground: perfectly smooth, wave-
shaped embankments (the banks) rising along the length
of one side; walls, benches, stairways, and granite tree
boxes to perform tricks; pillars to climb against; and long
stair rails to descend.”
The spaces under elevated transit structures have also
attracted the eye of vendors through the years. After the
construction of the elevated Metro-North rail line in East
Harlem in the 1890s, vendors from the largely Puerto
Rican neighborhood quickly transformed the space
underneath into La Marqueta, an informal market selling
goods that varied from livestock to bolts of fabric. In
1936 Mayor Fiorello H. La Guardia formally sanctioned
La Marqueta and built enclosed stalls under the track
for over 500 vendors to rent from the City. The market
thrived until the 1970s, when various urban renewal
projects razed much of the housing and community
assets in East Harlem, including three of the five market
buildings constructed by La Guardia.

36 Section I
Numerous proposals have been put forward for
rebuilding the market, but most have been unsuccessful
for various political and economic reasons. In 2011,
NYCEDC and the City Council combined forces to
modernize underutilized market space, add new retail
space, and construct a kitchen incubator. Despite
significant public investment in the area, the new La
Marqueta has struggled to attract visitors and retain
retailers, yet just a block north of La Marqueta at 116th
Street salsa dancers have congregated under the tracks
every Saturday evening in the summer months for years.
As an attempt to revive the informal spirit the market
once had, City Council speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito
launched La Marqueta Retoña (La Marqueta Reblooms)
in 2014, an initiative to bring street vendors, a farmers
market, and other community events back into the space.
As the Banks and La Marqueta examples illustrate,
informal use, and the inherent value of the city’s “leftover”
spaces beneath elevated infrastructure that inspire such
use, must be considered. DOT and other stewards of our
urban public spaces have to take into account a multitude
of uses and perspectives with every development
decision. The City needs our bridges to be safe and well
maintained just as much as we need real, soulful public
spaces like the Banks. Writing on Under the Elevated
in Metropolis magazine, New York City urbanist Karrie
Jacobs states:
…every city doesn’t need an elevated linear park, nor
should every old railroad viaduct be converted for
recreational use. But there are features of our cities
that we commonly regard as eyesores that should
instead be valued as part of our unnatural natural
environment. We can ﬁnd ways to immerse ourselves
in these oddities as if they were the uncanny rock
formations of some southwestern canyon. Even
the most obstructive, no-man’s-land-generating form
of urban infrastructure—the elevated expressway—
can, with skill and imagination, be incorporated into
metropolitan nature.17
17 KarrieJacobs,“Unnatural
Nature,”Metropolis,2014.http://www.
metropolismag.com/February-2014/
Unnatural-Nature/

37Potential UseSalsadancingatLaPlacitadela
MarquetaunderneaththeMetro-North
raillineinEastHarlem(©Krisanne
JohnsonfortheDesignTrustfor
PublicSpace)

Section I38
The physical attributes of sites beneath elevated
infrastructure offer potential public space resources to
neighborhoods citywide. The z-axis, or height, of New
York City’s elevated transit network generates three-
dimensional space—identified by the Under the Elevated
study as el-space—that provides a sense of enclosure to
passersby. Bounded yet accessible, the composition and
elements of these sites provide multifaceted opportunities
for use. Some of these spaces have qualities such as low
clearances that give a human scale to the infrastructure,
while others are more removed from intimate experience:
lofty, massive, and awe-inspiring.
The most obvious feature of these parcels is the usable
land they contain. The High Line—the elevated park
developed from an abandoned railroad right-of-way—
had 31 sites below and surrounding its decommissioned
rail-bed when its first section opened in 1999. Nearly
all of these have since been acquired for development
and are in various stages of design and construction.
Recent sales of the air rights of these parcels have
been approximately $600 per square foot. While the
High Line and the spaces beneath it are privately
owned, sites associated with elevated infrastructure
in areas throughout the city are primarily within the
public right-of-way under multiple jurisdictions. The
varied circumstances pose numerous challenges,
but precedents like the High Line demonstrate how
imaginative strategies can foster great benefits for
neighborhoods across the five boroughs and the city
as a whole.
Space Land
El-Space Assets
Together, the space, land, structures, and
widely distributed locations of these sites
can be harnessed to capture and create
value for communities and the City alike,
affecting the way New Yorkers live, work,
and play across the five boroughs.

39El-Space Assets
Structures LocationsThe structures themselves are also assets to exploit.
Many spaces in the city’s inventory contain architecturally
significant forms, such as the steel arches of the Harlem
River Viaduct or the stone arches under the Washington
Bridge in Highbridge Park. The overhead assemblages
deliver varying degrees of shelter from the rain and sun
while the ground plane—frequently a roadway, sidewalk,
or parking lot—forms a level surface for various activities.
As seen under the West Side Highway at Riverside
Park South, protection from sun and rain has become
a desirable component of the design of spaces for
recreation, cultural events, and concessions. In some
cases columns, trusses, tracks, and overhead roadbeds
even offer an armature for temporary lighting or the
display of art.
The networked disposition of these spaces provides
additional prospects for strategic urban interventions.
Many of the parcels are well connected to other modes
of transit and can serve as alternate travel routes and
multimodal transit hubs, such as the areas beneath the
FDR Drive that connect pedestrians and cyclists to the
Staten Island Ferry, taxi stands, and East River bridges.
In some cases, the highest and best use may continue
to be parking or storage for City services, while in others
the contiguous land beneath expressways and transit
lines can create connected linear systems of public
space or strengthen nascent commercial and pedestrian
corridors. Moreover, the combination of infrastructure and
available space in areas prioritized by the City presents
a concentrated opportunity to address persistent
environmental challenges related to air quality and
combined sewer overflows.

40 Section I
Site Typologies
New York City’s elevated transportation
network contains a great diversity of
structures and contexts. The Fellows
team surveyed the city’s nearly-
700-mile inventory at the outset of
the project to identify distinct formal
typologies. The following seven types
each contribute particular challenges
and opportunities to maintaining
and reclaiming space for public use.
Landing
Landings occur where a bridge meets land and gradually
merges with the existing grade of an area, extending
deep into the city’s urban fabric. Landings are composed
of bridge abutments, off-ramps, rail spurs, and other
assemblies, which are often massive in scale, as well as
dark and confining. These structures form barriers within
or between neighborhoods that continue for many blocks.
Adjacent communities typically experience heavy traffic
as vehicles, cyclists, and pedestrians exit and enter the
surrounding areas.
Trestle
Elevated train trestles are found throughout the
outer boroughs of the city and above 125th Street in
Manhattan. They are frequently located over highly
trafficked streets with commercial space below. The
trestles’ porous train beds and grids of columns vary in
height, creating dynamic lighting conditions beneath.
Transit stops along the tracks contribute to an active
streetscape, but the noise and pollution adversely affect
quality of life in the surrounding neighborhoods.
Park
In several parts of the city, elevated infrastructure runs
through parkland. Most of these sites are somewhat
inaccessible to pedestrians yet offer an exceptionally
verdant environment within the urban context. While the
spaces may be isolated from public access, many of
the parks include trail systems and areas that are used
informally or, in a few cases, formally, for highly active
forms of recreation, such as skateboarding, climbing, and
bicycle motocross (BMX).

41Site Typologies
Highway
Elevated highways run throughout New York City’s five
boroughs, dividing neighborhoods and limiting access to
urban waterfront areas. The width of the roadways and
opacity of the concrete structures work together to create
sheltered, dark physical and visual barriers. The elevated
highways typically feature downspouts that carry polluted
stormwater runoff from the paved roadway surface into
surrounding waterways or combined sewers. In many
cases, residential and commercial buildings, playgrounds,
and schools run along the highways at close proximity.
Clover
The typical highway cloverleaf can be found dotting the
major transportation arteries of New York City’s outer
boroughs. The clover is a system designed to maintain
particular vehicular speeds as cars move from one
roadway to another. A single clover, characterized by the
union, intersection, and cross of high-speed roadways
at varying elevations, is massive, even in urban settings
like New York City. The overlapping configurations result
in leftover, interstitial landscape patches below and
alongside roadways. Typically lawn, these areas require
significant resources, such as water and mowing, are
hard to maintain, and provide little ecological value.
Cluster
The convergence of multiple transit systems at
aboveground intermodal hubs produces complex
conditions in the built environment. The resulting
haphazard configurations pose a number of challenges
for the experience of pedestrians and transit riders
alike. The massive footprints of the elevated structures
associated with these transportation junctions obstruct
flow between neighborhoods and make it difficult to
orient oneself and navigate the surroundings.
Span
Several of New York City’s major bridges are located
along key geographic and jurisdictional boundaries
between boroughs, counties, and even states. These
structures provide the opportunity to utilize the entire
span of the bridge and its landings at either side
for initiatives that link citywide, regional, or national
constituencies, or programs that would benefit from
broader political support and funding. Span conditions
offer opportunities for enhancing quality of life, ecology,
and economics on a regional level. Locally, these
programmatic connections have the potential to provide
links between neighborhoods in different boroughs.

42 Section I
Pop-up > Pilot >
Permanent
Framework
The Design Trust team developed a phased approach,
Pop-Up > Pilot > Permanent, in this study for transforming
sites beneath elevated bridges, rail lines, and highways.
This successive framework takes into account the pace
of infrastructure work, the challenge of working within
spaces controlled by many City and State authorities, and
the established means of introducing new ideas to the
operations of public agencies. The incremental method
allows for a cycle of testing and calibration of design
strategies to address particular site conditions, community
concerns, and regulatory issues. Each phase has the
potential to influence and contribute to changes in relevant
public policy and is recommended for developing future
site-specific proposals.
POP-UP
The first phase, Pop-Up, employs a lower-cost, small-
scale, temporary installation—a duration of eleven
months or less—to spark community and public sector
interest in transforming a specific site, and to test design
strategies. Ideally, this phase uses on-site workshops
and stakeholder interviews to inform the development
of an installation, and employs a variety of methods to
gather data and document its use and durability. The
commission of a work of art or creation of a design by the
community and public sector provides an opportunity to
establish a common understanding and develop working
relationships. The pop-ups may also underscore changes
required to standard operational and maintenance
systems of various public agencies.
PILOT
The second phase, Pilot, builds on the lessons learned
from a given Pop-Up in the form of a short-term—one- to
three-year—installation. More in-depth and potentially
broader in scale than a Pop-Up, a Pilot provides a
means to test significant spatial, programmatic, and
operational changes under elevated infrastructure, prior
to investment of high-cost permanent enhancements. A
pilot project requires a firm commitment and partnership
between the public sector and a community organization
to maintain and, in some cases, program a site. Ideally
a Pilot is completed within one electoral cycle. When
well monitored, Pilots may provide the data required to
ultimately create thoughtful, evidence-based permanent
designs. Depending on the project, a Pilot can become
a permanent installation that is assimilated into a larger
plan for a site, or it can be modified for longevity and
performance. Oftentimes, quick, lower-cost strategies,
such as changes in surface treatment, have the potential
to be easily integrated into long-term solutions for a site.
PERMANENT
The third phase, Permanent, continues to develop
and adapt a site to its context and the needs of the
community on a long-term basis. Successful, well-used
permanent improvements may also inform future policy
and budgetary decisions. These projects typically are
more comprehensive and costly, involve interagency
coordination, require detailed design and construction
documents, and engage a strong community partner,
such as a business improvement district (BID), local
institution, or merchants’ association to maintain these
improvements. Permanent changes to a site may include
upgrades to material treatments and environmental
systems, such as lighting and acoustics, or elements that
were not included in a Pilot. Designs for these long-term
enhancements need to be flexible and built to last.
Any one of these three phases may be undertaken
independently. The Design Trust contends that the
most successful transformations of el-space depend on
successive cycles of community feedback embedded
in this Pop-Up > Pilot > Permanent approach. The
following examples—two Under the Elevated Pop-Up
installations and four case studies —illustrate key
takeaways from each phase and the overall strength
of the framework.

43Pop-up > Pilot > Permanent Framework
Division Street
Under the
Manhattan Bridge
Pop-Up
The Design Trust and NYC Department of Transportation
(DOT) developed and produced a temporary installation
under the Manhattan Bridge at Division Street in
Manhattan in April 2014 as part of the Under the Elevated
project. The installation tested several el-space strategies
to inform a broader Chinatown “gateways” initiative.
The site, located in the heart of Chinatown under the
shadow of the Manhattan Bridge, comprises a stone
abutment and large empty triangular plaza on its north
side, and a series of storefronts on its south side. The
surrounding area is highly trafficked and contains a
number of street vendors, as well as an informal bus
stop for shuttles that transport residents and visitors to
Flushing, Queens, and back. The site is dark and dirty
from vehicle emissions and bridge runoff, and noisy
due to trains running on the bridge above.
Design Trust Fellows developed a multipronged process
for engaging the surrounding community, including
the immediate area that is home to a large number
of Fujianese immigrants. The team chose Chinatown
Partnership, a local nonprofit development corporation,
as a community collaborator for this site. Initial meetings
with the Partnership, which works closely with the
Chinatown Business Improvement District, cemented
the importance of using the Division Street site for
a pop-up intervention that would inform a long-term
capital project with DOT on that site and other parcels
around the bridge.
DivisionStreetundertheManhattan
BridgeinChinatown(©Krisanne
JohnsonfortheDesignTrustfor
PublicSpace)

Section I44
The Fellows held an on-site workshop under the
Manhattan Bridge in August 2013 to gather input from
passersby. They spoke to people of all ages and
engaged them in a drawing exercise to imagine ways
of improving the space under the bridge. The proposals
ranged from the practical, like adding seating and
planting, to the fantastical, like installing a waterfall to
cover the noise from the trains. The team also observed
the site on different days of the week, in different weather
conditions, and at different times of day to understand
the range and intensities of activities occurring around
the site and how the pop-up might enhance its use.
This research revealed how important Division Street is
for pedestrian circulation and how activities observed at
the site—people shucking corn, playing board games,
selling crabs and fruits, and sitting on crates or the bridge
abutment ledge—contribute to a lively neighborhood
streetscape. Chinatown Partnership also shared insider
information about the more transient uses in and around
this site, including things like fruit stands and the informal
bus stops that run along Forsyth Street parallel to the
bridge. As part of its “Gateways to Chinatown” planning
and design efforts, the Partnership has been eager to
pursue the development of a gateway at the Division
Street location to function as a landmark, and place
of orientation.
Based on community input and empirical research, the
Fellows affirmed that the site could function as a gateway
into the community for residents and visitors alike. With
this in mind, the Fellows designed a pop-up, interactive
community calendar to test how the space under the
Manhattan Bridge could function as a place for people to
learn more about what’s going on in the neighborhood.
The installation included lighting to make the space more
inviting as well as information about the overall Under
the Elevated project, and chalkboard panels for people to
respond to specific questions about the installation.
The temporary installation was inspired, in part, by
the tradition of community bulletin boards that were
commonplace in Chinatowns across the country in the
early to mid 20th century. These bulletin boards were
pop-up interventions themselves, composed of strips
of paper with information on current events, upcoming
events, job postings, and other announcements on the
sides of buildings on popular street corners. The bilingual
calendar the Fellows designed sought to capture the spirit
and function of the traditional bulletin walls. Residents,
passersby, and community groups were encouraged to post
events on a weekly basis on one of six different maps of
the immediate area that corresponded with a different topic,
like Learn for classes and training activities; Play for games,
sports, and exercise-related events; Eat for food and
markets; See for festivals and the arts; Make for workshops
and crafts; and Connect for jobs, housing, and volunteering
opportunities. People were asked to post color-coded tags,
corresponding to days of the week, on the maps.
IdeasforimprovingDivisionStreet,
undertheManhattanBridge,shared
duringtheproject’son-siteworkhshop

In addition to the interactive elements, the design for
the site included accent lighting to attract people to the
installation. Red, considered the luckiest color in China,
was the obvious color choice for the space. LED lights
were chosen to wash the stone surface of the bridge
abutment wall and the underside of the bridge to create
a dramatic effect at night.
Once it was constructed, the Fellows observed the
Pop-Up to learn from its use. Due to high pedestrian
traffic in the area, the installation naturally accrued many
spectators. People who would have otherwise walked by
stopped to read the information displayed. The simple
gesture of inserting a temporary installation in the
bridge abutment changed people’s everyday patterns,
encouraging them to notice a space that was previously
ignored. The Fellows monitored the piece at least once
a week to see how it was being used.
Throughout the duration of the installation many people
stopped to read the tags, yet fewer people than expected
contributed to the calendar. The Fellows discovered
that people preferred to take the brightly colored tags
rather than post them on the calendar. The postings
included: language lessons, church events, political
demonstrations, neighborhood tours, and tai chi classes
in the park, among others.
The most popular component of the installation was the
chalkboard panels. The five panels asked the following
questions in English and Chinese: “Do you live and/or
work in Chinatown? Or are you a visitor?” “Do you think
this space acts as a gateway to Chinatown? Why or why
not?” “How does this installation help connect or enhance
this community?” “How does the lighting make you
feel?” and “What else would you like to see here?” Many
people responded directly to the questions presented.
The chalkboard wall offered an open platform for people
to share ideas and read what others had to say, which
made it the most dynamic element in the installation. The
majority of the messages that people left were in English,
but some were in Chinese as well. Notable messages
referenced the technological divide in the neighborhood,
the way the bulletin board helped connect people,
deficiencies in the lighting, the lack of plant life in the
area, the excessive noise, and the need for more garbage
cans. These comments informed the Design Trust’s Pilot
and Permanent recommendations for the site —included
in section two of this publication—as well as strategies
for other el-spaces.
The lighting component of the installation posed challenges
from the start. The team worked closely with DOT Street
Lighting in devising a plan for attaching down-lighting
and up-lighting to the underside of the bridge to achieve
the desired design intent. Installation of the lights was
complicated, however, and the vibrations of passing trains
above made a number of the lights continually malfunction.
Lighting such el-space sites needs further study.
Left:VendorsalongtheManhattan
BridgelandingnearDivisionStreet
(©KrisanneJohnsonfortheDesign
TrustforPublicSpace)
Right:Peopleusingthespaceduring
theinstallation(SamLahoz)
Left:Pedestrianandvehicularactivity
alongDivisionStreet(©KrisanneJohnson
fortheDesignTrustforPublicSpace)
Right:Theredlightingappearsatdusk
(NeilDonnelly)

Section I46
Overall, the Pop-Up showed that people are willing to
stop and linger in a space that does not fit the traditional
mold of a public space. This was demonstrated most
clearly on the day the team held a press event, when
DOT installed CityBenches and provided movable tables
and chairs, which were immediately filled with people as
soon as they were installed. Clearly, there has been a
great need for public space in Chinatown, and the “eyes
on the street”18 of people seated in the space afforded a
significant neighborhood benefit.
In addition to installing the CityBenches, DOT plans to
install a WalkNYC pedestrian wayfinding sign to mark
the Division Street “gateway.” DOT is also continuing
its collaboration with the Chinatown Partnership on the
“Gateways to Chinatown” project aimed at establishing
permanent gateways for the community at multiple sites
in the neighborhood.
In the end, the Fellows confirmed their assumption that
bridge landings are well suited to serving as gateways;
they are visible from a distance and form distinctive
thresholds into neighborhoods. They also offer shelter
from the elements and can provide a place for a
community to gather on a daily basis or during times
of crisis. The area around the Manhattan Bridge was
already bustling with activity. The Division Street Pop-Up
attempted to capture this energy in a space that was
otherwise overlooked.
18 JaneJacobs’bookTheDeath
andLifeofGreatAmericanCities,
publishedin1961,introducedtheconcept
of“eyesonthestreet,”whichisbased
onthenotionthatastreetbecomesafer
whenitiswatchedbythesurrounding
community.
Passersbyreadinginformationonthe
installation(SamLahoz)
Memberofthecommunityleaving
feedbackonthechalkboards
(SamLahoz)

Pop-up > Pilot > Permanent Framework 47
Childrenleavingmessagesonthe
chalkboards(RosamondFletcher)

Section I48
Southern Boulevard
Under the 2/5
Subway Line
Pop-Up
The Design Trust and NYC Department of Transportation
(DOT) partnered on the design and production of another
temporary installation along Southern Boulevard under
the 2/5 elevated subway line at Freeman Street in the
Bronx. Launched in July 2014, the installation, known as
the “Boogie Down Booth,” tested numerous strategies to
contribute to local community initiatives and to inform the
design of replicable el-space components.
A significant portion of Southern Boulevard runs under
the 2/5 subway line in the Morrisania neighborhood
of the South Bronx. The high levels of noise from the
subway cars passing overhead and the high contrast
of sun and shade filtering through the tracks create
inhospitable conditions for pedestrians. Vacant buildings
and lots contribute to negative perceptions of the area,
as do safety issues associated with vehicular navigation
of the elevated structure’s columns. At the boulevard’s
intersection with Freeman Street, the site of the Pop-Up,
the sidewalk has been significantly widened by DOT.
This creates a safer bus stop, yet the concrete paving
offers no further amenities for residents, workers, and
business owners in the area.
TheSouthernBoulevardcommercial
corridor(ChatTravieso)
Issuesandopportunitiesidentifiedby
thecommunityduringtheproject’s
on-siteworkshop

The Fellows initially learned about the site through the
work that WHEDco has done to improve the Southern
Boulevard corridor outside the jurisdiction of the Southern
Boulevard BID. WHEDco, a community development
organization that strives to create healthy and vibrant
neighborhoods in the South Bronx, was the community
collaborator on the project, contributing their expertise,
time, and significant funds to make the installation
possible. The Fellows had extensive conversations
with WHEDco on issues such as non-optimal lighting,
crime, train noise, and traffic safety. WHEDco also
shared information pertaining to the historical, social,
and economic landscape of the neighborhood in order to
contextualize physical issues related to the space under
the elevated train.
The Fellows also met with the Southern Boulevard
Merchant Association—an organization formed by
WHEDco and local business owners. Association
president Jebel Ceesay reinforced concerns voiced by
WHEDco. As with the Division Street site, the Fellows
held an on-site workshop to gather community input,
setting up a table next to the Freeman Street subway
stop near Louis Niné Boulevard and Southern Boulevard
in September 2013. People were encouraged to draw
or write ideas for how they thought the space under the
elevated 2/5 subway could be improved. The comments
received included:
Create more vibrancy under the elevated train
structure with active spaces to increase foot traffic
Encourage area residents and employees to shop in
local businesses
Address crime/safety issues and decrease
perceptions of the area being unsafe
Use creative place-making to promote the Southern
Boulevard commercial corridor
Increase lighting under the elevated structure
Reduce noise caused by subway cars
Repurpose vacant lots into public spaces
Rezone the area to address retail discontinuity
The design intervention for this site sought to tackle a
number of the issues presented during the community
input phase. The Fellows noticed that even though the
sidewalk was widened to allow for a safer bus stop, there
was no seating to accommodate the people waiting. To
address this issue as well as the noise and lack of lighting,
the Fellows and WHEDco came up with the “Boogie Down
Booth,” an installation designed to provide seating as
well as a canopy with built-in LED lights and directional
speakers playing music that originated in the Bronx.
Left:Theinstallationinuse
(ChatTravieso)
Right:Graphicdetailofthe“Boogie
DownBooth”(BillMichaelFredericks)
The“BoogieDownBooth”during
installation(CarolineBauer)

Section I50
The“BoogieDownBooth”under
thestairwaytotheelevatedstation
(BillMichaelFredericks)

When installed, the seating was used not only by people
waiting for the bus; it was also popular with passersby,
especially the elderly and young people. The seating
offered a reason for people to linger and brought more
eyes to the street corner. In addition, the installation
included a canopy that covered the seating area and
provided some protection from rain. Painted bright
blue and wrapped around a subway stair column, the
installation added a splash of color to the otherwise dark
palette of hunter green that is ubiquitous on all elevated
rail structures. Even without lights, the bright blue created
a more welcoming environment. In doing so, the piece
invited the public to imagine what Southern Boulevard
would look like if the entire elevated structure were
painted a lighter color.
The installation also contained off-the-grid technology:
solar-powered LED lights and directional speakers that
played music for people sitting under the canopy. The
lights, which turned on at night, made that area more
hospitable. The music, which played all day and night,
created a playful space that made people want to stay
longer, helped cover up the noise from the train, and
reminded the public of the rich musical history of the
Bronx. And since the speakers were directional and
concentrated, the music did not disturb any neighbors.
The idea of using music as a way to mitigate the noise
from subway cars came from discussions with WHEDco
about the Bronx’s eclectic and significant musical legacy.
From Thelonius Monk to the Chantels to Eddie Palmieri to
Grandmaster Flash, so many world-renowned artists lived
or launched their careers in the Bronx. The Bronx Music
Heritage Center (BMHC), one of WHEDco’s projects, has
been dedicated to preserving and promoting Bronx music
since 2010. Currently housed in a storefront less than a
block from this site on Louis Niné Boulevard, BMHC was
a perfect collaborator to curate the playlist, which included
a wide range of musical styles from Latin jazz and hip-
hop to the music of recent immigrant groups. The playlist
also included advertisements for local businesses along
Southern Boulevard.
Based on observations and conversations the Fellows
had with local business owners, passersby, and WHEDco
staff, the installation worked exceedingly well in attracting
people to sit, linger, and listen to music. WHEDco staff
gathered hourly data samples on usage. The data shows
approximately 1,500 interactions with the booth each
week, including people sitting at the booth, listening to
the music, and reading the content of the panels. A local
fruit vendor whose stand is immediately adjacent to the
site kept an eye on the installation during the day and told
of school groups visiting it. The one request that many
people voiced was to turn the music up. While the music
distracted from the noise of the train and street, especially
if one sat directly under the directional speakers, even at
full volume, it was practically impossible to overpower the
noise of a train at full speed.
The Fellows and DOT also learned several key lessons
from the installation that could inform the design of
future standards or components for el-space. First
and foremost, the design allowed for many uses of
the seating. For some it was a bus stop, for others, an
observation booth, and for a few, a place to eat lunch
while listening to a few tracks. The flexibility of the
installation ensured its constant use, and facilitated
interaction among people that might not otherwise
connect. The design also employed a “light touch” with
the elevated structure, which was within the Metropolitan
Transportation Authority’s jurisdiction. By encircling the
column with minimal contact points, and by using an
off-the-grid power solution, the Pop-Up posed no threat
to the column’s structural integrity and maintenance;
the installation was able to proceed with minimal
additional approvals. Furthermore, the way the lighting
was integrated into the canopy eliminated potential
impacts from vibrations, effectively solving the problems
encountered with the Division Street installation. The
success of the booth allowed the permit for the duration
of the installation to be extended from September to
November. However, as the sun began to set earlier in
the fall, the effectiveness of the solar panels diminished,
preventing the lighting and eventually the music from
being powered. Future projects that require solar power
must consider how the panels could receive sunlight
throughout the day and year-round.
The Boogie Down Booth, which sought to provide an
optimistic view of the future and celebrate the borough’s
rich musical legacy, ultimately led both WHEDco and
DOT to explore aspects of its replicable design for future
projects—a definitive indicator of its success.
Theinstallationincludesseating,
solar-poweredlighting,anddirectional
speakers.(BillMichaelFredericks)

Section I52
Case Study:
Pilot Pedestrian Plaza
New Lots Triangle, Brooklyn
NYC Department of Transportation (DOT) launched the
Plaza Program in 2008 to enable the agency to work with
selected nonprofit organizations to carve neighborhood
plazas out of underused sections of city streets. Nonprofits,
typically Business Improvement Districts and Merchants
Associations, apply to transform a section of active
roadway in their neighborhood. If the project is selected,
DOT will fund and manage the improvements, and the
nonprofit partner signs on to maintain the space in the
long-term. Plazas are first built with low-cost, temporary
elements—like planters, stone bollards, and movable
street furniture—in order to see how the space is utilized.
If successful, DOT and the nonprofit partner explore using
DOT’s capital funds to build a more permanent plaza.
New Lots Triangle Plaza in East New York, Brooklyn,
was one of the first projects of the Plaza Program. Prior
to the plaza’s completion in 2011, the New Lots Avenue
commercial corridor lacked a place of reprieve for
shoppers and pedestrians from the bustling sidewalks,
and subway riders exited from the train onto a narrow
sidewalk with little protection from oncoming traffic. DOT
worked with the New Lots Avenue Triangle Merchants
Association to join an 800-foot traffic triangle with nearby
sidewalks and the exit of the elevated 3 train line to create
a 3,800-square-foot public space with street furniture,
protected from traffic by decorative planters. According to
DOT, the plaza has made the area safer for pedestrians
and created “an immediate impact on business by
encouraging pedestrians to linger longer in the area and
visit businesses, boosting the local economy.”19
19 http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/
html/pr2011/pr11_99.shtml
TheNewLotsTrianglePlazainuse
(DOT)

Case Study:
Pilot > Permanent
Pedestrian
Improvements
Times Square, Manhattan
Times Square is one of NYC’s most iconic public
spaces. In 2003 the Design Trust for Public Space
initiated a project to make the streets, sidewalks, and
public spaces in Times Square more pedestrian-friendly.
Since 2009, NYC Department of Transportation (DOT)
has been working to make Times Square cater less to
automobiles and more to pedestrians, who outnumber
cars 7 to 1 on any given day.20 The Agency’s pedestrian
improvements include:
Green Light for Midtown (2009): Broadway was
closed to traffic and 100 percent pedestrianized.
Temporary tables and chairs were installed to
inscribe the former roadways into a public plaza.
Cool Water, Hot Island (2010): DOT sponsored a
design competition for artists and designers to paint
the surface of the new Times Square. “Cool Water,
Hot Island,” by Brooklyn-based artist Molly Dilworth,
was selected. Reminiscent of water, her design
included waves of blue and white that reflected
sunlight and deflected heat from the pavement.
Times Square Transformation (2011–2016): After
a competitive RFP process, DOT selected the
architecture firm Snøhetta to permanently transform
Times Square into a pedestrian area. The three-
phase capital project includes installing concrete
pavers, widening streets, and embedding power
connections into new street furniture.
20 http://www.archdaily.
com/465343/nyc-s-times-square-
becomes-permanently-pedestrian/
Temporaryimprovementspilotedat
TimesSquare(DOT)
Renderingofcompletedpermanent
improvementsatTimesSquare
(Snøhetta,courtesyofDOT)

Section I54
Case Study:
Permanent Park
Transformation
Highbridge Skatepark, Manhattan
A number of elevated highways and bridges connecting
Manhattan to the Bronx crisscross the 130-acre
Highbridge Park in Manhattan’s Washington Heights
neighborhood, including the architecturally significant
and historic High Bridge and the heavily used Alexander
Hamilton Bridge. In the daylight, the towering arches of
both bridges make sections of the park feel like secret
urban refuges. At night, however, the lack of adequate
lighting under each bridge encourages squatting and
fosters illicit activity. In an effort to revitalize Highbridge
Park, the NYC Department of Parks & Recreation (Parks)
developed a comprehensive plan and invested over $98
million in the park over the past decade. In the same
period, the New York State Department of Transportation
(NYSDOT) began working on major improvements on
the Hamilton Bridge. As mitigation for using parts of
the park and other city land during the construction
project, Parks secured funding from NYSDOT to build a
skatepark in an underused section of Highbridge under
the Hamilton Bridge. Parks collaborated with NYSDOT
and the city’s skating community to design and build the
Highbridge Skatepark, which officially opened in 2014.
Notably, most city-constructed skateparks do not include
enhanced lighting and often close at night. Thanks to the
collaboration between Parks and NYSDOT, Highbridge
Skatepark includes bright floodlights that encourage
around-the-clock activity, effectively making the area feel
safer for all parkgoers. Building on the success of this
project, the City recently announced plans to improve
the lighting along the pathway to the skatepark from the
Highbridge Park entrance at 181st and Amsterdam.
TheHighbridgeSkateparkunderthe
HamiltonBridge(KristinePaulus)

Case Study:
Permanent Plaza
Transformation
Dutch Kills Green, Queens
The permanent redesign of Queens Plaza was one of the
first comprehensive el-space improvement projects in
New York City. In 2002, the NYC Economic Development
Corporation issued an RFP for a design team to rethink
the 1.5-mile area from one characterized by a tangle
of elevated train tracks, chaotic traffic patterns, and
deteriorating parking lots into a new gateway for the Long
Island City community and visitors. A group of designers
and engineers21 were selected to transform Queens Plaza
into a distinctive, welcoming space that promoted walking
and biking. A major component of the project involved
the removal of a commuter parking lot under the tracks,
which was turned into Dutch Kills Green, a new park
with well-lit green pathways flanked by trees in the heart
of the Long Island City commercial district. In an article
for Urban Omnibus, the project’s landscape architect,
Margie Ruddick, comments that “rather than using a
harsh, urban language, we tried to find a language through
which lushness and beauty could coexist with the hard
edge of infrastructure. The linear landscape of medians
and streetscape meet in [Dutch Kills Green], and this
convergence, for me, challenges the notion of an urban
park because its surroundings are so inhospitable. This
juxtaposition would have seemed inappropriate several
years ago. But these days it’s becoming more prevalent.”22
21 Theteamofdesignersand
engineersfortheQueensPlazaproject
includedMargieRuddickLandscape,
MarpilleroPollakArchitects,Michael
SingerStudio,andWRT.
22 http://urbanomnibus.net/2009/06/
queens-plaza-infrastructure-reframed/
DutchKillsGreenparkadjacentto
elevatedtracksinLongIslandCity
(CourtesyofLindaPollak)

57
From a Catalogue
of Issues to a
Catalogue of
Opportunities
The strategies presented here explore the particular
issues and opportunities at seven sites, each chosen to
represent one of the el-space typologies and a diverse
set of social contexts. They illustrate the potential impact
that new design and programming ideas for use of space
beneath elevated transit infrastructure can have on
communities. The proposed strategies not only capture
but also create value for acres of these spaces that
serve as networks in themselves. Organized into short-
term Pilot and long-term Permanent recommendations,
some strategies outline an expanded function for
public sector initiatives beyond their current use of
el-space for storage or operations (such as electrical
vehicle (EV) taxi charging stations under the Ed Koch
Queensboro Bridge), while others delineate private sector
opportunities (such as vendors, art studios, or food
trucks below the Gowanus Expressway or even outdoor
equipment and training sponsorships in Highbridge
Park). The ideas proposed for these sites serve multiple
needs by introducing a variety of amenities, including
wayfinding, green infrastructure, and open space for
festivals and markets, while also providing safer streets
or capturing stormwater for cleaner waterways.
The seven typological explorations are categorized into
three main areas of impact—Neighborhood Revitalization,
Environmental Sustainability, and Mobility—to show how
targeted improvements to el-spaces align with and
support broader City and community goals. Complementary
case studies in this section further elucidate the issues
and opportunities of these spaces, and illustrate
widespread enthusiasm for reimagining el-space sites
across the boroughs.
Opportunitiesand
Alignmentswith
CitywidePlans

58 Section II
Neighborhood
Revitalization:
Reinforcing Housing
and Economic
Development Plans
Vacant and less active commercial corridors beneath and
along miles of elevated rails stretch deep into the city’s
outer boroughs. Massive bridge landings limit access
between neighborhoods along the city’s waterfronts.
These undervalued el-space areas—exemplified by the
Trestle and Landing typologies—could reinforce and
bolster local housing and economic development plans.
Improved lighting and sound attenuation along tracks
could increase safety and restore vibrancy in high-
density neighborhoods citywide. Surface treatments
and integrated street furniture could encourage greater
mobility and repose, forming distinctive local gateways
for residents and tourists alike. By creating vital public
spaces in predominantly underserved communities,
el-space enhancements can turn blighted areas into
healthy drivers for neighborhood revitalization, attracting
new residents and tenants. The following typological
recommendations and case studies illustrate this
potential impact.

59Neighborhood Revitalization
Study Site:
Division Street
Under and Around the
Manhattan Bridge
Manhattan
(SusannahC.Drake)
DOT
(roadway, sidewalks,
parking)
MTA
(walkable scaffolding)
FDNY
(pipe)
NYS DOT
(downspout)
DOT
DEP
(water)
Agency Key
DEP NYC Department of Environmental Protection
DOT NYC Department of Transportation
FDNY NYC Fire Department
MTA Metropolitan Transportation Authority
NYS DOT New York State Department of Transportation
Site Jurisdictions:
Cross-Sectional View

60 Section II
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Division Street cuts below the Manhattan Bridge right
before it meets Canal Street in the heart of Chinatown.
The north side of this segment contains a wide triangular
plaza and the south side, a series of narrow storefronts.
The surrounding area features a high amount of foot traffic
and street vendors, but in many places the sidewalks
are too narrow to accommodate the flow of pedestrians.
Noise from the subway and vehicular traffic above echoes
through the space, and a fine layer of dirt and particulate
matter, in part from vehicle emissions, coats most of
the surfaces. The Division Street el-space is dark and
nondescript. It offers little to encourage pedestrians to
linger or reinforce the neighborhood’s identity yet the
spectacular stone architecture of the bridge gives a stature
to the space more indicative of a gateway.
Many of the areas under the Manhattan Bridge on
the Manhattan side are already used for a number of
recreational, industrial, and commercial purposes. As
visitors walk from the East River to the landing, they
encounter a waterfront esplanade, salt storage facilities,
a skatepark, a NYC Department of Education parking
lot, an NYC Department of Sanitation Distribution Center
and adjacent garage, and two malls that include markets,
restaurants, stores, and even a playground and park. The
Division Street el-space, situated adjacent to the malls,
bustles with locals and visitors. The neighborhood’s rich
culture and community is evident in the many businesses
and activities peppered around the site, which is home
to a new wave of Fujianese immigrants.
ExistingusesofthespacealongDivision
StreetundertheManhattanBridge
(ChatTravieso)

23 VisionZeroisaplantoimprove
thesafetyofNewYorkCity’sstreets:
http://www.nyc.gov/html/visionzero/
pages/home/home.shtml
Lightingfeaturescouldbeplacedin
theareasthatreceivetheleastamount
ofnaturallighttoreducecontrast.
Inthisexample,alightingelement
intheformofapipebecomesmore
perforatedasitmovesdeeperunderthe
elevatedstructure,emittingmorelight.
(SusannahC.Drake)
12:00Summer
Solstice
Winter
Solstice
Fall/Spring
Equinox
9:00am3:00pm
12:00pm9:00am 3:00pm
12:00pm 9:00am3:00pm
3:00pm 3:00pm 9:00am12:00Summer
Solstice
Winter
Solstice
Fall/Spring
Equinox
12:00pm
12:00pm 3:00pm9:00am
3:00pm 9:00am
Sun Study
SYNERGIES WITH CITY INITIATIVES
Plans for the site—those illustrated here and those
developed as part of the Chinatown Partnership and
NYC Department of Transportation (DOT)’s Gateway
Project—align well with Mayor Bill de Blasio’s Vision Zero
plan,23 which seeks to improve the safety of city streets
and eliminate transportation-related injuries and deaths.
There is also an opportunity to reconfigure the flow of
traffic and reclaim roadway space for pedestrian use,
a tactic deployed throughout the city as part of DOT’s
Plaza Program. Future designs for the site would benefit
from further exploration of these synergies.

62
PILOT: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
Lighting and bright or reflective surfacing are two lower-
cost, short-term solutions that could offer a significant
impact to dark landing sites. For example, a lighting
installation that varies in intensity based on existing
patterns of infrastructure and sun and shade could
make the site more welcoming. The introduction of an
unexpected color palette and reflective surfaces into
the site and its environs, meanwhile, has the potential
to enliven, lighten, and define the space even further.
In addition to forming plaza spaces and pedestrian
zones, new surface treatments could transform typically
overlooked components of urban infrastructure, such as
light poles and downspouts, into a distinct streetscape.
PERMANENT: LONG-TERM STRATEGIES
The long wall that is created as the bridge meets the
grade is typical to this el-space typology and well suited
to treatment as green infrastructure. A high-visibility
planted wall could both beautify the streetscape and
enhance pedestrian experience, transforming the site into
a distinctive gateway. In addition to improving air quality
and reducing noise, a green wall would collect rainwater
that drains from the Manhattan Bridge, keeping pollution
out of waterways. The introduction of a new pedestrian
plaza adjacent to the site could host community events,
markets, or art installations, establishing the area as a
hub of neighborhood cultural activities. Curb extensions
surrounding the site would create a safer environment for
visitors and residents.
Section II
Inspiredbytheexistingnetworkof
pipesintheel-space,anewwebof
lightingelementscouldbeaddedto
theundersideoftheDivisionStreet
intersection.Theseelementswouldmake
thespacemoreinvitingforpedestrians
andthosewhosetupasvendors.The
existingpipeinfrastructurecouldbe
paintedacolorthatisassociatedwith
itsregulatingagency;forexampleFDNY
waterserviceconnectionscouldbe
paintedred.(SusannahC.Drake)
Lighting Element Painted Existing Infrastructure
Pilot

Green Wall
Curb Bump OutsNew Paving Surface
Lighting Element
Lighting Element
New Paving Surface Curb Extensions
Green Wall
Permanent
Afreestandinggreenwallthatpurifies
thesurroundingairflankstheAirTran
officesattheHartsfield-JacksonAtlanta
InternationalAirport.Thesetypesof
vegetatedwallscanbecolonizedwith
lower-maintenancevines,thatdonot
havetobeanchoredtoanadjoining
structure.Thisavoidsthecomplicated
jurisdictionalandmaintenanceissues
thatcomewithwallsthatmustbe
attachedtoexistinginfrastructure.
(greenscreen®)
Curbextensions,newpavingsurfaces,
andmoreprominentcrosswalkscould
helpcreateasafepedestrianenvironment
surroundingtheel-spaceandenhance
thetunnelspresenceasagatewayto
Chinatown.Thelightingelementand
anewfreestandinggreenwallcould
enhancethequalityofspaceand
ecologicalfunction.(SusannahC.Drake)

64 Section II
Study Site:
Southern Boulevard
Under the 2/5 Subway
Line at Freeman Street
The Bronx
(SusannahC.Drake)
Agency Key
DOT Department of Transportation
MTA Metropolitan Transportation Authority
PRIVATE
(mixed use)
DOT
(roadway, sidewalks,
parking)
PRIVATE
(commercial)
MTA
DOT
Site Jurisdictions:
Cross-Sectional View

TheSouthernBoulevardcommercial
corridor(SusannahC.Drake)
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Southern Boulevard is a major commercial corridor in
the Morrisania neighborhood of the South Bronx. The
2/5 elevated subway line runs above the boulevard for
eight long blocks, dominating the streetscape. Despite
the growing number of businesses along Southern
Boulevard, the corridor is inhospitable to pedestrians
because it lacks street-level lighting and experiences
high levels of noise from trains passing overhead. This
linear el-space includes characteristics typical to many
of New York City’s elevated train corridors. It is dark
and very loud, and can be foreboding with its low height
in certain areas. Vacant buildings and lots, as well as
industrial blocks along this street, exacerbate the issue
by disrupting retail continuity, hindering pedestrian
flow, and fostering crime and the perception of crime.
Furthermore, pedestrian and traffic safety issues persist
at major intersections like 174th Street, Freeman Street,
and Westchester Avenue.
Even so, there have been recent efforts to improve some
of the spaces under and around the trains due to advocacy
and activism from the local community and groups like
the Women’s Housing and Economic Development
Corporation (WHEDco). Thanks to WHEDco’s efforts, the
previously rusted and unsightly train structure was painted
by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) in
2014. Also, the sidewalk under the Freeman Street stop
between Freeman Street and Louis Niné Boulevard has
been significantly widened by DOT to allow for a safer bus
stop. With a recent influx of new housing, new residents,
new businesses, an increasing local workforce, and a
strong network of community-based organizations, the
neighborhood around Southern Boulevard between 174th
Street and Westchester Avenue in the South Bronx is well
poised to benefit from enhancements to the area under the
elevated 2/5 train that can further improve quality of life,
celebrate its unique assets, and remove the stigma of its
blighted past.
SYNERGIES WITH CITY INITIATIVES
Projects developed for the Southern Boulevard el-space
align well with Mayor Bill de Blasio’s Vision Zero initiative.
The columns supporting the elevated tracks create
pedestrian hazards as vehicles navigate around them.
Another established DOT initiative called Bus Stops
Under the Els works to increase the safety of stops for
buses that run along and under the Trestle type el-space.
The Southern Boulevard el-space would benefit from
pedestrian-friendly improvements of the Bus Stops
Under the Els efforts as part of the El-Space Program.
Additionally, MTA might consider the value of changing
the color palette of its infrastructure as New York State
Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) has for its
arterial structures, painting them in lighter, vibrant colors
that show maintenance issues, rather than hide them.

66 Section II
PILOT: SHORT-TERM STRATEGIES
The hard, bleak streetscape of Southern Boulevard
reflects, rather than absorbs, the sounds of subway and
vehicular traffic. Replacing stretches of the sidewalk with
a mix of curbside bioswales, planted beds, and street
trees will alleviate some of this unwanted ambient noise
while also enriching the experience of the corridor for
both pedestrians and motorists. This strategy could be
coupled with the introduction of street-level lighting and
new bold, patterned crosswalks, improving overall safety
while establishing a sense of identity for the area. Lights
could attach to existing street light poles using approved
DOT fixtures, mounted lower to illuminate the sidewalk.
curb bump-outs elevated infrastructure light element
Asabusytransithubwithheavy
pedestriantraffic,theel-spaceat
SouthernBoulevardcouldbenefitfrom
pedestrianlevellightingandlarger
crosswalks.Thelightingelement
wouldextendoutwardtoeachof
theintersectingroads,markingthe
el-space.(SusannahC.Drake)
Pilot
PERMANENT: LONG-TERM STRATEGIES
The introduction of an elevated acoustic barrier along
the subway tracks could further build on these noise
mitigation and beautification efforts. The barrier itself
could alternate between solid and vegetated, depending
on its position along Southern Boulevard. The solid
portions would be deployed around nodes of community
activity, such as the areas around stations, and could
be used as a canvas for installations by local artists.
Barriers planted with vines could be irrigated with runoff
from the structures. Additional lighting, either in the
form of an art installation or a series of simple fixtures
above key pedestrian crossings, would be integrated into
the structure as well, further enhancing the safety and
welcoming character of the area under the structure.

55
A
R
T
A
R
T
5
A
R
T
A
R
T
Left:SoundDiagram
(SusannahC.Drake)
Acoustic Barrier
Art Installation
Green Wall
Permanent
Right:ThefaçadeofthePittsburgh
Children’sMuseumbyNedKahn
employsthousandsofplasticsquares
tocreateadynamicinstallationthat
respondstochangingwindpatterns,
playfullyanimatingatypicallystatic
componentoftheurbanlandscape.
(WithpermissionfromNedKahn
Studios.)
Acontinuouslinearsystemofsound
dampeninginstallationscouldbe
constructedalongthelengthofthe
elevatedinfrastructure.Inaddition
tocreatinganacousticalbarrier,
theinstallationwouldprovidepublic
amenitiesintheformofgreenwallsand
artinstallations.(SusannahC.Drake)

68 Section II
Case Study:
Zoning Designation
for Areas with
Elevated Train Lines
C4 – 4L Districts, New York City
Zoning is the primary tool for city governments to influence
neighborhood development. The NYC Department of City
Planning (DCP) uses zoning to set parameters for the
type, size, and use of buildings and how they are situated
within a particular district. C4 districts, for example, are
regional commercial centers that serve areas outside
of a central business district. In 2012, DCP established
the C4-4L district in Bedford-Stuyvesant, Brooklyn, a
zoning designation tailored for areas housing elevated
train lines. C4-4L districts are designed to mitigate the
hulking presence of the elevated on the commercial and
mixed-use buildings flanking these structures. In 2013,
Manhattan’s Community Board 11 in East Harlem put forth
a rezoning recommendation to establish a C4-4L district
on Park Avenue along the elevated Metro-North line.
Specific strategies24 include:
Requiring all lots maintain a five-foot setback
incorporated into the existing sidewalk, effectively
enlarging the relatively dark sidewalks along the viaduct
A lower minimum base height and a higher maximum
building height than most contextual mixed-use or
residential districts to encourage building forms that
allow more light to reach the street level and move the
building farther away from the noise and vibrations
that are created by trains as they pass
Increasing allowable development area of affordable
housing where an Inclusionary Housing Designated
Area is mapped
24 http://civitasnyc.org/live/
wp-content/uploads/2014/01/
EH-Land-Use-Rezoning-Initiative-
Final-Recommendations-5-1-13.pdf
C4 – 4L Commercial District
Lot Location
Corner Lot
Coverage
(max)
Interior /
Through Lot
Coverage
(max) FAR (max)
Base Height
(min / max)
Building
Height
Required
Parking
Fronting on
Elevated Rail
Line
80%1 65%2,3 4.04 30–65 ft 100 ft 50% of
dwelling units5
Not Fronting
on Elevated
Rail Line
80% 65% 4.0 40–65 ft 80 ft 50% of
dwelling units5
1 Corner lots less than
5000 sf, or less than 7,500 sf if
bounded by streets meeting at
an angle of less than 65 degrees
not subject to maximum lot
coverage
2 Through lots less than
180 ft deep and bounded by
streets meeting at an angle of
less than 65 degrees limited to
80 percent lot coverage
3 Through lots less than
180 ft deep and bounded by
streets meeting at an angle
of less than 65 degrees not
subject to rear yard equivalent
requirement
4 4.6 FAR with
Inclusionary Housing Program
5 30 percent if zoning lot
is 10,000 sf or less; waived if 15
or fewer spaces
(Source: DCP)

Case Study:
Neighborhood
Gateway
Atlantic Avenue, Brooklyn
The Atlantic Avenue Business Improvement District
(AABID) has been working since 2012 to transform a
Brooklyn Queens Expressway overpass on Atlantic
Avenue into a new gateway between the Brooklyn
Heights neighborhood and the East River waterfront.
While many commuters, residents, and tourists utilize
the el-space as a shortcut to the waterfront, the
passageway was previously dark, dirty, and uninviting
to pedestrians. AABID kicked off the project after
receiving a BID Neighborhood Challenge grant from
the NYC Department of Small Business Services,
designed to fund BIDs throughout the city to transform
their communities in creative ways. The award enabled
the AABID to contract Interboro Partners, an NYC-
based architecture, urban design, and planning firm,
to “strategically reimagine the design, and thereby the
perception of this piece of infrastructure.”25 Working
in partnership with the Brooklyn office of the NYC
Department of Transportation (DOT), Interboro and
the AABID have proposed a comprehensive redesign
of the el-space that includes installing distinctive blue
lighting on the metal beams of the overpass, clearing
the sidewalks of pigeon guano and trash, and planting
the adjacent on-ramps on both sides with colorful,
and useful, rain gardens. To pave the way for these
permanent improvements, the AABID worked with
Groundswell, a community-based arts organization, to
activate the space with a bright mural that celebrates
the history and culture of Atlantic Avenue.
25 http://www.interboropartners.net/
2014/atlantic-avenue-underpass/
ProposedimprovementstotheAtlantic
AvenueunderpassbeneaththeBrooklyn
QueensExpressway(InterboroPartners)

Under the Elevated

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (20)

Destaque

Destaque (6)

Semelhante a Under the Elevated

Semelhante a Under the Elevated (20)

Mais de West Harlem Art Fund

Mais de West Harlem Art Fund (20)

Último

Último (20)

Under the Elevated