Great Design Costs Money (And Is Worth It)

A new pedestrian bridge, recently opened near a BART station in the San Francisco Bay Area, is an example of why the high price of good design can sometimes be worth it.

San Francisco Chronicle urban design critic John King offers a positive review of the new bridge.

"The 600-foot-long arc not only eases the way for pedestrians and bicyclists, it also sends a message naysayers choose to ignore: our society should aim to produce civic works on par with cherished landmarks from the New Deal or the Carnegie libraries of the generation before that."

The bridge connects an area of mixed-use developments to a 28-mile trail, and was designed by Arup.

Full Story: Footbridge an elegant new icon in East Bay

Comments

Comments

John King's Icon-Mania

This article is so bad that I wrote the following response in my blog when it appeared in the Chronicle. (If you don't want to read the blog post, you can just look at the picture in the article and see what a forbidding, unpleasant place this is - though John King loves it because it contains an icon.)
__

John King, the "urban design" critic for the San Francisco Chronicle, once again provides a perfect example of how ignorant modernist critics are of the fundamentals of urban design.

His latest column is about an overpass near the Pleasant Hill BART (rail transit) station, going over Treat Boulevard. Like a typical modernist, he thinks of the overpass purely as an esthetic object, a sort of abstract sculpture:

"instead of tapering inward, as is common for bridges of this type, the arches fan outward from the deck.... From the street, it's as if enormous silver bows were poised above you. On the deck, you move amid sculptured butterfly wings ... Robert I. Schroeder Overcrossing shows what an icon can be."

Anyone who has the slightest idea of how cities work will have a very different reaction when they look at the picture of the overpass in this article.

On the far side of Treat Boulevard, you can see the transit village next to the BART station. The transit village has stores facing the sidewalk of Treat Boulevard, but anyone who uses this overpass will touch ground far beyond that sidewalk. This overpass makes it more likely that the sidewalk will be empty of pedestrians and the storefronts will be vacant.

There is an office park right across Treat Boulevard from the transit village. It would be very convenient for people from the office park to walk across the street to the stores in the transit village. But in order to use the overpass to get there, they would have to walk about a block away from Treat Boulevard to the place where the overpass touches down on their side, and after crossing , they would have to walk a block back to get to the stores. They would have to walk two blocks out of their way to get to the stores right across the street - and instead, most of them will find it more convenient to drive somewhere to do their shopping.

In addition to not working for pedestrians, the overpass does not work as placemaking. Anyone on the sidewalk of Treat Boulevard feels like they are next to a freeway, a street so dangerous that you need an overpass to cross it. (Almost anyone: the only exceptions are architecture critics who do not notice the dangerous traffic and narrow sidewalk because they are contemplating the esthetics of overpass design.)

They could have made the crossing safer and made the street more pedestrian-friendly for much less than the cost of this overpass. Notice in the picture that the intersection has free-right-turn lanes to speed up traffic at the intersection. In addition, though you cannot see it in the picture, the sidewalk is cut back in front of the transit village to speed up cars making a right turn there.

The obvious first step to make this intersection more pedestrian friendly is to eliminate the free-right-turn lanes and the cut-back in the sidewalk, in order to slow cars down by giving them a tighter turning radius and give the transit village a full sidewalk for the customers at its stores. In addition, they could retime the traffic lights to slow traffic a bit and to give pedestrians more time to cross. These minor changes would encourage more people to walk across Treat Boulevard to shop.

Currently, the world of urban design is split between New Urbanists, who want to design good places for people to be, and avant gardists, who want to create striking sculptural objects.

What I have said about this intersection is very basic New Urbanist design, and it is very obvious to anyone who cares about creating good places for pedestrians.

But the Chronicle's urban design critic does not think for a moment about placemaking or about pedestrians. He does not even notice the obvious fact that, to use this overpass to get to the shopping across the street, people in the office park would have to walk two blocks out of their way.

If you want to know the one thing that he does think about, you do not even have to read his article. It is enough to read its title "Footbridge an Elegant New Icon."
__

PS: for more criticism of King's icon-mania, see my blog post about the article where he calls the Transamerica Pyramid "a beloved icon on the San Francisco skyline," which is at http://preservenet.blogspot.com/2010/01/transamerica-pyramid-and-empire-... Once again, he only cares about an icon and completely ignores placemaking.

Charles Siegel

Obsessed with icons?

In one of his first articles written for the Chronicle many years ago, John King described a walk up South of Market's Second Street. Reading the article I was surprised how John emphasized the qualities of the streetscape over and above the qualities of individual buildings. On the other hand he now stands accused of being obsessed with icons. Perhaps he is simply comfortable navigating the grey area sandwiched by the dogma of avant-gardism and the dogma of New Urbanism, and realizes that our streetscapes would be poorer places were it not of the occasional interruption created by an icon - even if that icon "tears a hole in the urban fabric and creates a place that is uninteresting and unattractive for pedestrians", according to Charles Siegel's description of the Transamerica Pyramid. I highly recommend the pocket park located right next to the Pyramid as a wonderful place to hang out and contemplate the multi-layered nature of a successful and dynamic urban environment, where icons and non-icons take turns to soothe and provoke the pedestrian.

Yann Taylor, Principal, Field Paoli

Prepare for the AICP Exam

Join the thousands of students who have utilized the Planetizen AICP* Exam Preparation Class to prepare for the American Planning Association's AICP* exam.
Starting at $199
Planetizen Courses image ad

Planetizen Courses

Advance your career with subscription-based online courses tailored to the urban planning professional.
Starting at $14.95 a month
T-shirt with map of Chicago

Show your city pride

Men's Ultrasoft CityFabric© tees. Six cities available.
$23.00
poster

A Short History of America

From comic book artist Robert Crumb, poster shows how the built environment has changed throughout the decades.
$14.95