I noticed a lot of talk about linking REO Town to downtown in the articles about the redevelopment of City Hall. While that sounds great in theory, with the freeway, the river and the new substation, there's a lot dead/inactive space between the two neighborhoods. How do you fix that, short of something bold and expensive, like burying or removing 496?
There's a lot to be gained from linking to REO Town to downtown, but the obstacles to doing that seem huge to me. Do we have politicians and developers up to the challenge?
Oh, thanks, I see that now and I agree they have the best plan for the old City Hall.
The gap between downtown and REOtown is real, but I think there are a few ways it could be closed. One would be to build in the airspace over 496, but with all the open land around to develop it would unlikely. I could see the walkways leading to REOtown being a greenway from downtown blocking views of 496 with trees and green fences.
In my experience it's tough to get Americans to walk over freeways. It really seems to kill pedestrian activity.
496 was a big mistake. They should've just built 96 farther north in the Jolly/Holmes area and used MLK to route traffic in and out of downtown. Of course now we're stuck with what we have. Hopefully somebody can figure it out.
It's true that 496 was a big mistake, dividing the city and destroying something like 900 buildings. Lansing was proud of its new modern expressway back then so I guess they built the bridges so you could see it.
My idea about a greenway would be a shaded wide sidewalk/linear park from Hillsdale over to the new substation walkways. Washington Ave is very wide there and has unused traffic lanes on both sides of the 496 bridge that could be filled with planters and small trees. On the bridge, a green fence of evergreens shrubs or flowering vines that weave through fencing could be placed along the sidewalk to totally block the view of 496. A lot more trees and hedges could be planted along the ground level areas of the highway right of ways, especially at the corners. Right now it is noisy cold windy and kind of vertigo-inducing to walk across that bridge. Any sort of buffering of the view the weather and the noise would really help.
Thanks everyone for indulging my brainstorms on the site, I have thought about what I would build in Lansing if I was in charge since I was a kid, so it is fun for me to share these ideas even they are just dreaming and perhaps tiresome!
BTW - I don't think I've ever seen any pictures of main street before its demolition. Could someone post a few pics, esp. from the stretch between MLK and cedar/larch? I'd also be interested in learning more about the history of that area, and why the city decided to plow 496 through it.
I do not have any pictures, my Dad had a Sunoco station on the corner of Main Street and Logan. On Main Street, there was a couple of churches small corner stores and lots of small bungalow type houses very old and very used, on down to fine big houses near Washington Ave. The location of this neighborhood between GM and Downtown and the fact that it was mainly populated by African Americans who had no power to stop it, there was the point of least resistance. There were also several thousand more people working at Olds, REO and Downtown. The old street grid was maxed out it's true, and I do not know where else they could have put it, but it seems like there may have been more than just a bit of racism involved these decisions. In a former post here you can find a link to the Lansing Library that has a collection of photos taken of almost every house in Lansing in the early 60's look there to find lots of photos of that area.
Ann Arbor got it right. Don't plow a freeway through your historic areas. They avoided that impulse and, lo and behold, cars still find their way to U of M and the downtown just fine.
I think if you could erase 496 ever happening and magically move MSU a little closer to the capitol, Lansing would be doing noticeably better. We just made the wrong bets and are paying for it now.
We thought convenient freeway access would bring shoppers downtown. Wrong. We thought situating MSU away from the capitol, making it a rural campus (at that time), would add to its appeal. Wrong.
These aren't insurmountable problems but I do believe that it's slowed down the recovery of the city's historic areas.
BTW - I don't think I've ever seen any pictures of main street before its demolition. Could someone post a few pics, esp. from the stretch between MLK and cedar/larch? I'd also be interested in learning more about the history of that area, and why the city decided to plow 496 through it.
The LSJ ran a feature story a couple years ago about the destruction that 496 caused and they had pictures of the neighborhoods prior to the freeway. I tried looking on Google for it but couldn't find it. The article should still be online somewhere.
I agree that it seems people don't want to cross freeways. They make one of the toughest "walls" that we could have in urban environments. I've used one of the parks that covers 696 in Oak Park and it's really nice. You actually can't tell that you're over a freeway, the only odd thing being that it's devoid of buildings nearby.
I think if a combined park and row of businesses were built over a sunken freeway it could work really well to hide the freeway beneath it. Each time a bridge is replaced we could take the opportunity to widen it and add greenways and small shops on top.
I have not been all over Detroit, but I did notice that much of I-96 has been rebuilt recently [when?] and they have nicely landscaped the sides of the highway and around the overpasses. Our expressways would benefit from the same treatment.
The "Big Dig" in Boston is a great example of covering a highway with parklands. Here I could see building a greenway over the depressed part of 496, maybe with developments at some of the major street crossings. It could be just a beautiful urban park that re-connects the north and south of the city. Developments could be spurred along parts of St. Joe.and to the north into downtown also Malcome X to the south and west with no buildings on the greenway. Since they built it in Boston the land next to the Rose Kenndy Greenway has become very desirable, the locals and tourist love and use the greenway. I used to really like the fresh air you find once you get down there, it smells like grass flowers and the ocean. Just dreaming but these things are not imposable.
Thanks for the tips on Main Street - I'll see what I can dig up.
I agree that a sunken freeway would be perfect for spanning 496. Ideally it would run from ~Cherry Street to Walnut, but even an expanded Washington Ave. bridge would make a big difference.
Comments
I noticed a lot of talk about linking REO Town to downtown in the articles about the redevelopment of City Hall. While that sounds great in theory, with the freeway, the river and the new substation, there's a lot dead/inactive space between the two neighborhoods. How do you fix that, short of something bold and expensive, like burying or removing 496?
There's a lot to be gained from linking to REO Town to downtown, but the obstacles to doing that seem huge to me. Do we have politicians and developers up to the challenge?
Oh, thanks, I see that now and I agree they have the best plan for the old City Hall.
The gap between downtown and REOtown is real, but I think there are a few ways it could be closed. One would be to build in the airspace over 496, but with all the open land around to develop it would unlikely. I could see the walkways leading to REOtown being a greenway from downtown blocking views of 496 with trees and green fences.
In my experience it's tough to get Americans to walk over freeways. It really seems to kill pedestrian activity.
496 was a big mistake. They should've just built 96 farther north in the Jolly/Holmes area and used MLK to route traffic in and out of downtown. Of course now we're stuck with what we have. Hopefully somebody can figure it out.
It's true that 496 was a big mistake, dividing the city and destroying something like 900 buildings. Lansing was proud of its new modern expressway back then so I guess they built the bridges so you could see it.
My idea about a greenway would be a shaded wide sidewalk/linear park from Hillsdale over to the new substation walkways. Washington Ave is very wide there and has unused traffic lanes on both sides of the 496 bridge that could be filled with planters and small trees. On the bridge, a green fence of evergreens shrubs or flowering vines that weave through fencing could be placed along the sidewalk to totally block the view of 496. A lot more trees and hedges could be planted along the ground level areas of the highway right of ways, especially at the corners. Right now it is noisy cold windy and kind of vertigo-inducing to walk across that bridge. Any sort of buffering of the view the weather and the noise would really help.
Thanks everyone for indulging my brainstorms on the site, I have thought about what I would build in Lansing if I was in charge since I was a kid, so it is fun for me to share these ideas even they are just dreaming and perhaps tiresome!
a greenway would be perfect!
BTW - I don't think I've ever seen any pictures of main street before its demolition. Could someone post a few pics, esp. from the stretch between MLK and cedar/larch? I'd also be interested in learning more about the history of that area, and why the city decided to plow 496 through it.
I do not have any pictures, my Dad had a Sunoco station on the corner of Main Street and Logan. On Main Street, there was a couple of churches small corner stores and lots of small bungalow type houses very old and very used, on down to fine big houses near Washington Ave. The location of this neighborhood between GM and Downtown and the fact that it was mainly populated by African Americans who had no power to stop it, there was the point of least resistance. There were also several thousand more people working at Olds, REO and Downtown. The old street grid was maxed out it's true, and I do not know where else they could have put it, but it seems like there may have been more than just a bit of racism involved these decisions. In a former post here you can find a link to the Lansing Library that has a collection of photos taken of almost every house in Lansing in the early 60's look there to find lots of photos of that area.
Ann Arbor got it right. Don't plow a freeway through your historic areas. They avoided that impulse and, lo and behold, cars still find their way to U of M and the downtown just fine.
I think if you could erase 496 ever happening and magically move MSU a little closer to the capitol, Lansing would be doing noticeably better. We just made the wrong bets and are paying for it now.
We thought convenient freeway access would bring shoppers downtown. Wrong. We thought situating MSU away from the capitol, making it a rural campus (at that time), would add to its appeal. Wrong.
These aren't insurmountable problems but I do believe that it's slowed down the recovery of the city's historic areas.
The LSJ ran a feature story a couple years ago about the destruction that 496 caused and they had pictures of the neighborhoods prior to the freeway. I tried looking on Google for it but couldn't find it. The article should still be online somewhere.
I agree that it seems people don't want to cross freeways. They make one of the toughest "walls" that we could have in urban environments. I've used one of the parks that covers 696 in Oak Park and it's really nice. You actually can't tell that you're over a freeway, the only odd thing being that it's devoid of buildings nearby.
I think if a combined park and row of businesses were built over a sunken freeway it could work really well to hide the freeway beneath it. Each time a bridge is replaced we could take the opportunity to widen it and add greenways and small shops on top.
I have not been all over Detroit, but I did notice that much of I-96 has been rebuilt recently [when?] and they have nicely landscaped the sides of the highway and around the overpasses. Our expressways would benefit from the same treatment.
The "Big Dig" in Boston is a great example of covering a highway with parklands. Here I could see building a greenway over the depressed part of 496, maybe with developments at some of the major street crossings. It could be just a beautiful urban park that re-connects the north and south of the city. Developments could be spurred along parts of St. Joe.and to the north into downtown also Malcome X to the south and west with no buildings on the greenway. Since they built it in Boston the land next to the Rose Kenndy Greenway has become very desirable, the locals and tourist love and use the greenway. I used to really like the fresh air you find once you get down there, it smells like grass flowers and the ocean. Just dreaming but these things are not imposable.
Thanks for the tips on Main Street - I'll see what I can dig up.
I agree that a sunken freeway would be perfect for spanning 496. Ideally it would run from ~Cherry Street to Walnut, but even an expanded Washington Ave. bridge would make a big difference.