Why don't they put buildings underneath elevated freeways?

[kernals12]

It seems wasteful to use that space for makeshift homeless camps and parking lots. Why not put homes and shops there?

[Max Rockatansky]

Seismic activity and that nobody wants to shop/hang around something unattractively dystopian like that. 

[ozarkman417]

Seattle has a park under I-5. That is another  use for the unused area.
It would be very noisy and dark under a freeway, deterring would-be occupants. If there were to be buildings under the freeway, their property values would be low.


SM-G965U

[Max Rockatansky]

Seattle has a park under I-5. That is another  use for the unused area.
It would be very noisy and dark under a freeway, so if there were buildings under the freeway, the property value would be low.


SM-G965U

You need not look far to what was the Alaskan Way Viaduct for all of those things.  That was probably the most universally reviled structure in Seattle before it was demolished.

[TheGrassGuy]

Speaking of which, there are a lot of elevated highways in cities in China, like Shanghai. The only buildings I've ever seen under them, though, are maintenance substations and public restrooms.

[Flint1979]

I like how I-5 snakes it's way through Seattle. That is pretty cool.

[Big John]

The area under the bridge is in the the right of way of the bridge maintainer; and they don't want the liability the buildings if they were built.

[TheGrassGuy]

Here's an example from Hong Kong (albeit temporary):
https://maps.app.goo.gl/fLXybMqhY8BizzGC7

A more concrete example in Taipei:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/jzn1qk5LtyW77edHA

Also in Taipei, found this ball court:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/aiYVe8iNtcHm5xbMA

But Japan takes this to whole new levels:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/gGdzk93DMU5vriVg6

[hbelkins]

The government owns the ROW. If they put buildings beneath them, they would most certainly have to be used for government offices. The free market would frown on the government going into the residential or commercial rental business to compete against private owners.

[kernals12]

The government owns the ROW. If they put buildings beneath them, they would most certainly have to be used for government offices. The free market would frown on the government going into the residential or commercial rental business to compete against private owners.

That's even better, they can make money by selling that land.

[In_Correct]

They can make money by Tolling it. They can also provide parking and temporary housing for the Toll Road's staff, but most of the space can be used for Parks & Recreation.

[allniter89]

Seattle has a park under I-5. That is another  use for the unused area.
It would be very noisy and dark under a freeway, deterring would-be occupants. If there were to be buildings under the freeway, their property values would be low.


SM-G965U

City Park in New Orleans is partially under 610.
Pensacola has an outdoor recreation area under I 110.
any others? Or should I start a new thread?

[Bruce]

Seattle has a park under I-5. That is another  use for the unused area.
It would be very noisy and dark under a freeway, deterring would-be occupants. If there were to be buildings under the freeway, their property values would be low.

It's a mountain biking course and is not particularly pleasant to hang around. It's loud, it smells of car exhaust, and it gets drafty. Freeway Park (which sits over I-5) is way more pleasant.

Buildings under railroad viaducts are somewhat common in dense cities (e.g. London or Tokyo), so it is possible. But not desirable until it's the last available space.

[TheStranger]

I think there's a spot underneath the Capital City Freeway/Business 80 in midtown Sacramento that is essentially a mini-mall, at 29th and K:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/29th+St+%26+K+St,+Sacramento,+CA+95816/@38.5723684,-121.4684363,3a,75y,75.23h,89.27t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s5u6Xas46o2C8V3UpCuup4g!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D5u6Xas46o2C8V3UpCuup4g%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dsearch.gws-prod.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D360%26h%3D120%26yaw%3D18.199791%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192!4m5!3m4!1s0x809ad09535659e8d:0x80b5612653f16ee5!8m2!3d38.5723924!4d-121.4683715

[kernals12]

Seismic activity and that nobody wants to shop/hang around something unattractively dystopian like that.

The reason why the space under highways is dystopian is because it's dark and abandoned. If you put buildings there, the appearance would be greatly improved.

[kernals12]

Seattle has a park under I-5. That is another  use for the unused area.
It would be very noisy and dark under a freeway, deterring would-be occupants. If there were to be buildings under the freeway, their property values would be low.


SM-G965U

With enough soundproofing, it doesn't need to be noisy and with buildings, it wouldn't be so dark. The freeway would just be a roof.

[kernals12]

Seattle has a park under I-5. That is another  use for the unused area.
It would be very noisy and dark under a freeway, deterring would-be occupants. If there were to be buildings under the freeway, their property values would be low.

It's a mountain biking course and is not particularly pleasant to hang around. It's loud, it smells of car exhaust, and it gets drafty. Freeway Park (which sits over I-5) is way more pleasant.

Buildings under railroad viaducts are somewhat common in dense cities (e.g. London or Tokyo), so it is possible. But not desirable until it's the last available space.

I can think of many places that are out of space. Check out this space under FDR Drive in Manhattan currently used for parking
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7346901,-73.974898,3a,75y,143.76h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sv6DzhqjoZ6gbz-Mms_w7sQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Or looky here under the Williamsburg Bridge in Brooklyn. I'm sure hipsters would love it
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7117859,-73.9653243,3a,60y,161.46h,91.29t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spNmdcGsGUO9R0eAadPRojw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

[CardInLex]

The government owns the ROW. If they put buildings beneath them, they would most certainly have to be used for government offices. The free market would frown on the government going into the residential or commercial rental business to compete against private owners.

Surprised you didn't point out this KY example, HB... KYTC's Trimarc offices underneath the 9th Street ramps in Louisville.

https://goo.gl/maps/Ejk9ymgsuzX9kKMN9

[Dirt Roads]

The government owns the ROW. If they put buildings beneath them, they would most certainly have to be used for government offices. The free market would frown on the government going into the residential or commercial rental business to compete against private owners.

Surprised you didn't point out this KY example, HB... KYTC's Trimarc offices underneath the 9th Street ramps in Louisville.

https://goo.gl/maps/Ejk9ymgsuzX9kKMN9

What a great logo for the KTC.  I've never seen it before.

[kphoger]

The Canal Route here in Wichita gets pretty close, but not quite.  I'm specifically thinking of this house on 3rd Street.  (The cul-de-sac underneath the highway here was one stop on the Wichita roadmeet a few years ago.)

It would be very noisy and dark under a freeway, deterring would-be occupants.

It being dark was actually what attracted my wife and me to use the hike/bike path underneath the Canal Route for jogging.  During the summer months, the shade of the highway helped keep us cooler than we would have been at other locations.  (However, there are definitely some sketchy folks who use that path every day, and I never felt totally comfortable leaving our car parked on that cul-de-sac when arriving for a jog.)

[kphoger]

It seems wasteful to use that space for makeshift homeless camps ...

Where would you prefer homeless people sleep?  Out in the rain and snow?  They're exposed to the elements enough as it is.

[citrus]

There's a skate park under a freeway overpass near me! Always thought this was a good use of the space. https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7701603,-122.4216451,3a,75y,69.77h,93.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swFBX-XyO1RfDIKakwWJMyA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

[roadfro]

In Reno, NV, the Regional Transportation Commission of Washoe County currently has some transportation offices and bus garage/maintenance facility underneath the I-580/US 395 viaduct section that spans the Plumb Lane/Villanova Dr/Reno Airport interchange. (Street View from NB frontage, Street View from SB frontage) I believe the RTC has had long-range plans to relocate to a new facility–NDOT now has long-range plans to widen the freeway as part of the Reno Spaghetti Bowl makeover, and the RTC would lose some of the buildings on this site.

More interestingly: In Sparks, NV, along I-80 between the Rock Blvd and Pyramid Way interchanges is a viaduct section. The Nugget, a major casino/hotel resort, also resides in this section, with most of the casino and both hotel towers on the south side of the freeway and another portion of casino and their showroom on the north side of the freeway. The two portions of casino floor are connected under I-80 with a substantial section of building that includes more casino floor space (currently where most of the table games are located), at least one restaurant, and much of the shipping/receiving/support areas. When you're actually in the casino, multiple sets of thick triple columns give away the fact that you're under I-80. (Google Maps aerial view, Street View from Victorian Plaza Cir east, Street View from Victorian Plaza Cir west, Street View on I-80, where a Nugget HVAC unit appears between the two carriageways) The viaduct is nearing the end of its design life and has been a choke point during rush hour because it's not wide enough for peak travel demands–NDOT has long range plans to widen/rebuild it as part of a future phase of the Reno Spaghetti Bowl project, but it will be interesting to see how NDOT is going to accomplish this without significant impacts to the Nugget (which is a major economic driver for Sparks).

[Bitmapped]

Bridges and overhead structures inevitably require maintenance. A DOT isn't going to want to sell or lease the land because they would then have to re-acquire it at a higher cost in the future.

Parking, storage, and park space are ideal uses of areas beneath bridges. Since they have few or no permanent facilities, they can easily and cheaply be moved in the future if the DOT needs the land again.

[hbelkins]

The government owns the ROW. If they put buildings beneath them, they would most certainly have to be used for government offices. The free market would frown on the government going into the residential or commercial rental business to compete against private owners.

Surprised you didn't point out this KY example, HB... KYTC's Trimarc offices underneath the 9th Street ramps in Louisville.

https://goo.gl/maps/Ejk9ymgsuzX9kKMN9

I thought about it, but neglected to mention it. I toured that facility several years ago.