202a: Highway Design/Civil Engineering

Highways. Loosely defined, seemingly even more so loosely placed into an environment. If you have not traveled by car to Newark Airport, then you do not have the right to tell me that the aesthetics of the highways, byways, freeways, and thru ways of America are in the interest of the public eye.

But this isn't an essay about sound walls to prevent the (insert sarcasm) insanely loud trucks and unsightly pavement. It is more a testament to why we think as residents we deserve anymore than just seeing in a city.

Baltimore, Jersey Turnpike, Cleveland, you name it, the car is the major engine to the flow of travel. Even in many train dependent cultures, like the Japanese, we see a steady influx of traffic daily.

What is the purpose of this structure...is a thruway...an express route to get people only through the city...is it a means of getting people out and in? How can civil engineering to one of the highest powers, but most frequently needed infrastructure capacities be held in step with the needs for design?

Transition is a key principle taught in design...so why all these expressways that suddenly end in a light, much like 395 to Conway and Howard in Baltimore. The confusion or the abrupt nature of this condition is notable…you have to drastically reduce your speed around a bend to meet the light near the Convention Center. As a pedestrian, there is this unusual zone where one can walk, and then suddenly notices it leads to a seemingly unforgiving sky bridge of a highway, towering over the city.

You cannot simply place A next to C...a B is needed to, with simple regard to tell cars and people alike a change is occurring. In one example, take the radical idea of having to place parkland near the place where freeways begin. No one likes to live near a highway, but perhaps it makes a lot more sense to attempt a park where people see it, but don't have to be inconvenienced by it. In section, make it obvious 'pedestrians stop here.' Anything to stop them from continuing down a road not meant for them. Or change it so it IS meant for them. Merely ideas, why not play with forms with the human in mind. Why is this branch so, untouchable? In the end, you have to live and coexist with these chunks of metal, concrete and steel, don't you?

From my Urbanism class, the idea is that all cities have generators of ‘urban form.’ Brasilia for instance, was the car, as it was built as a Utopian, advanced society. Only cars needed (this will be discussed further when I write about semiotics) so no sidewalks. “Olde Towne USA”s around the country will be small and walkable, because, they had to be in order for people to get around. So on and so forth. But the car has dominated in our years for the past two generations. Has convenience usurped quality, safety, and design?

The questions to ask are how can the aspects that define our cities just as much as our buildings, the road systems, the public transit, where the tracks are and so on, impact our perception. Do you really mind a city that is so heavily loaded to make shadows occupy the street level at almost all hours? The train tracks that give rise to a ‘dead zone’ in cities? Loaded questions, I know, but we see these instances a lot. Perhaps the notion of civil engineering + architecture is more than a communication based relationship. Perhaps a synthesis of the ideals of both efficient and aesthetic design choice can occur. Next entry will focus more on the specific ways roads come through our lives, not just in dense areas, but in general. From there, we all can see what has the ability to change.