Time To Build Highways Underground?
by Karin Kloosterman, Tel Aviv 
on 01.26.07
Hundertwasser- Austrian architect, artist, environmentalist- proposed green and aesthetic solutions for highways and byways. His sketches of underground highways lined by trees to filter out noxious chemicals, also showed such a concept could minimize noise and maximize land use. Judging by the rate of the country’s expansion, Israel could use a little bit of his vision right now. The tiny country compared in population density to the Netherlands, is growing in a rapid rate. That means more autos on the already packed streets.
A politician and her geologist husband (he built the Mount Scopus tunnel in Jerusalem) in the city of Ra'anana, near Tel Aviv, are against the planned new Road 531, which would connect their city Ra'anana to Herzliya. They suggest that the city build the road and the planned railroad track, underground.
Dr. Tsali Polishook, the geologist husband has been involved in planning other tunnels in Israel, and has already prepared a preliminary plan for a tunnel and presented it to the mayors of Herzliya and Ra'anana. The couple also hope to enlist local residents for their cause.
In a recent Haaretz report Polishook says, "Tunnels would decrease noise and the air pollution, and would prevent the creation of a large barrier between the cities that causes great damage to the landscape. This would also save in compensation payments for decreased property values. Tunnels will save extensive amounts of land, which totals 4,500 dunams under the current plan. With the tunnels, only about 900 dunams would be used."
As for the economic cost, Polishook estimates the tunnels would cost NIS 2.7 billion, about what the current plan would need. That sum does not include further benefits - including the lesser compensation sums for neighboring landowners, and the use of the land under which the tunnel runs. We should add to this, of course, the decreased medical expenditures of people who will not become ill from air pollution exposure. Polishook is convinced all this makes the tunnel worthwhile. ::Haaretz
Follow @TreeHugger on Twitter & get our headlines with @TH_rss!
The order-of-magnitude increase in construction materials and machine labor required to build underground roads are incredibly worse for the environment than a little noise pollution. This system yields only a very marginal increase of nominally useable land.
Looks like such a tunnel would be quite a bit more expensive than a normal above-ground road. And I imagine the extra space would be used for development rather than trees.
It's a very cool concept though.
I fail to see how this would result in an 80% reduction in land use. I think this is a wonderful idea, in theory. I think This fails to take into consideration other increase in costs.
How much structural support will you need to support the weight of a tree and the soil in which it grows over a roadway (now how much when the ground is wet.)
How will you handle the drainage of a roadway that is now 12 to 20 feet below the surrounding area (and prevent the roadway from becoming a river).
The compensation from neigboring landowners (if it's anything like way they handle compensation in the United States) will not come even close to the increased cost of building this style of roadway.
I am a big fan of "The Big Dig" in boston where they moved underground the downtown highway corridor and covered it with parks. But the cost of this project was enormous.
I don't think anybody would want to do that for long stretches of road, but for short distances close to habitations, it could probably work, especially in historical areas where you don't want to uglify things.
But then, pedestrian-only areas would probably do a better job :)
I think 'underground' and 'tunnel' are misnomers, as are the cost comparisons to true underground tunnels. Perhaps a more equivalent cost comparison would be to current flyover constructions.
From what I can see, you're basically digging a trench, installing concrete 'wings' and then covering the wings with earth. A far cry from actual tunnelling. Very conceptual, but I like it and the way they're thinking!
just imagine the amount of carbon released using all that additional concrete. this idea would be devastating to our planet. but the drawing is cute.
Just switch to electric cars. The roads will get a lot quiter.
The worst things about busy highways is how they prevent wildlife from crossing. We need intermittent tunnels or raised sections for wildlife to pass over or under.
And tolls to pay for it.
Here in Los Angeles, they are planning this for a 5 mile long freeway extension (710) planned since 1950, never built due to public opposition. This would be the longest highway tunnel in North America if built.
Property values are now so expensive in Los Angeles, that building the tunnel would actually be less expensive than compensating landowners for their land, even at slightly less than market rate. Of course, if they go deep enough, they do not have compensate landowners above in any way for use of their land.
So this idea could actually work out economically speaking, in areas where land costs are prohibitively large.
Of course, exhaust from the cars does need to be vented from the tunnel. A 100 foot tall vent stack would be the only part of the structure visible above ground.
It seems to me that there would be a deafening roar inside the "tunnel." Some noise would escape out the top, but not before bouncing around for a good long while.
The biggest engineering challenges would come at the on-and-off accesses.
This much effort could be directed at projects that would make a much greater impact.
yes, sleckie, something has got to be done about allowing wildlife to cross roadways. i've been trying to come up with something myself, i wonder if there have been any solutions to this issue enacted anywhere.
zaxxon, they are considering animal bridges here in Washington state:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/227961_bridge10.html
Quote:
"The worst things about busy highways is how they prevent wildlife from crossing. We need intermittent tunnels or raised sections for wildlife to pass over or under.
And tolls to pay for it."
I hope you mean tolls to be paid by the wildlife trying to cross from one side of the highway to another. :)
That's the way it should be!
Actually the "Animal Crossings" are not just for the sake of animals. Deer collisions cause massive amounts of damage to cars and people every year! If bridges help prevent that ,so much the better!
The problem here is the cars, they shouldn't even exist. That's what know by looking at the drawing, it's so simple, hiding cars underground is a great solution. Since they are labeled as one of the most pollutant devices we humans have created and also seen as an addiction to many, they just don't notice that they're so addicted to the car that they even can't walk for 5 minutes.
It's so strange and true.