The BPC emphasized the importance of acquiring a sufficient right-of-way and limiting access to the main motorway. A broad right-of-way would provide enough land on both sides of the road to keep billboards and unsightly development out of view. In some areas, however, most notably near Mount Vernon Avenue, Tuckahoe Road, and White Plains, the BPC was unable to purchase a wide enough swath of property to eliminate development and had to rely on landscaping to screen out unsuitable views. The area near Scarsdale Station was particularly challenging, since the parkway reservation was barely 100' wide at this point. In areas where there was a broad right-of-way, designers had more flexibility in placing the roadway and embellishing its surroundings. A broad right-of-way also made it easier to limit access from surrounding streets and properties, which enhanced safety and efficiency while eliminating the unsightly commercial establishments found along many roadways. From the early years of parkway planning, commissioners recognized that the parkway drive should be carried over or under the more important intersecting streets to accommodate four lanes of fast-moving vehicles. The commission was unable to eliminate all at-grade intersections, but when the parkway opened in 1925, nine grade-separated interchanges dramatically improved safety for parkway motorists and cross-traffic alike.(158)

Engineered Structures and the Landscape

Aside from the parkway drive itself, the BRPR’s outstanding engineered features were bridges and viaducts. The BPC insisted that prominent man-made features be designed to harmonize with the parkway’s naturalistic appearance. Most of the bridges were modern reinforced concrete structures faced with rusticated stone. Other structural elements designed to complement the parkway’s natural features were guardrails, light standards, and the rock work used in dams, retaining walls, and riverbank protection.

Parkway planners sought to combine beauty with utility and permanence. BPC engineers relied on reinforce concrete to construct attractive bridges without excessive cost. According to Jay Downer, the parkway’s bridges and viaducts were intended to "endure for centuries and mellow with the years." The BPC required that the bridges’ architectural treatments harmonize with their natural surroundings. BPC guidelines stipulated that exposed surfaces of bridges, retaining walls, and other structures were to be of rough-surfaced native stone to avoid the formal effect of cut stone.(159) For practical reasons, the BPC allowed long-span viaducts to have exposed concrete surfaces. Exposed steel girder construction was not permitted. The BPC considered steel structures to be ugly and discordantly utilitarian, whereas concrete viaducts could be built "upon pleasing and dignified lines."(160)

The BPC favored traditional arch construction for many of its earlier bridges. Downer maintained that arched bridges followed nature’s model for symmetry, graceful strength, and stability. These bridges were constructed with reinforced concrete and faced with rugged native stone. Some bridges were built using concrete girders, but were given the appearance of an arch bridge and faced with stone. Other concrete girder bridges were faced with stone and curbed with rough-hewn timbers and guardrails resting on quarry-faced stone abutments.(161)


 

(158)Downer, "Public Parks in Westchester County," 973.
(159)Downer, "Public Parks in Westchester County," 973; Bronx Parkway Commission, Report, 1922, 39.
(160)Bronx Parkway Commission, Report, 1922, 39; Final Report, 1925, 40.
(161)Downer, "Public Parks in Westchester County," 973.

|

1

|

2

|

3

|

4

|

5

|

6

|