SladeSheaffer_M.Arch_PhoenicianBikeatecture

A C A S E for P H O E N I C I A N B I K E AT E C T U R E

t ojec r P t en ty pend Universi e d n 021 ch I ate M.Ar izona St Spring 2 Ar

SLADE SHEAFF

ER

A C A S E for P H O E N I C I A N B I K E AT E C T U R E

SLADE SHEAFFER Arizona State University | The Design School M.Arch Independent Applied Project | Spring 2021 | Chair: Philip Horton | Co-Chair: Dr. Olivier Vallerand

PRIMER

02

intro what’s to be done? thesis position terminology / lexicon

04 06 07 09

CONTEXT

12

canal history phoenix is bad for bikes! instances of obstruction obstruction typologies cyclist personas reaching critical mass cycling

14 20 24 25 26 34

PROPOSAL

36

architecturalizing infrastructure railing design kit of parts

38 39 40

speculative interventions site 02: I-17 & grand canal site 03: indian school rd & grand canal site 04: tempe town lake (eastern end)

42 44 48 52

intensive intervention: PHX bike gardens axon component diagrams floor / structural plans sections experience closing

56 60 68 80 86 95

acknowledgments sources

97 99

PRIMER

cycle (or hike) to the top of 36th st. for this lovely view (and pass Frank Lloyd Wright’s Norman Lykes House on the way)

The legacy of twentieth-century low-density urban development, or urban sprawl, is an increasingly pressing sustainability and resilience issue in many American cities such as Phoenix. Growing populations coupled with continued sprawl create a positive feedback loop of more auto-centric infrastructure (i.e. streets) with increased traffic and emissions, contributing to climate change by deepening dependence on fossil fuels.

Furthermore, suburban sprawl development has segregated urban functions, placing schools, homes, and workplaces far apart, which then requires more auto infrastructure to facilitate movement between these routine destinations. It’s a vicious cycle.

Vehicles and pavement both have consequential environmental impacts, including worsening air quality, sealing soils resulting in increased flooding and water pollution, destruction of ecological habitats, and urban heat island effect. Reorienting city development values away from vehicles and toward a pedestrian and bicycle-focused could help make progress towards solving some of these local and global environmental issues. However, currently, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, more people are working at home and doubting the old ways of car commuting, and since March 2020, Improved bicycle sales have skyrocketed1. cyclist and pedestrian-friendly infrastructure

combined with policies that incentivize bicycle commuting is one underutilized way to reduce auto-dependence and its related carbon emissions and environmental impacts. At the same time, this approach encourages healthy lifestyles and improves the human experience of a cityscape.

Many European cities have already achieved admirable levels of bicycle commuting (seven European capitals boast cycling modal share of 10% or greater1, although the size and commuting distance of these cities undoubtedly lends an advantage). Meanwhile, of the United States’ 70 largest cities, only Portland, Oregon and Washington D.C. have a cycling modal share of 5% or greater2. This is likely because many of the largest, sprawling American cities, built for auto-centric lifestyles, have grown completely inhospitable to pedestrians and cyclists alike.

This does not necessarily mean, however, that there is no potential for vastly improved cycling and pedestrian networks in such cities; through a combination of public policies and improved infrastructure, the attractiveness of bike commuting could be bolstered, creating a more welcoming cycling environment to entice people to give it a try. Nevertheless, change often needs a catalyst; so, what exactly will it take for cycling to become a viable commuting option in Phoenix and other sprawling cities?

18

what’s to be done?

The argument for improved cycling infrastructure should be presented along with the following consideration: improvements in cycling infrastructure combined with new regulations and incentives in the short term may prove beneficial for more than just cyclecommuters and traffic reduction. In recent years, it has become increasingly clear that cycling infrastructure could be used for more than just cycling. E-bikes, one of the latest trends, offer electronic assist and higher speeds for the average commuter (a low-power motorcycle, of sorts); concepts like Canyon Bicycles’ Future Mobility Concept Vehicle push this idea further, offering the added auto-esque benefits of weather protection and increased storage space2. Rideshare scooters by Lyft, Bird, Lime and others have taken cities by storm. All these new methods of transportation have potential to revolutionize personal travel as more sustainable and efficient, and all can utilize bicycle infrastructure.

So, while cycling and bike commuting itself might not be the end-all and singular solution to sustainable urban mobility in sprawling cities like Phoenix, it may open the door for other transportation avenues, as well. Nonetheless, without crucial interventions, fractured existing cycling networks will continue to make bike-commuting (and previously discussed alternative personal transit methods) seem unrealistic, impractical, and unattractive to the

average commuter. A well-designed, strategic intervention, however, could go beyond simply making these transit methods feasible—it could simultaneously improve the functionality of the urban fabric it weaves through.

Phoenix, specifically, is a city of canals, first developed by the Hohokam centuries ago.

However, if some have sprouted excellent public pathways, many of them have become wasted spaces–fenced off from adjacent buildings and empty of the potential urban functions they could serve. To promote and catalyze the further use of Phoenician canals, I am proposing an architectural solution in the form of a modular, integrated infrastructure system combined with policy recommendations that could link canal paths where major road crossings or other impediments occur. Such a system, in addition to creating continuity between currently fragmented canal pathways and future canal paths, could provide bus stops and other transit infrastructure, shading, platforms for vegetation, community meeting places, and even opportunities for housing. This system could provide stronger and more functional links to existing and future public transportation networks to encourage mixed bike and public transit commuting—the combination being a promising and increasingly popular transportation method5. Diving deeper, such a system could even serve as the framework for a new micro live-work-play model, creating

Image: A Strava heatmap of recorded cycling activities around Phoenix, Scottsdale & Tempe. Credit: Strava6

a smaller-scale and more localized version of contemporary urban developments, such as ASU’s Novus Innovation Corridor.

But a system of infrastructure is likely not enough. What this project truly centers around is a proposal of Phoenician bikeatecture—large, exciting projects that encourage people to get on their bikes. Compelling interventions could hopefully catalyze a bike revolution in Phoenix, encouraging people to start biking, and showing them that cycling in Phoenix is possible.

While canals may be a characteristic fairly unique to Phoenix, the rights-of-way, under which public canal paths are categorized, are not. If such a system could be widely applied in the infamously sprawling Phoenix Metro, so too could it be applied in cities throughout the

United States and the world that may have similarly fragmented linear infrastructures.

Beyond simply unifying and strengthening existing infrastructure networks, how might this project catalyze further development of pedestrian and cycling infrastructure? How could such a framework be informed by other cities with successful cycling/pedestrian models?

Lastly, how might this project spur a change from traffic/street-oriented architecture to pedestrian/cyclist corridororiented architecture? Ultimately, this project will aim to answer these questions and make more possible and attractive the idea of bike commuting and commuting by alternate methods in a city like Phoenix, subsequently reducing emissions, fostering healthy lifestyles, and improving the enjoyability of the cityscape.

thesis position 1. The Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) should create legislation that funds implementation of strategic commuting corridor improvements. This funding would: a. Implement the proposed cycling infrastructure ‘kit-of-parts’ which will create continuity where paths are fragmented and generally improve infrastructure. b. Improve and create cycling corridors along canals where currently only gravel roads or degrading pavement exists. c. Create public awareness campaigns to promote the new bikeways and alternate methods of travel, such as scooters, e-bikes, personal vehicles, etc.

2. In addition to creating a more comprehensive cycling/alternate transportation network, the newly designed infrastructure system should leave the door open for future expansion and architectural integration that will shift the project from solely infrastructure to amenity.

3. To spark excitement for cycling in the Phoenix Metro, MAG should invest in a limited number of strategic bikeatecture projects that offer cyclists unique and intriguing destinations.

4. Such implementation of these programs and interventions will ultimately lead to further incentive for bicycle/alternative commuting methods that will ease traffic in the Phoenix Metro and lead to more equitable communities and access to transportation.

granite reef dam awaits at the eastern termini of the south and arizona canals

bikeatecture

[noun] Architecture designed around bikes. Beyond simply architecturalizing infrastructure such as bike paths or bridges, bikeatecture infrastructuralizes architecture, integrating fun, bikeable features with feature projects and other functional programming often suited, but not limited to, bikes. Bikeatecture is an enthusiastic invitation to get on a bike.

bicycle

[noun] also bike, cycle, two-wheeler, velocipede. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines this as “a vehicle with two wheels tandem, handlebars for steering, a saddle seat, and pedals by which it is propelled.” It’s worth mentioning there are dozens of genres of bicycles tailored to wide-ranging and niche uses, ranging in price from a few dollars to a small fortune. In many cases, they’re machines of fun, but more importantly, they can be powerful tools of utility. Some even believe them to be an ultra-powerful tool of health and urban renewal (myself included). For the purpose of this project, “bike” also includes tricycles, recumbent bikes, and other non-traditional bikes.

This is all to say that bikes come in many shapes and sizes, but they’re all great (a subjective, but popular opinion, I would say).

bicycle

[verb] also bike, cycle, pedal, “shred.” The act of riding a bike. Sometimes a commute, sometimes a workout, sometimes dangerous (especially in Phoenix), and often pure joy.

E-bike

[noun] A more recent version of a bicycle that includes an electric motor in addition to traditional pedaling. While fully usable with standard bike infrastructure, these make cycling and cycle-commuting accessible and more practicle to larger portions of the population.

cyclist

[noun] Well, a cyclist, primarily. Someone who rides a bike. However, for the purpose of this project, the word ‘cyclist’ sometimes includes other groups, as well. Sometimes this might mean pedestrians who interact with cycling or multi-use infrastructure, and sometimes this may refer to riders of electric scooters, E-bikes, or even future individual concept vehicles.

phoenix metro

[noun] also Phoenix Metropolitan Area, Valley of the Sun, Salt River Valley. The largest metropolitain area in the Southwestern United States, with a population of over four million and infamously sprawling over 60 miles from Sun City to Queen Creek. Friendly to cars, not friendly to bikes.

phoenician

[adj.] of Phoenix, Arizona or [noun] a resident of Phoenix, Arizona or the Phoenix Metro. Recognizing this is not an official term, ‘Phoenician’ seems to be the most appropriate and fitting word.

To clarify, this is not to be confused with the Phoenicians of biblical context.

p

rt

go

de

pa

un

pa

h

k ar

e 20 2

m ys te

ry

al w

l

CONTEXT

brave cyclists might discover that the pavement going up ‘A’ Mountain near the ASU Tempe campus is bikeable—simply make it up a few meters at a 26% grade

CANAL HISTORY A quick degression to discuss the history of Phoenician canals. It might seems that the history of canals doesn’t have much to do with how present canals with foster cycling culture, and that might be true. However, understanding the history of the canals can be insightful both to the modern state of canals and the potential future of them. Furthermore, the history of the canals is deeply intwined with that of civilization in Maricopa County, as well; accordingly, the fate of canals could be deeply intertwined with the fate of the Phoenix Metro.

The first canals in the valley were built by an ancient people known by archaeologists as the Hohokam. It is unknown exactly what these people called themselves, but Hohokam is a derivative of Huhugam, a word for the ancestors of the Pima, or Akimel O’odham people. The Hohokam were a farming people who first settled in the Salt and Gila River valleys approximately 2,000 years ago. For the next 1,400 years, they constructed an extraordinary network of irrigation canals throughout the valley.

This canal system included over 1,000 miles of canals. Over the Hohokam era, the canal system was dynamic, with canals sometimes being destroyed by flooding or rebuilt and rerouted as the river itself changed. As many as 16 independent canal systems existed in the Salt River Valley during the time of the Hohokam – the largest

prehistoric irrigation system in North America.

Visitors to the Pueblo Grande museum will find a massive map of this canal network depicted on its walls; the smaller distribution and lateral canals almost resembling capillary veins as related to arteries.

For somewhat unknown reasons (archaeologists suspect environmental changes, such as drought, violent flooding, or river erosion may have played a part), the Hohokam stopped maintaining the canals around 1450 A.D. Despite the abandonment of this ancient canal network, many of today’s canals were built on the framework established by the Hohokam.

Like much of the 19th century development that occurred in the American West, the revival of the canals can be attributed to precious metals. The 1860s brought a gold rush to central Arizona that led to the founding of the Swilling Irrigation and Canal Company, which constructed the “Swilling Ditch” waterway to grow crops by diverting water from the Salt River. In May 1868, a government survey party travelling through the valley noted the emergence of a new community called Phoenix.

A drought in the 1890s caused another small exodus in the valley but would lead remaining farmers to conclude that a dam and reservoir comprised the obvious solution. The National Reclamation Act of 1902 allowed this project to

Image: Phoenix Transect7

proceed, and in 1903, the Salt River Valley Water Users’ Association was formed (which remains part of modern utility Salt River Project, or SRP). This group secured government funding that would lead to efficiency improvements in efficiency and linkage of existing canals and more notably, the project’s flagship achievement, the Theodore Roosevelt Dam. President Roosevelt himself gave a speech at the dam’s dedication in 1911, and less than a year later, Arizona gained statehood, even placing an image of the Roosevelt dam on the newly minted state seal.

Since 1917, operation of the governmentsubsidized canal system has been the responsibility of the Salt River Valley Water Users’ Association. Today, several major canals crisscross the Phoenix Metro, as well as the remnants of many of the canal laterals.

The major canals as they exist in Phoenix today and their dates of construction are:

• • • • • • • • •

Tempe Canal (1870) Grand Canal (1878) Arizona Canal (1883-85) Consolidated Canal (1891) South Canal (1907-09) Eastern Canal (1909) Crosscut Canal (1912-13) Western Canal (1912-13) The Central Arizona Project (1968)

In 1964, SRP partnered with Maricopa County to create the first recreational path along the canals – Sun Circle Trail in Mesa along the South Canal and Consolidated Canal. Since then, various stretches of all canals have been developed as multiuse paths, many of which have become heavily used by both pedestrians and cyclists. Other stretches, however, remain unmaintained and underutilized, acting less as public rights of way and more as empty, wasted urban space8.

Map of SRP Canals Credit: Salt River Project9

phoenix is bad for bikes!

And this isn’t purely a subjective statment. Several months of cycling around the Phoenix Metro provided me with ample personal evidence of poorly-maintained pathways, dangerous and fragmented bike lanes, and a city that prioritizes car travel over all else. Nonetheless, I sought a broader range of opinions to guage general perception of cycling in Phoenix.

The ASU Cycling Team10 is the collegiate club cycling group at Arizona State University. East Valley Short Group11 and OLA Roadies12 are groups where casual cyclists organize group rides and share cycling resources. Knowing valley cyclists would have a broad range of cycling experiences, I asked members of these three Facebook groups a simple question:

People for Bikes (peopleforbikes.org) is an American research and advocacy organization dedicated to responsibly growing the cycling industry for both sustainability and recreation purpose. Every year, People for Bikes releases City Ratings of several hundred municipalities throughout the United States. These ratings use a data analysis tool called the Bicycle Network Analysis, or BNA, that is designed to measure the connectivity of a city’s paths, trails and streets, to award a city a score out of five stars13.

In the 2020 City Ratings, Phoenix scored an abysmal 1.5 out of 5 stars, indicating the fractured nature of Phoenix’s bike infrastructure. Analyzing other valley cities gives similar results, showing how car culture affects the whole Phoenix Metro.

Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) Bikeway Map Credit: https://www.azmag.gov/

14

MAG Bikeway Map (reverse)

INSTANCES

of

OBSTRUCTION

The Maricopa Association of Governments provides an excellent bike map (see pages 22-23; a virtual version is also available online) that helps cyclists in the valley clearly navigate bike lanes, bike routes and designated auto-free pathways14.

A closer look at this map, however, with a focus on canal paths specifically, shows constantly-occuring discontinuities. At these spots, pathway users must cross traffic or navigate other obstacles to continue on the path. These discontinuities are inconvenient and can be hazardous, and are enough to deter many potential pathway users. Obstructions can be generally classified in six path-obstruction typologies (see next page).

Google Earth

CYCLIST PERSONAS

It’s important to understand who uses canals and how improved infrastructure might target different groups to most efficiently influence cycling modal share.

Cyclists/canal path users can be generally classified into three broad groups:

A avid cyclists B casual cyclists C non-cyclists

A Image: R.E.I.15

the avid cyclist The avid cyclist is the stereotypical “cyclist” as imagined by western society. Think Tour de France, tight-fitting cycling shorts and jerseys, zipping down bike paths near the speed of cars, and carbon bike frames.

The avid cyclist will be well-versed in traffic avoidance, pedestrian avoidance, existing bike lanes and infrastructure, and cycle path rules and etiquette (although they will often bend these rules in the name of their own speed). Avid cyclists, though often commuters, most often bike for the sake of biking. An avid cyclist will accordingly often plan routes that stay mostly or entirely on bike lanes or bikeways.

With that being said, an avid cyclist will be more likely to consider commuting by bike than most other groups, even when conditions are not ideal. They will be more comfortable taking risks and travelling the extra distances required to commute by bike.

For the avid cyclist, an improved cycling network will be almost entirely about the experience – making cycling safer, more continuous, less annoying, and more fun! As an avid cyclist myself (I acknowledge the stereotypes and confirm and accept that I do, in some ways, conform to it), I can already picture the smooth transition from street to canal and near elimination of wait time at crosswalks…

the casual cyclist The casual cyclist is the occasional cyclist – that is, someone who likely owns a bike and rides it occasionally for leisure. In some cities, they may also be the regular user of a bike share system (though bike share still has a long way to go to be feasible in many American cities). In more rare cases, this person will bike to a destination, though they are most likely not a cycle commuter. In this person’s case, destination cycling will generally be leisurely – i.e., going to the local park or town center.

This casual cyclist will generally opt not to use a bike for errands or for commuting. This is not because they are completely averse to the idea or lazy, but rather because of a plethora of other reasons that have deemed this practical application of cycling inconvenient, unappealing, or unsafe. To begin, sprawl in cities like Phoenix means longer commutes from suburb to center of commerce. With longer commutes come more traffic lights, more cars on the road to compete with and a generally more strenuous journey.

B Image: R.E.I.15

Safety, however, is likely be the more dominant factor. To be able to commute by bike, one will certainly rely on some quantity of bike lanes. In Phoenix, a cycle commuter can often make much of a journey via one of the city’s canals or bike paths.

However, just as a car must exit the freeway and forfeit speed to reach its final destination, a cycle-commuter will most likely have to leave the comfort and quiet of a bike path to reach theirs. A robust network of bike paths, such as the Phoenician canals, can be an excellent start to forge a strong cycling community; however, such systems must be supplemented by accompanying arterial bike lanes to create a cohesive cycling network. Standard, street-shoulder bike lanes, even when wellpaved and maintained, can be intimidating. No matter the experience level of a cyclist or the quality of the bike lane, it can be unnerving to have automotive traffic buzzing by at 45 miles per hour mere inches away. Furthermore, aggressive driving and poorly used turn signals create real danger of automotive collision, requiring much more acute focus and attention (i.e., a much more stressful cycling experience). Regular cyclists will also note added danger in poorly-paved bike lanes. When the surface is not smooth, riddled joints or cracks, or worse, potholes, the riding experience becomes both less enjoyable and more hazardous, given the necessity of occasionally dodging and swerving. These factors alone will deter a large portion of potential cyclists.

The true unsafety comes, however, in the discontinuity and fractured nature of the bike lanes of Maricopa County. Even with extensive planning and scouting, a cyclist in Phoenix will often be riding along a major arterial road only to find that their bike lane suddenly terminates. While an avid cyclist will often brave an arterial street without a bike lane (armed only with their flashing taillight and well-practiced glances over the shoulder), the casual commuter will almost certainly not. The only remaining option in such a case would be to default to using the sidewalk, which can be hazardous in its own right. And, of course, when a cyclist uses a sidewalk, they must use extra caution to avoid pedestrians, curbs, and motor vehicles entering and exiting the road. Accordingly, the necessity of using a sidewalk for more than short distances has power in its own to disqualify a potential commute by bike.

Casual cyclists will be the key market that can transform Phoenix (or any auto-centric city) from an auto nightmare to a cyclist paradise. While an avid cyclist will still cycle with the inconveniences and dangers of imperfect cycle infrastructure, the casual cyclist will choose not to. If these hazards and inconveniences can be addressed, it could vastly increase the number of people willing to consider bicycling a serious method of transportation.

the non-cyclist The name of this group may seem misleading or unclear – allow me to explain. Despite the massive potential of the casual cyclist persona, the non-cyclist could encompass so many more. We live in a world of amazing new gadgets, technologies and constantly evolving possibilities, and people of all ages are excited and willing to engage with them.

C Image: Axios3

Enter E-scooters! A mere decade ago, Bird, Lime, Razor, and many others didn’t exist. Now, a trivial fee will allow anyone with a smartphone to zip around the streets at speeds near or exceeding standard cyclists. E-scooters can be seen everywhere on city corners, accessible to all that are willing (and able) to give it a try. And while scooter share programs may have had some initial road bumps, their success and growth continue. What was once a novelty entertainment has now become a serious and viable method of transportation.

Electric scooters, however, are generally affected by the very same issues that plague cycling. Poor and fragmented infrastructure means that the use of scooters for mid-longer range commutes is still widely ignored. Nonetheless, like with bikes, a robust, cohesive cycling network could change that.

And e-scooters aren’t it! E-bikes are the latest, and perhaps greatest, new trend. What is essentially a hybrid bicyclemotorcycle makes speedier cycling commutes available to people of most physical abilities. No longer will avid cyclists be the only ones able to take full advantage of the speed of bikes. Despite e-bikes being generally pricey and outside the price range of standard bicycles, they open up the very real possibility of older people considering cycle commuting. This could mean more middle-aged and elderly people choosing to commute by bike versus the generally younger existing cycle commuters.

More technologies may be coming, as well. In 2020, Canyon, a German bicycle company, proposed its “Future Mobility Concept,” which is essentially an e-bike with an added weather-proof shell and storage space. In practice, it would function as a one-person car, capable of using both local streets and bike infrastructure4. This and similar vehicles will bring exciting auto alternatives to the market in coming years, further incentivizing a switch away from the automobile.

It’s not hard to imagine the umbrella of bikes, e-bikes, e-scooters and alternative transportation covering just about the entire population. Coupled with the use of bolstered public transportation, as well as some major inevitable cultural shifts, a robust cycling network could become the way to get around in Phoenix – or at the very least, a viable alternative to the auto.

But it will all rely on the infrastructure. Without dramatic interventions to improve the efficiency, safety, and appeal of the Phoenician cycling network, further development and sprawl will only mean more cars, not less.

To reach a critical mass of cyclists in Phoenix that could tip the scales and catalyze a shift away from car culture, groups B and C will be the key. Reaching groups B and C, importantly, will consist of fixing the fragmented, hazardous and inconvenient existing bike system. Doing so should create a consistent, aesthetic, and easily recognizable bike infrastructure . . . . . . in simpler terms, this action is

architecturalizing infrastructure

16

Simply fixing infrastructure alone, however, is likely not enough. Cycling personas B and C need an exciting reason to get on their bikes (or scooters, or e-bikes, or personal transit vehicles). Various projects have been able to accomplish this feat, though these projects are most often seen in Europe (perhaps not so coincidentally), where practical cycling is far more widespread.

The question of such project’s success could be related to the pervasiveness of utility cycling, or recreational cycling at the very least. It’s a classic ‘chicken or the egg’ scenario—would cycling need to be commonplace in a given context for a such a project to be successful, or would the presence of such a project catalyze the expansion of cycling culture?

This project argues the latter—that in order to create excitement around cycling and expand the Phoenix cycling community, the city needs its own projects that infrastructuralize architecture. . . . Phoenix needs its own

bikeatecture

PROPOSAL

Part 2 of the solution is to implement bikeatecture at a limited number of strategic sites. Of these four sites, identified as ideal places for bikeatecture, three were considered speculatively with surface-level analysis. One was chosen for an intensive proposal.

The Grand Canal Path, which exists as gravel/outdated pavement on both sides of I-17, stops at the frontage road running on both the East-West sides of I-17 (N Black Canyon Hwy on Google Maps). While the canal itself passes underneath I-17 (which here is paved at the same level as the surrounding frontage roads), no infrastructure is provided for the path to continue over/under I-17.

To reach the other side of I-17, path users must traverse over 500 meters north via the frontage road to cross I-17 at the Indian School Road overpass, then traverse back south via the other frontage road. Both frontage roads have discontinuous sidewalks and no bike lane, requiring path users to interact with fast-moving traffic. The result is extreme difficulty regaining the trail, and an ideal solution would bridge I-17 and take advantage of potential for new urban space.

Google Maps17

The Grand Canalscape Multi-Use Trail in central-east Phoenix was recently renovated, having been completed in February 2020 as a concrete multi-use pathway. Between Priest Dr. in the east and 19th Ave. in the west (as of Spring 2021; the Grand Canalscape will be expanded west in coming years), the path is in mostly excellent, new condition. Notably, however, users of the Grand Canalscape still must cross several major arterials. While these are mostly provided with crosswalks and pedestrian stoplights, the wait can still be long and inconvenient for cyclists.

A major pathway disruption occurs between Indian School Rd. and 16th St., where the roughly 100-yard stretch of canal path has been left completely unpaved. The city’s intent is for users to proceed to the nearby intersection, and cross both streets there. This double crossing, however, can be hazardous and highly inefficient. The site accordingly presents a peculiar sliver of land, with an ideal solution creating an overpass of both streets.

Google Maps17

The Rio Salado Pathway on the south bank of the Salt River and Tempe Town Lake maintains continuity for several miles to both the east and west of the lake. Similarly, the path on the north bank swings north at the eastern end of the lake to connect with the Indian Bend Wash Greenbelt, running the length of Scottsdale. Unlike the west end of Tempe Town Lake, however, the east end lacks a pedestrian bridge, meaning cyclists wishing to cross must navigate McClintock Dr. and Curry Rd. to be able to regain the path.

The existing in the lake, however, are three abandoned piles that provide anchoring opportunities.

Additional considerations for this site include the necessity to leave a corridor open on the lake for competetive rowers, and the future expansion of ASU’s Novus Innovation Corridor directly to the south.

Google Maps17

rio

sa

la d o

pa

nea

en

ri

ha v

ll a ve .b

rc op

mi

d ge

ay w h t

e a rc e stl

While the speculative sites provided potential solutions at a low resolution, site 01 was chosen for an intensive, highly-developed intervention. This site became the main focus of this project.

The site presents a curious triangular plot occupied only by an existing billboard. Users of the canal must traverse both Camelback Rd. and 40th St. to be able to continue on the other side. The site also boasts excellent views of Camelback Mountain to the northeast, the Phoenix Mountains to the north, and Downtown Phoenix to the southwest.

The existing site presents an odd triangular sliver between Camelback Rd., 40th St. and the Arizona Canal. Additionally, the existing site hosts a billboard that will need to be replaced, and apartment parking to the northeast must be minimally impeded.

The first move is to bridge the canal and create a public amphitheater. The 15’-high sculptural bowl additionally serves as an air retention basin to help maintain a microclimate, and an acoustic barrier to the busy Camelback road to the south. A stair-ramp (stramp) on the southeast provides pedestrian access while the ground-level northwest entrance provides cycling access.

The second move fulfills the site’s next functional requirement to link the fragmented canal patv. Circumnavigation paths allow cyclists to move continuously over Camelback Rd. and 40th St. and past the structure, while the 18’ concourse level also allows the opportunity to engage the ramps and move upward or down to street level.

The defining move is a series of 6’-wide concentric ramps and platforms that gradually guide users from street level up to a 48’ viewing platform, from which users can peer over rooftops and enjoy views of nearby Camelback Mountain, the Phoenix Mountains, and Downtown Phoenix. From the inner viewing platform, users may peer down to the sculptural amphitheater below.

A series of columns line the semi-circular plane between the concentric ramps. These in turn support cantilevered ‘branches’ that hang cables, supporting the ramps and platforms below. A pair of arches allow the linear segments to span the canal. Two sets of dualing tension and compression rings with a supplemental arch allow the structure to reach inward to shade the space below.

On the semicircular segments, sun canopies also function as wind catchers, diverting wind downward into the 3’ cavity between the concentric ramps. An outer curtain wall retains and directs the falling air to the center space, while a series of plant racks on the inner side host climbing vines that thrive in the Arizona climate and filter the outside air.

Finally, the building fulfils its promise to replace the site’s existing commercial revenue—instead, the structure hosts a larger, 90-degree panoramic billboard. Similarly, the inner amphitheater is adorned with an interior screen making the space an effective movie venue. A stage beneath the screen allows additional functionality to host concerts and other public events.

floor plan 00’

ground & NW entrance + bike parking, toilets

floor plan 06’

SE entrance

floor plan 12’

concourse

0’

25’

50’

floor plan 18’

concourse & bridge

floor plan 24’

NW platform

0’

25’

50’

floor plan 30’

SE platform

floor plan 36’

NW platform

0’

25’

50’

floor plan 42’

SE platform

floor plan 48’

view platform

0’

25’

50’

structural plan 60’

tension rings

structural plan 65’

support rings

0’

25’

50’

structural plan 70’

compression rings

southeast elevation

section SW-NE

The story of PHX Bike Gardens is best told in section. These progressive SW-NE sections move from the southeast elevation (previous page) through the stramp, SE entrance, and ramps before reaching the longest cut of the structure (next pages)

catching air / maintenance of microclimate

structural load paths

section W-E

section NW-SE

journey up the outer ramp

video of the journey up the ramps can be viewed here: https://youtu.be/y8AzV5Cuij0

around the inner viewing platform

The sculptural amphitheater from above. Stairs are strategically angled towards the screen and stage, and openings in the bowl for the NW and SE entrances also create uniquely-curved spaces for stairs and seating. Shadows from the tension ring and supporting cables above evoke spokes on a bicycle wheel. video of the user’s perspective from the inner view platform can ve viewed here:

https://youtu.be/8LuR9OIeDRI

journey down the inner ramp

video of the journey down the ramps can be viewed here: https://youtu.be/eBPG7R83Ksw

cycling the outer view path

view of camelback mountain

video of the above shot can be viewed here: https://youtu.be/F4F8aaPlhn8

PHX Bike Gardens aspires to be a bikeatecture project for the Phoenix Metro that could catalyze a change away from auto-centric car culture. To be enjoyed by cyclists and pedestrians alike, this is a place where you could sit down with your family to watch a viewing of Pixar’s 2006 film Cars, a homage to the American automobile love affair, and then hop on your bike, and bicycle home.

the complete video presentation can be viewed here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMuPQqF-Kn0&ab_channel=SladeGSheaffer

+ my online portfolio can be found here: https://sgsheaffer.wixsite.com/sladesheaffer

First and foremost, I must thank my project chair, Philip Horton. As interim director of The Design School this past year, he has likely had to navigate the Zoom meetings and technical troubleshooting realities of the coronavirus pandemic more than anyone. Despite having his hands full (and very effectively managing TDS), Phil was always a text away, and provided far more input and feedback than can be expressed in a paragraph. Not only was Phil an excellent chair for this project, but he has been a voice of encouragement and support throughout my two years at ASU. Phil, your work and companionship is deeply appreciated by many of my peers and myself, and I can’t thank you enough.

I must also thank my project co-chair and professor of INT 650, Diversity in Design, Dr. Olivier Vallerand. Besides serving as a valuable voice with extensive knowledge of cycling and other urban issues, Dr. Vallerand’s expertise and passion for issues of diversity and equity is contagious and highly impactful.

To the other reviewers a faculty who sat through bi-weekly reviews: Professors Thomas Hartman, Darren Petrucci and Max Underwood, your regular feedback was immensely valuable, and it has been wonderful being able to work with you. Dr. Paul Coseo, thank you for your early feedback on the idea, and to our exterior reviewers, thank you for watching my final video with enthusiasm and for the charming discourse afterwards.

I owe a humble and grateful thank you to The Design School @ ASU itself, and the wonderful faculty who have guided my way through my M.Arch degree.

And for being awarded the 2021 AIA Henry Adams Medal, I am deeply honored.

To the excellent friends I’ve made during my time at ASU: Cole, Nathan, Anna, Shasta, Sunny, Yanela, Sashank, Sam, and many more. You are an incredibly bright group, and I’m honored to call you friends. Thank you for the countless laughs, frantic group chats, and support for the last two years. Cheers!

To my parents, Brad and Jen, my sister, Shay, and extended family (including my nephew Kohen, born September 2020), who have brightened my days and cheered me on. And, most importantly, to my partner, Maria, who has tolerated the many late nights and deadline pushes with love and endless support.

Lastly, I have to thank bikes! Mountain biking and cycling have have been a constant source of joy, especially in the midst of the pandemic. Being able to study and design around something I’ve become so passionate about has made for an unforgettable semester, and it was an absolute blast!

pa

pa

wh

go

ite

ri m l

es tt

ai tr

bu

m ys te

ry all w

1. European Cyclists’ Federation. (2021). ECF Annual Report 2020. Retrieved January 11, 2021, from https://ecf.com/system/files/ECF_Annual_Report_2020.pdf 2. League of American Bicyclists. (2021). Bicycling & Walking in the United States, 2018 Benchmarking Report. Retrieved January 11, 2021, from https://bikeleague. org/sites/default/files/Benchmarking_Report-Sept_03_2019_Web.pdf 3. Tracy, J. (2020, September 15). A cycling boom has materialized as a result of the coronavirus pandemic. Axios. https://www. axios.com/bikes-bicycles-sales-coronavirusc5197e82-a8aa-4360-8989-65edb97427c6. html

So

Mo

TV

ro a

4. Hahn, J. (2020, September 11). Canyon unveils “revolutionary” pedal-powered concept vehicle. Dezeen. https://www.dezeen. com/2020/09/09/canyon-future-mobility-concept-vehicle-transport-design/

d

5. van Mil, J. F., Leferink, T. S., Annema, J. A., & van Oort, N. (2020). Insights into factors affecting the combined bicycle-transit mode.

Public Transport. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s12469-020-00240-2 6. Strava, Inc. (2021) Strava Global Heatmap. Retrieved from https://www.strava.com/heatmap 7. Phoenix Transect. (2017, December 29).

Map of Prehistoric Irrigation Canals. Phoenix Transect. https://phoenixtransect. org/2014/05/29/urban-agriculture-and-cultural-politics-at-the-phoenix-indian-school-site/002-urban-agriculture-and-cultural-politics-at-the-phoenix-indian-school-site-20140503171529/ 8. Salt River Project. (n.d.). History of the Phoenix canal system. SRP. https://www.srpnet. com/water/canals/history.aspx

9. Salt River Project. (n.d.). Everything you need to know about canal trails. SRP. https://www. srpnet.com/water/canals/trails.aspx 10. ASU Cycling Team. (n.d.). In Facebook [Facebook page]. Retrieved February 15, 2021, from https://www.facebook.com/groups/asucycling 11. East Valley Short Loop. (n.d.). In Facebook [Facebook page]. Retrieved February 15, 2021, from https://www.facebook.com/groups/FullGas/?multi_permalinks=3235485710004173 12. OLA Roadies. (n.d.). In Facebook [Facebook page]. Retrieved February 15, 2021, from https://www.facebook.com/ groups/1137698426259458 13. People For Bikes. (2020, June 9). How does your city rate? Find out! #PFBCityRatings.

PlacesForBikes City Ratings. https://cityratings.peopleforbikes.org/all-cities-ratings/ 14. Maricopa Association of Governments. (n.d.).

Bikeways. AZMAG. https://azmag.gov/Programs/Maps-and-Data/Bikeways 15. Recreational Equipment, Inc. (2020, November 30). Best Road Cycling Routes for Climbers in Phoenix. REI Co-op Adventure Center. https:// destinations.rei.com/local-tips/phoenix-roadbike-climb-routes 16. González, M. F. (2020, June 3). Inspiring Architectural Projects for Bicycles. ArchDaily. https://www.archdaily.com/806102/12-inspiring-architectural-projects-for-bicycles 17. Google Maps. (n.d.). [Phoenix, Arizona].

Retrieved January 11, 2021 from https://www. google.com/maps 18. Google. (2020, July 21). Google Earth Pro 7.3.3.7786 (64-bit). [Phoenix, Arizona].

A Case for Phoenician Bikeatecture is a love letter to bikes. During the COVID-19 pandemic, after being confined to sitting behind screens for the majority of my waking hours, cycling became my way to maintain sanity. This project was born of countless encounters with “bike lane ends” signs, close calls with traffic, and constant interruptions of multi-use canal paths by autoways. Frustrated with the inconvenience of cycling in Phoenix, but recognizing the potential of cycling to serve as a powerful urban solution, I sought to consider just how the Phonician bike system might change to convince more people to participate. What began as a simple infrastructural and policy solution turned into something much larger, and much more fun . . .

This book is the story of my research, and the product of my exploration—the idea that Phoenix should create ‘bikeatecture’ to make people excited to get on their bikes, plus my proposal for a bold bikeatecture intervention dubbed PHX Bike Gardens.

SLADE SHEAFFER M.Arch Independent Project

Arizona State University | Spring 2021 Chair: Philip Horton Co-Chair: Dr. Olivier Vallerand