> Your location in a city should not be designated by a mear 2
> coordinate system, but also a third coordinate accounting for height
> or even DEPTH, as building underground is just as practicle.
> I'm sorry, but I cannot possibly condone this web site which had for
> a brief moment been the boon in my crusade. There is a grievous flaw
> that negates the whole arguement present and to refer someone here
> would only confuse them.
In this group you will find many versions of how a car free city can be
designed. Though it is tempting to look back 200 years when everything
was car free, it was also electrical power free. We would change city
life and design at least as much as the auto did because we have new
ingredients in the brew, electrical power and a desire to free ourselves
I take your point about thinking 3D when it comes to urban design. And
for industrial uses particularly I say go to ground -- what better way
to control emissions, and know which companies emit which pollutants.
In this age of electrical power healthful ventilation could be
maintained far underground. If emissions could be controlled, that is,
cleaned before ejection into the atmosphere, and if noise and
contaminants could be controlled by underground containment, we would
have the interesting situation of people being able to live close to
heavy industry, without their health or esthetic senses suffering.
I really go for mixed use buildings. And I hope to see people build in
hurricane country, right on the coast, heavy, steel frame and concrete,
rounded corners that the winds can't catch, a city laced through with
canals to accomodate the inevitable floods, and the lower stories
designed to take it too, maybe as boat houses. Sometimes it would be
Venice, sometimes it would be great skateboarding.