RE: Re: [carfree_cities] Transport Infrastructure (was Shock Tactics)
> -----Original Message-----As far as I know, Habitat '67 building is still a condo building. I've
> From: Richard Risemberg [mailto:rickrise@...]
> Sent: 1 juin, 2000 17:11
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: Re: Re: [carfree_cities] Transport Infrastructure (was Shock
> At 6/2/00 04:06:00, you wrote:
> >One of my favorite versions of car free living, would make
> much use of
> >terraced buildings, so that the sides instead of going
> straight up from
> >the ground would incline 45 degrees. Actually with
> terraces, it would
> >be steps. Each condo, or co-op would have a balcony. In
> the interior,
> >especially the wide lower floors, there would be lots of room for
> >offices, stores, classrooms, restaurants. Commercial codes are less
> >strict generally about requiring windows and egress than residential
> >codes, but some of the terrace slots, that would normally be an
> >apartment would be open to the interior, glassed in of course, but
> >employees could step out for a bit of sunshine, a smoke, feed the
> >pigeons... Between the balconies could be gutters that lead to the
> >ground so snow and rain could run off to storm sewers, or I hope, a
> Wasn't Habitat, from the Expo '67 in Montreal (which I
> attended!) similar to this? What has happened with that
> building (which was not mixed use, by the way)?
not visited this place (I'm too young), but I've heard it's a nice place
to live and it's expensive. The thing to know is how does one access
restaurants, shops, banks, work etc... from there. The bus or other transit
certainly goes there, but it's always better if you can find all the basics
by walking or cycling, so you don't rely exclusively on the bus.
The architecture desing the person described above seems a good idea, there
could be a large shoppin/utility indoor network on the ground floor that
would cover the total area of the block, and
on top of it you find apartments all around an interior terrasse (like what
is called "Jardins intérieurs" in France). Since the garage needs to contain
only bikes/carts/strollers, there should be more extra space on the ground
floor for some more utilities. And what about metro freight (or passenger)
that arrives underneath the whole setup?
In Longueuil (South Shore of Montreal), there is a good setup. A network of
several towers (about 15-20 stories) containing mostly apartments or condos
and some offices, and on the ground floor or basements there are some
shops and utilities, even an indoor gym and swimming pool. All the buildings
are accessible by indoor overpasses, and the Longueuil metro station along
with a large bus terminal arrive in the center, everything is accessible
from the inside.
There is one disadventage of this dream setup: when you open the window,
you hear heavy car noise because the complex is surrounded by highways and
the bus/metro terminal attracts a good number of cars. It's a paradise for
a person wanting to live indoors only, but for someone who wants to poke
outside, listen to birdies, walk through bushes, it's paradise when he's
inside with closed windows. There you feel your outside living is somewhat
spoiled by those metal/glass /$%"%$$&?* boxes.
> > There's certainly a way to carry even more, maybe if oneYou got the point, again. BTW, what's the definition of sport? A sport is
> builds tandem
> > units. Say 2 pedalers could carry 2000 pounds behind. Also
> a larger gear
> > set could help as it would need less pedaling strokes to pull more.
> > Your idea is great! Instead of formula 1 car races (where the winner
> > may lose because his car is defective), we could settle a Grand Prix
> > cycling, that also includes a load carrying competition.
> Gee, it would be super to see the trike or heavy haul biking event on
> sports television for its own interest and because it would
> be a way of
> easing it into peoples' heads that they do not need a van or
> even a car
> to haul significant loads. Heavy haul biking -- sounds pretty brawny
> doesn't it?
an activity or a competition where the natural human body does the work,
isn't that the definition?
I'm getting upset here when in the sports news report on TV they talk about
Formula I before talking about hockey (or baseball in the US) which is
our national sport. I don't consider F1 as a sport since the body of
the athletes doesn't perform the whole exercise. They should read the news
in the order as follows:
- The national sport of your country (hockey, baseball or soccer...)
- The other natural sports in any arbitrary order (including cycling,
running, gym, swimming, canoe, etc...)
- And finally (if there's time left), the F1 or any other artificial sport.