RE: Re: [carfree_cities] Transport Infrastructure (was Shock Tactics)
- Richard Risemberg wrote:
>Wasn't Habitat, from the Expo '67 in Montreal (which I attended!) similarto
>this? What has happened with that building (which was not mixed use, bythe
>way)?The buildings still stand and are being used 33 years after Expo. I biked by
there last month they looked fine. I must say, I wasn't around during Expo.
The following URL shows how "Habitat" looked in 1967. Dawson
> > 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.