|
I sent a letter to the NY Times suggestiong now would be an awesome time to begin modifying highrise buildings so that every Tower was linked by a network of Public Skywalks - geting people off street level.
What are your thoughts on a public Skywalk linking buildings above the street level? Good or Bad for the Future of NY?
Never been to New York, but I've been to plenty of other cities, some of them crowded as well (Washington, D.C. comes to mind...). I think it'd be good to have, but doubt it'll happen any time soon simply because of the cost.
For the record, the benefits would be, among other things, separate areas of transportation for cars and people (so no "car runs a red light, hits a pedestrian walking across the street", no waiting for opposing traffic to stop so you can walk across the street, no cars waiting for people to clear the crosswalk to go, etc.), a way for pedestrians to get around without being exposed to the elements, and so on.
|
|
Is there something wrong with people being on street level, and what is good about them being above the streets as opposed to them being under the streets?
Honestly though, I've never been to New York (City) and have no desire to ever go, so I really have to file it under "don't care."
-Skeld
Once you remove the majority of the people from the street level you reduce pedestrian v. traffic interference. The only reason anyone would have to be on the street level is to catch a taxi or bus or drive their car. No more clusters of pedestrians crossing the road in front of traffic.
On the Down side Commercial shop fronts would need to move from street level to the Skywalk because they would experience a reduction in walk-in Public.
makes sense, and its a better way to spend tax-payers' money than to contiously put them in the war machine IMO
well it did not seem to hurt Calgary much. neither did it hurt Minneapolis it seems.
heck a lot of places are putting them up.
I think the unique part of New Yorks plan is if I remember, to use old unused railway systems and convert them into elevated parks for municipal use. The will have the added benefit of lowering the ambient temperature of the city.
is a pedestrian walking on a skyway a Skywalker?
The biggest problem with that plan is that most buildings in NYC couldn't stand the strain of the extra weight of the sky-walks or the traffic.
Which is why, as far as I know, they are using existing structures and re-purposing them.
Is there something wrong with people being on street level, and what is good about them being above the streets as opposed to them being under the streets?
Honestly though, I've never been to New York (City) and have no desire to ever go, so I really have to file it under "don't care."
-Skeld
Hey...that hurts, man!
|
|
Hey...that hurts, man!Is there something wrong with people being on street level, and what is good about them being above the streets as opposed to them being under the streets?
Honestly though, I've never been to New York (City) and have no desire to ever go, so I really have to file it under "don't care."
-Skeld
You'll get over it.
Or if you're in Toronto, it's like an underground maze with their tunneling systems that you can walk all over the city and even visit shops, restaurants, go to a hotel; etc. You'd never have to step outdoors. You could become ... mole people.
|
Speaking as a resident of Minneso-tah, the skyways are great when the temperature drops below -20. And, since the Minneapolis are the largest interconnected skyways on the planet, I'd say they're pretty popular.
Of course, they're not open 24/7... And you're pretty much regulated to going from point A to point B since they're aren't exits at every block...
Speaking as a resident of Minneso-tah, the skyways are great when the temperature drops below -20. And, since the Minneapolis are the largest interconnected skyways on the planet, I'd say they're pretty popular.
Of course, they're not open 24/7... And you're pretty much regulated to going from point A to point B since they're aren't exits at every block...
Is it like...oh man..what was that campaign setting with all the catwalks?! I can't remember the name!!!
|
Is it like...oh man..what was that campaign setting with all the catwalks?! I can't remember the name!!!Speaking as a resident of Minneso-tah, the skyways are great when the temperature drops below -20. And, since the Minneapolis are the largest interconnected skyways on the planet, I'd say they're pretty popular.
Of course, they're not open 24/7... And you're pretty much regulated to going from point A to point B since they're aren't exits at every block...
Catwalks: The Skywalking.
Is there something wrong with people being on street level, and what is good about them being above the streets as opposed to them being under the streets?
Honestly though, I've never been to New York (City) and have no desire to ever go, so I really have to file it under "don't care."
-Skeld
Once you remove the majority of the people from the street level you reduce pedestrian v. traffic interference. The only reason anyone would have to be on the street level is to catch a taxi or bus or drive their car. No more clusters of pedestrians crossing the road in front of traffic.
On the Down side Commercial shop fronts would need to move from street level to the Skywalk because they would experience a reduction in walk-in Public.
There's a certain sterility in what you are proposing. I have many reasons for being on street level. It is a great city for walking. I like pounding the pavement. I like the smells. I like looking up at the buildings like a goggle-eyed tourist and checking out the architecture. I like parks. I like jaywalking. I like seeing how neighborhoods change as I traverse long distances. I like the feeling of connection with the metropolis that I can only get when my feet are on the ground.
|
|
Perhaps something like Hong Kong has. Couple the skyways with moving walkways and you have the basis for a relativly low emmisions mass transit system. Or even something like the People Mover.
