I don't understand why the world isn't a huge mall

[Biff_Loman]

Today, our city of London, Ontario was blanketed with snow. The white-out slowed traffic to a snail's pace; there were several collisions. City buses spun their tires trying to launch from bus-stops. And naturally, property owners of all kinds were obliged to remove snow.

This brought me back to one of my favourite obsessions: wondering why cities don't more closely resemble university campuses or shopping malls. Why do we have to go outside at all? Who the hell thought it would be a good idea to keep all the buildings separated? Whenever I go to a large city such as Toronto, the sheer density of the skyscrapers strikes me. "Someone missed an obvious step," I think, "when they didn't connect these buildings together."

I've often contemplated a world in which the entire city consisted of inter-connected modules, such that one would never have to step outside. Surburbia could be preserved with all its evils, as long as one could park their car at the edge (or basement) of the enclosed city. Electric people-movers, elevators, trains, and conveyor belts would provide locomotion within the complexes.

Private ownership would reign, of course; I'm not suggesting that conjoined buildings would dictate a communist system. Just because your building is connected to mine doesn't mean we have to share wallets, too.

I guess those of you in Florida will probably think I've cracked, but in areas where inclement weather is a genuine concern: this makes sense. A few years back, Toronto actually called in the army to help with the snow. Our brave troops shovelled Toronto's streets in the name of national defence. Thankfully the PM didn't declare a "war on winter" or identify an "axis of snowfall."

It just seems to strange that in a mall I can do all my shopping, buy my groceries, go to the library and even go to church without stepping into the elements. . . but for most of my life I'm still obliged to wait at crosswalks, be showered with rain and snow, and exposed to excessive heat and cold just to get around.

Edit: in my perfect world, we'd all live in individually-owned condominiums attached to the big urban blob. And there'd be plenty of atriums and green space for all, of course. Much, if not all, of the surface would be accessible via stairs and elevators so people could chill outside.

[moni]

here ya go: tokyo sky city (http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/engineering/skycity/interactive/interactive.html)

[Star]

I'm sure you already know about this -

Montreal's Underground City (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underground_city_(Montreal))

It's a start. :)

[kuranes]

Good thought. They always used to show skyscrapers connected by tunnels on different levels in illustrations of the "city of the future." Not sure why it didn't happen much. ( You see a little of it. )

Probably the old bugaboo of "who's going to pay for that?" Sure, they could split it, but you'd be surprised how complex people can make things, especially items involving joint command/ownership. Plus the big shots probably get dropped off by limo at the door with the shoveled walk. So they don't care.

[placid_panic]

i think people get little enough fresh air and sunlight as it is.

[zhang_bob]

It would get boring.

[Neppy]

i think people get little enough fresh air and sunlight as it is.

Agreed.

Though in the future, something like this will definitely be necessary, with overcrowding and all.

[booyalab]

here ya go: tokyo sky city (http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/engineering/skycity/interactive/interactive.html)
i see where something like that is headed. Instead of making you pay to be in the sky, like they do now, they'd make you pay to WALK ON THE GROUND. sickos.

[Heather Harrison]

Sometimes, I like to go outside in the nasty weather. It reminds me that nature still exists.

In Salt Lake City, a few buildings are connected by little-known underground tunnels, some of which go underneath the city streets. It is difficult to find the access points. I have only been in one of them, but I know there are more. My mother used to work as a paralegal, and she often had to walk a few blocks from her office to the courthouse. I accompanied her a few times. She used one of these tunnels as a shortcut. This tunnel might be gone by now; the courthouse that it connected to has been torn down.

I have always liked dank tunnels; it would be nice if more buildings were connected in this manner.

Heather Harrison

[Snowflake]

In the D.C. area, around Crystal City, and probably other places, there are underground tunnels, and they are lined with stores and restaraunts, and even other utilities such as conference centers, and dentists. When we were there a few weeks ago, the hotels connected right up to these tunnels, and also linked up with the metro system.

If not underground tunnels, I think more cities should have decent, cheap, well maintaned public transport systems, namely train based. Busses are great, but I don't like the concept as much as a good train system.

Here in Orlando there was talk of putting in a train system, but it was voted out, and haven't heard of it since. It is only time though; this city needs transportation.

[Purple-Silver Fox]

There are a few engineering difficulties.
Buildings of that height are always swaying a little. So the connecting piece would likely be torn sooner or later. It can be done by making loose connections instead of fixed ones, like earthquake shock damping.
Also, the earth is round. Connecting a few buildings is doable, but connecting an entire city would be complicated and require a masterplan of some sort.

[hardkar]

Today, our city of London, Ontario was blanketed with snow. The white-out slowed traffic to a snail's pace; there were several collisions. City buses spun their tires trying to launch from bus-stops. And naturally, property owners of all kinds were obliged to remove snow.

This brought me back to one of my favourite obsessions: wondering why cities don't more closely resemble university campuses or shopping malls. Why do we have to go outside at all? Who the hell thought it would be a good idea to keep all the buildings separated? Whenever I go to a large city such as Toronto, the sheer density of the skyscrapers strikes me. "Someone missed an obvious step," I think, "when they didn't connect these buildings together."

I've often contemplated a world in which the entire city consisted of inter-connected modules, such that one would never have to step outside. Surburbia could be preserved with all its evils, as long as one could park their car at the edge (or basement) of the enclosed city. Electric people-movers, elevators, trains, and conveyor belts would provide locomotion within the complexes.

Private ownership would reign, of course; I'm not suggesting that conjoined buildings would dictate a communist system. Just because your building is connected to mine doesn't mean we have to share wallets, too.

I guess those of you in Florida will probably think I've cracked, but in areas where inclement weather is a genuine concern: this makes sense. A few years back, Toronto actually called in the army to help with the snow. Our brave troops shovelled Toronto's streets in the name of national defence. Thankfully the PM didn't declare a "war on winter" or identify an "axis of snowfall."

It just seems to strange that in a mall I can do all my shopping, buy my groceries, go to the library and even go to church without stepping into the elements. . . but for most of my life I'm still obliged to wait at crosswalks, be showered with rain and snow, and exposed to excessive heat and cold just to get around.

Edit: in my perfect world, we'd all live in individually-owned condominiums attached to the big urban blob. And there'd be plenty of atriums and green space for all, of course. Much, if not all, of the surface would be accessible via stairs and elevators so people could chill outside.
The INTJ lifts his finger.
The problem is not the snow, it's the people. The world is a huge (outdoor) mall already. Who gonna take care of the 'chill' areas? It's a small society itself with similar problems occur in the future. Why aren't the people in your town prepared for winter? eg. Putting studded tires on the cars, putting the plough trucks on stand by. The same thing happen every year, it's a question of when. It's so absurb, such projects and gated communities is communism.

In the capitalistic America, society drives you.
:whistle:

[Biff_Loman]

The INTJ lifts his finger.
The problem is not the snow, it's the people. The world is a huge (outdoor) mall already. Who gonna take care of the 'chill' areas? It's a small society itself with similar problems occur in the future. Why aren't the people in your town prepared for winter? eg. Putting studded tires on the cars, putting the plough trucks on stand by. The same thing happen every year, it's a question of when. It's so absurb, such projects and gated communities is communism.


I don't even know what to say to this. There was a bad snowfall and traffic was tied up; by the afternoon everything was plowed and things were fine.

Toronto had a particularly bad snowfall that year; that was a long time ago and it hasn't happened since.

It's not just snow. It's rain, wind, etc. I don't want to go outside unless I have to. And it's traffic! Why make me wait at stoplights for stupid fucking cars?


In the capitalistic America, society drives you.
:whistle:

I live in Canada.

And no, it's not a communist plan. Cities zone land as commercial or residential. . . One cannot just build whatever they want wherever they want. One still needs to follow rules. . . I'm merely suggesting changing the rules.

[Biff_Loman]

There are a few engineering difficulties.
Buildings of that height are always swaying a little. So the connecting piece would likely be torn sooner or later. It can be done by making loose connections instead of fixed ones, like earthquake shock damping.
Also, the earth is round. Connecting a few buildings is doable, but connecting an entire city would be complicated and require a masterplan of some sort.

Joining all the basements would be fine by me. That would meet my requirements, as long as there would be some kind of link to a city-wide transporation system from the basement.

Example:

1) take elevator down to basement
2) hop on conveyor belt to subway station

There could elevators and escalators to bring one to surface transport. I never really did envision something like Tokyo's sky city. More like Montreal's underground city.

[Purple-Silver Fox]

Joining all the basements would be fine by me. That would meet my requirements, as long as there would be some kind of link to a city-wide transporation system from the basement.

Example:
1) take elevator down to basement
2) hop on conveyor belt to subway station

There could elevators and escalators to bring one to surface transport. I never really did envision something like Tokyo's sky city. More like Montreal's underground city.
That's feasible step by step. So it will happen, somewhere. Many cities have metro systems and parking garages already, so it's just a matter of expanding the stations. Throwing a party in an unused metro branch might be a good thought to promote it.

Personally, I'd rather prefer to put the cars underground rather than the people. Eliminates most stoplights too.

[crule81]

An interesting study concerning humans couped up in large domed cities can be found in Asimov's "Caves of Steel" and "Naked Sun".

I've also heard that the MIT campus is completely connected by tunnels. Similarly, the Kettering Institute (formerly the General Motors Institute) in Flint, Michigan, is also a college that is completely self-contained (as far as I know). That is probably a good thing considering that it is in Flint.

[hardkar]

I don't even know what to say to this. There was a bad snowfall and traffic was tied up; by the afternoon everything was plowed and things were fine.

Toronto had a particularly bad snowfall that year; that was a long time ago and it hasn't happened since.

It's not just snow. It's rain, wind, etc. I don't want to go outside unless I have to. And it's traffic! Why make me wait at stoplights for stupid fucking cars?So you want a whole town underground? Why not move some where else, where you don't have to walk far to get to the store. The stoplight problem aren't there any underpasses to walk under the streets? Sounds like your city not made to walk in.

I live in Canada.

And no, it's not a communist plan. Cities zone land as commercial or residential. . . One cannot just build whatever they want wherever they want. One still needs to follow rules. . . I'm merely suggesting changing the rules.Well isn't that america... North America? ;) Your buddies in the south might have some bad influence on you.
Yep residential or commercial, the thing that strikes me is that fact. 'Let's build a wall around us and do things together' Creating a collective.

It's a cool idea anyway. Like a spaceship underground.

[Sue Denim]

It was 91*F here yesterday. Only 55*F today, though. Could get to freezing toningt. Brrrrrrrr....

[dunee]

My college has tunnels as well. They're supposed to be closed off "for safety reasons" since they're really old and supposedly full of old pipes and stuff that could cause students to trip & die from impalement or lockjaw, thus possibly bringing up expensive lawsuits against the school. But its an open secret that the time-honored pastime of "tunneling" is still practiced by intrepid students from dorm to dorm and building to building.

While I'm not too fond of the idea of interconnected cities, I like the idea of underground highway systems. In order to develop those though, they'd have to come up with ways to partition the new dimensions of space & land owning, wouldn't they?
Do current laws allow that, say, "such & such owns all earth 20 km below the surface" already or would there be loopholes that could allow a city or other such entity, etc. to build & extend an underground network underneath another entity's property without breaking surface property ownership laws?
There must be loopholes, otherwise, how do cities justify building subway systems without paying through the nose to buy up underground property rights? Could another country build a city or transportation system underneath a neighboring country?