[Pre-Supremacy] Architecture (pre-pre-Ecoria!)

[Philip S]

I'm working up my thoughts on Pre-Supremacy architecture. These would be the designs before the proper 'pre-ecoria', where the pre-Ecoria are the above ground version with the first full rack farming systems, before the full subterranean Ecoria of Sciror). These 'pre-pre-Ecoria' form the basis of the later Ecoria paradigm, and prepared society for what was to come.

Therefore I want the designs to be seductive, to tempt the viewer, and in turn make it believable that humanity could be tempted, in the direction I want them to go. I figure that the better the designs are at tempting the viewer, combined with the 'obvious' logical conclusions derived from these designs, the more likely it is to unsettle the viewer. The idea is to instil a sense of wonder and foreboding at the same time, maybe even horror. The only saving grace of this rabbit hole is that if the viewer jumps on this merry-go-round that there is no such thing as psionics. Off course if a person believes in psionics then this is probably going to get a little disturbing...

So getting the design to seem realistic is kinda important, and basing the designs on modern architecture concepts, ideals, and construction techniques is paramount - but we need to subvert everything. Modern architecture is highly varied in design, though there is a lot of convergence in many areas on construction. The current trend of build fantastic and eye-popping shapes and then squeezing in a living and office space, often with a few awkward areas (those odd shapes do not play well is practical square layouts) is something I want to move away from. I'm looking more towards utilitarian design, using the latest techniques, while being very traditional in a sense to ease acceptance but with a twist. I want to give the viewer a living space the would desire, while putting it into a setting that is way over the top but also 'cool' - least that is the desire.

There are a few personal preferences I'd like to incorporate into the design;

First: I like green spaces, gardens, parks. In a modern city this is not easy to achieve as land is at a premium, and a garden is more a luxury – hence all the blocks of flats. This is why I love roof gardens, a little oasis in a sea on brick, steel and concrete. I think everyone should have access to their own patch of outside, and it should be private. There are surprisingly few roof gardens, I imagine it's mainly for economic reasons, of conversion, but a few new builds have roof gardens so there is hope (and the technology is developing).

Second: There seems to be a strong drive towards building taller buildings. The idea is simple, you maximise the plot of lad you have by building as tall as you can – genius. The only issue is that the bigger the buildings, the taller they are, the more infrastructure they need to support them. Roads get wider, more rail lines need to be laid, and as a big city reaches saturation point this can cause problems. Once reason London isn't covered in Skyscrapers like New York is that the roads are narrow and the infrastructure cannot support it. London is adding more and more underground rail links (cross-rail is the latest) as it's the only way to feed the growing city centre (unless you want to start knocking things down!). The problem with roads, and the accompany car parks is that they take up a lot of space. This is 'dead' space, in the sense nothing green is growing on it. You cannot turf a road! But I want to...

Combining these ideas I come up with a rather simple apartment block idea, which has a precedence in some mountainside apartment complex design, where the flat above is offset from the flat below and a roof garden put onto the open space created. My first rough concept is this;



Nothing too complex. Quite primitive. The ground floor flat has a roof garden on top that belongs to the second floor flat, and the second floor flat is offset and covers the road. There is parking space further in, where less light is critical, and the road is nearer the outside where I'll put in some open areas for light and ventilation (tunnel safety is an eye opener). These flats can be stacked into a long pyramid. The bigger the stack the bigger the internal space. I then imagine shops/ mauls could go into this internal areas as many shops rely more on artificial light and do not really need access to direct daylight. The other benefit to the road user of this design is that weather cannot get to the road surface: it's covered, so snow is not an issue, or rain. Nothing slows down, and in the case of an accident traffic can be diverted to another level. No bottlenecks.

My second thought was to make it a little more traditional and to add a garage and fire escape;



Too fussy. I do not like this. It is getting complicated in shape and I want something a little more stylish.

In moving forward I wanted to solve the 'column problem' for the car park area seen in the first plan as they are a pain in the ass. I then found www.steelconstruction.info and I saw the answer – steel structures using 'long spans' for car parks. Perfect.

A long span can be used to create vast interior space;



They can easily cover 20m spans and strong enough (with composite floor panels) to support a whole car parks full of cars! A revelation. God I love technology

Then my mind went off onto a fantasy as I wondered how wide the M25 was. Everyone in England thinks it's a huge eyesore, a blight on this green and pleasant land, but a necessary evil. After a quick Google maps search, and using their measure tool in satellite view, it turns out that the M25 is 20m wide from hard shoulder to hard shoulder;



*tents fingers*

So now I imagine that I'd build over the M25, a 20m long span straight across the M25 and then building car parks, shops and flats all above, and around, the M25's road surface. Basically covering the M25 in roof gardens. A truly massive project!

I also thought that due to each level having a road, that it is basically multiplying the capacity of the M25: with 2 stories we have two M25. Obviously the pyramid design means the upper road sections would be narrower, but then I thought that HGV, vans, SUV, and maybe even Australian style 'land trains' could travel on the bottom level, while cars could be on the upper level, and another level above that could be cyclists, and perhaps low power electric vehicles. The benefit is that a tiny smart car would not have to tangle with a HGV. A lot of owners who buy SUVs cite safety as a main concern, but if the only danger is another smart car, then people may buy a smart car if they are a single commuter (and they do not have to leave the complex).

This also foreshadows the design of the true Ecoria with it's 45 level rail system

While thinking about this, and reading more about car parks I saw this design;



I love this design as it maximises parking space as the ramp is put to good use of not only getting a vehicle to the next level but also providing parking space – no waste. I then looked at the turns on the end of the ramps, the only wasted space in the design and had an idea;



This takes the one wasted space, the turns, and joins them together into a road. The multiple levels of the M25! Now everything is used. The image that I imagined in my head is that of an artificial San Francisco (with all the hills). It would be easy to navigate and there would be plenty of parking. I'll this a 'parking hive' - basically a multi-level road network interconnected with sloped parking spaces. Going back to what I said before about accidents, you can see from this design it's very easy to re-route traffic. This redirection could happen organically, humans can 'self-organise', before even the emergency services arrive traffic would still be flowing.

Next I'm looking at fire suppression technologies. Steel structures are very good at resisting fire, but I'm thinking active fire suppression (sprinkler? foam?) built in a decentralised network (so a section can shut down and suppress automatically autonomously).

So I think I have all the main elements I need to move forward, and I thought I would share what I am up to.

Philip

[malika]

Ah, I started to miss your posts!

I'm working up my thoughts on Pre-Supremacy architecture. These would be the designs before the proper 'pre-ecoria', where the pre-Ecoria are the above ground version with the first full rack farming systems, before the full subterranean Ecoria of Sciror). These 'pre-pre-Ecoria' form the basis of the later Ecoria paradigm, and prepared society for what was to come.

I noticed that your current designs are very much based on a more 'contemporary' context, meaning that the 'pre-pre-Ecorium' is set in our present or very near future. Was that done on purpose? Reason I'm asking this is because you need to take various factors (ecology, politics, etc) into account here when designing this thing. What might be seductive in a current Western urban situation might not be that seductive in another setting.

First: I like green spaces, gardens, parks. In a modern city this is not easy to achieve as land is at a premium, and a garden is more a luxury – hence all the blocks of flats. This is why I love roof gardens, a little oasis in a sea on brick, steel and concrete. I think everyone should have access to their own patch of outside, and it should be private. There are surprisingly few roof gardens, I imagine it's mainly for economic reasons, of conversion, but a few new builds have roof gardens so there is hope (and the technology is developing).

The reason why rooftop gardens are a bit tricky is that rooftops generally aren't designed to have vegetation growing on them. You'd either need to have separate planters you put on top of the roof, or prepare the roof so it can handle vegetation. You basically need to build a system that can handle the extra weight (both the soil and the plants), but also the possible leakage (this works slightly different than having it just rain proof) and roots growing through things. So if you want gardens and greens, the buildings should be designed to support that.

However, why stick to roof gardens? Why not have 'communal' gardens inside the building as well? Note that the building doesn't have to be a simply fully enclosed block, you could include all sorts of openings in there, maybe even in the style of those old Spanish mansions which had an open atrium of a sorts.

Speaking of communal gardens we already get to the topic of how a society would work, which is something you need to take into account when designing your buildings. How communal or individualistic are people? We see that in Western society individual meritocracy seems to be the hot thing ("you are responsible for your own success/failure", etc). However, we do see people coming together lately, forming neighbourhood councils, organizing their own markets, etc. etc. etc. At the same time we see that public space (the area where these people come together) is disappearing or becoming overregulated. This is something you could possible take with you in your design, would the building also include such space where people can come together, or would you want to discourage that kind of behavior altogether by removing the unregulated public space?

Another idea might be that the 'green' aspect is actually part of the building, rather than something separate that grows on it. Ponda and me have been discussing a lot about the Ecorium as something that is 'grown' rather than 'built' (check the various threads in the SitA section). We already see all sorts of 'strange' developments in architecture and other technologies. 3D printed buildings in China and Amsterdam. Now that we can also print organic materials, the idea of organic buildings might not even be that far fetched. It would also fit nicely into the whole 'eco' trend in which we want everything to be 'organic' and 'natural'. Glass, steel and stone might be seen as old fashioned here.

Second: There seems to be a strong drive towards building taller buildings. The idea is simple, you maximise the plot of lad you have by building as tall as you can – genius. The only issue is that the bigger the buildings, the taller they are, the more infrastructure they need to support them. Roads get wider, more rail lines need to be laid, and as a big city reaches saturation point this can cause problems. Once reason London isn't covered in Skyscrapers like New York is that the roads are narrow and the infrastructure cannot support it. London is adding more and more underground rail links (cross-rail is the latest) as it's the only way to feed the growing city centre (unless you want to start knocking things down!). The problem with roads, and the accompany car parks is that they take up a lot of space. This is 'dead' space, in the sense nothing green is growing on it. You cannot turf a road! But I want to...

We're already seeing developments that might bring an end to the 'personal car', from driverless cars to cities fully operating on public transport. I remember a couple of years back they did this experiment in a Belgian city in which cars weren't allowed in the city. Now that more and more is happening online, leaving your house might become redundant: you can work from home and shopping can be done online. However, it might be imaginable that people still want to leave the house, but then resorting to walking to where they need to go, or using public transport to cross bigger distances. But now we're entering the area of urbanism rather than architecture...

Nothing too complex. Quite primitive. The ground floor flat has a roof garden on top that belongs to the second floor flat, and the second floor flat is offset and covers the road.

There's a possible problem with too much covered roads, especially if people would have to walk around there as well: air pollution. Unless we are already dealing with fully electric cars of course. But it's still a tricky area to tackle!

There is parking space further in, where less light is critical, and the road is nearer the outside where I'll put in some open areas for light and ventilation (tunnel safety is an eye opener). These flats can be stacked into a long pyramid. The bigger the stack the bigger the internal space. I then imagine shops/ mauls could go into this internal areas as many shops rely more on artificial light and do not really need access to direct daylight.

The central areas might be the 'public space' I mentioned previously, but it might end up feeling like the inside of a mall, very impersonal and sterile. One trend we see nowadays is that people are looking for 'authenticity', whatever that might mean: so the cute old little cafe or old chaotic market, rather than the clean and futuristic looking shopping center. But then again, people seemed to be overjoyed with Rotterdam's 'markthal'.

I also thought that due to each level having a road, that it is basically multiplying the capacity of the M25: with 2 stories we have two M25. Obviously the pyramid design means the upper road sections would be narrower, but then I thought that HGV, vans, SUV, and maybe even Australian style 'land trains' could travel on the bottom level, while cars could be on the upper level, and another level above that could be cyclists, and perhaps low power electric vehicles. The benefit is that a tiny smart car would not have to tangle with a HGV. A lot of owners who buy SUVs cite safety as a main concern, but if the only danger is another smart car, then people may buy a smart car if they are a single commuter (and they do not have to leave the complex).

I can't help but think of those really old fashioned 'future visions':

[PondaNagura]

Wow, that's quite a write up to start with. Good to see you back.

*edit: reiterating a bunch of what Malika said, hadn't refreshed when writing all this to see his post.

A few clarifying questions and suggestions.

So would these cities be new builds all together, or are they supposed to be like the organic adaptation building in existing colonized territories (like how cities work now)? I only ask because this will affect how they're structured. Also lifestyle and culture.

So you mention Sanfran, as an example. They actually have space issues at the moment, their tech industries keep bringing in more people than the city has proper capacity for. And landlords know they can price rent according to tech workers, which makes older established residents have issue with keeping up, which often results in a displacement of people who work in the city but can no longer live there. There's also incredible reluctance to put new buildings up in any timely fashion, as a result there's a lot of demand for property space. So a bunch of things have resulted from this.
For certain businesses that can do so, forgo longterm leases on office space, as their persons can either telecommunicate most of their projects and they meet up temporarily on public facilities or temporarily rented spaces for any projects that demand them to. there's a quite a bit of working from home or from any business that has decent enough wifi services. There are also efforts to have multi-purpose work spaces, office by day with fold up work stations, and open area studio or conference room by night. SanFran has become a "sharing" city....another problem is the dearth of proper transportation, the train lines, trolleys and cans haven't really been keeping up with the demand, so for some there are company-specific bus lines to ferry their employees.
For everyone else theres "ride sharing': originally modeled as carpool applications have since morphed into a para-taxi service, so less cars need be on the road to get around. The next intended generation of these services, such as Uber, Lyft is partnership with autonomous vehicle fleets. That is you don't have any drivers, you pay robots (or probably some monthly subscription) to drive around the city for you. For one thing this basically eliminates private car ownership, I suppose if you have the space/money you can own a specific model for personal use, but otherwise the only space you need to house the fleet is when they come in for charging/maintenance, which means eventually parking structures are eliminated or drastically reduced space. They'd run 24/7 otherwise. When they do park, there wouldn't be people inside, so doors need not need room to swing open. The cars communicate with each other and react to surrounding environments (people, *bikes, and manually driven vehicles) so traffic incidents and congestion are reduced.
As safety improves, and more vehicles are replaced with robots, build standards can be relaxed for lighter and stronger construction materials. Also replaced with electric vehicles over combustion which improves noise and air quality.

*If street-side parking is eliminated, then bikes would probably get a proper lane.

Other random things to think about: modern above ground car parks/garages are built to be open: it provides light and vents combustion exhaust, but it also reduces the weight of the overall structure. Each floor has to be able to suspend the weight of the surface material along with the cars in motion and at rest. As a result they build the platforms in segments to allow for expansion and contraction of road material in different seasons, like bridges. As a result though, and due to their hollow acoustic nature, they are really loud and vibrate a lot.
So other advantages to autonomous cars, aside from less need for parking, and built from lighter materials, lack of exhaust venting, means tighter designated spaces, less vibration issues. Which means you could have your human occupied spaces be adjacent to these roads/garages without as much noise pollution as their modern counterparts.

These are things to consider in your planning.
The space required for vehicles that need very few instances of parking, and how people interact and live in the space. Ramps are advantageous for walking/mobility limited persons (well, assuming technology can't address their issues). You could have kind of a 4-lane walking ramp system. the inner ramps stretch from say floor 1 to floor 5, with "exit ramps" to each floor in between and probably some kind of lift/elevator. The long ramps would be easy on the legs, but still afford a view of the surrounding space.

Also vehicle placement, if there are geographical or structure related issues that place cars and people in the same space, or can they be tiered, like in Da Vinci's "Ideal city" or the Masdar City arcology experiment.
I mean this also assuming humans still need cars and that cyber or gene-modding doesn't make us want to run and climb everywhere( okay, maybe that's more speculative scifi).


More important consideration is the actual daily/weekly lifestyle that people actually live/work with. How much work is actually done by humans versus the tools/machines in their space? Do they communicate remotely, come to common public areas, as well as their own private garden spaces?
how would property work between privately held and public utilities? Maybe they work from domestic shops and fabrication facilities, then sell their stuff in public spaces, or can their domiciles also be businesses? How would that effect congestion of people and vehicular traffic.

How do resources get to them, water/power, sanitation and health facilities. Are they more or less contained or are they moved elsewhere? yes fire safety would definitely be a concern for close proximity and how well such events could be contained. Plenty examples through the ages of city-spanning fires.

Really it's a question of how people will use the space and how that will impact the shape and layout of the spaces. So if it's in an existing urban area, then they are limited by existing structures, available property and resources. But if they're colonizing new worlds, then that has whole different limitations.

New worlds would only be restricted by resource and technology availability and environments to contest. They can layout cities and structures to their ideal needs, they certainly would have the space to expand and adapt. It might be more issues with gravity, or poisonous atmosphere, no atmosphere, atmospheric pressure and weather conditions, available illumination and the psychology associated with perceived spaces. Do they have a view of the world outside, do they need one? Can they go there without protection?
Can they build big open structures or are they structurally limited?
How did people get there, how long did it take and what do they intend when they do get there to do? Granted the people living in the city spaces will be generational-removed from the pilgrims who settled it, there wants and needs completely offset by the lack of that journey experience. Same way most Americans prioritize and perceive daily life completely different than our immigrant ancestors.

[malika]

*If street-side parking is eliminated, then bikes would probably get a proper lane.

Pfft, in Holland we've got both! One does not have to exclude the other! ;-) However, one of the reasons why cycling in countries like the US isn't such a major form of transportation is because the distances are a lot bigger than in the Netherlands, even within the same city. Because of this everybody needs his/her own car. However, there might be other solutions of course, like carless cities for example! In those cities cars are parked in the outskirts, whilst movement in the city is mainly done by walking/bike or public transport. However, movement between cities would then be done by cars. However, this is a very tricky thing to do, especially when dealing with large cities.

I remember reading this research about transport in Rotterdam a couple of years ago. What they basically did was have a cyclist, car driver and a public transport user compete against one another to travel between different locations in the city. Funnily enough the cyclist almost always ended up being on first place. Reason being that the distances aren't too big (Rotterdam as a city is about 15km x 15km), and bikes can easily access all streets. Cars came on a second place, they're fast vehicles but are limited by traffic, one-way streets (so they often have to do a sort of detour) and lack of parking facilities. Public transport ended up last, often show up way later than the other two. Reason being that there aren't always direct connections, you often have to wait long for the tram/train/bus/metro/ferry to arrive and then the fact that it stops at every tiny little station/stop. Now when one travels between cities/villages things are a bit different. Bikes will be the slowest because of their maximum speed. Cars have access to the highways, which means they can get to different places fast. However, the only problem here would be parking (when dealing with the major cities). Public transport between the major cities is quite good (with trains going every 15 to 30 minutes). However, when trying to go to smaller and more outback locations, public transport becomes a hell, meaning that an hour car ride could take you 3-4 hours by public transportation (if you're having bad luck!).

Then there's the whole economic side of it: public transportation is expensive as hell, especially for the 'quality' you get in return. Cars are also quite expensive in Holland (taxes, insurance, etc., and a drivers licence costs a small fortune). So bikes are most definitely the cheapest option.

Now, this is when we apply this knowledge to the Netherlands, what about when we are dealing with other countries with way larger cities? People might have to commute larger distances, especially when certain areas are simply too expensive like in lets say San Francisco, or maybe some better examples: Los Angeles or New York.

or the Masdar City arcology experiment.

Ha, I couldn't help but think of this! CNC Workshop are probably one of the few parties out there who are doing some really interesting stuff with CNC technology when it comes to model making I think.

How do resources get to them, water/power, sanitation and health facilities. Are they more or less contained or are they moved elsewhere? yes fire safety would definitely be a concern for close proximity and how well such events could be contained. Plenty examples through the ages of city-spanning fires.

But this all depends on what kind of technology would be available, what if people would have wireless power supplies? Or maybe some type of digester that allows them to convert organic waste (left overs from food, plants, but also toilet stuff) into biogas that could be converted into either electricity of used directly. As for fire safety, that would all depend on the types of materials being used, with fire safety tools being reduced to a mere small extinguisher at home, with more specialized stuff kept mobile by the fire department (like drones for example).

Might not be that far-fetched to perhaps read a bit more into architecture, interior design and urbanism to get a picture of possible future trends.

[Philip S]

Good to see you both

I'm going to start with little pre-amble to colour my responses before jumping into the meat of it;

My aim is to address current architecture, but to set it up in such a way that it naturally leads to 'Sciror' (as in sci-fi - horror). The ideas are a bit of an interlinked spider-web (like a lot of my ideas!) they all depend on each other, but I'll attempt to unravel it so it makes some kind of sense. I think to do this I need to refocus on the small, on the start, the ideas that apply now.

I think most people can see that car parks are needed in the city, but that they take up a lot of space that could be used for other things, like businesses that generate money (more than a car park), but these same businesses wouldn't make much money if there were no car parks near by. Cars are going to be around for a while, people of loath to give them up, and they will hold onto them for as long as possible.

The basic idea is to take this rather nice car park;



Put it in a city centre and then build apartments on top. Simple, and doable.

It's not really that unusual of an idea. For example, I live in the New Capital Quay development, and what is not obvious is that there is a massive underground car park the size of the whole development, that is actually lower than the water level of the Thames! The lifts in each block go down to the car park level.

Yet up on the surface, between the blocks, there are hybrid roads/ pedestrian paths in nice white herringbone paving, along with parking spaces for delivery vehicles etc. It doubles up what is below. The car park below already has 'roads';

If we raise the underground car park up onto the surface, so it's one massive open car park of one story, make it pretty like the picture above, then the 'roads' that lead through the car park can be made a bit wider - and then we have a proper road. Then up on the next story, the second story (that used to be the surface) we do not need any roads at all.

What I'm saying is that we already build what I'm suggesting, but it's a case of not seeing the wood for the trees. There is a cheaper way: I'm sure building a single story open car park is cheaper than building an underground car park. Even if you have to clad and fire proof that single story car park.

The problem is what society expects of their buildings. How would we feel driving about in a never ending tunnel/ car park knowing everything fun and interesting is above us. If done on a city wide scale it may be overwhelming, but on the other hand sections could be make over to this new way of doing things, and up on the surface it could be very nice.

I suppose that when I look at any town, I look at the space above the road and think: what a waste. Not only for people enjoyment, but also for resources. England is famous for rain, things grow like wild fire, yet we are tarmacking over everything. All the rain that falls on a road is washed away to the sewer. There is more awareness of water conservation, but I think we could build it into the system and capturing rain that would fall onto roads is another layer of the puzzle solved.

Project aim - the small stuff
So starting small: I'm thinking of something like a single story flat, raised up on a steel frame with a car park underneath. Then the next flat above is offset and is build out over the pavement/ road like in my first post. A bit like those old Tudor Houses (the more things change the more the stay the same). I think getting this small block, a modular unit (you know how I like those!) makes it easier to understand and visualise how it could be done now.

Now onto some replies;

Feb 4, 2015 12:39:36 GMT -5 malika said:

I noticed that your current designs are very much based on a more 'contemporary' context, meaning that the 'pre-pre-Ecorium' is set in our present or very near future. Was that done on purpose?

Yes. I figure that the end result of all this thinking (the Ecoria) is a bit much for some to really believe it's possible. Right now, real science is making huge leaps and it's leaving the rest of society behind. I want to start bringing some mainstream construction ideas to the fore in sci-fi and then twist them into something that makes sense, while leading to the Ecoria. I want to give a vision of our future people can believe in, but at the same time they hope it doesn't go 'all the way' as the ending is not ideal to our modern mind set, yet is could be understandable.

Feb 4, 2015 12:39:36 GMT -5 malika said:

The reason why rooftop gardens are a bit tricky is that rooftops generally aren't designed to have vegetation growing on them.

True of most roofs, but these new steel long span roofs would be strong enough take a car, it could probably take a lot of vegetation, wet soil, etc. Modern roof garden design can deal with this very well, even when they put down lawns. Also you could add in water features, even a swimming pool for the high end properties. Steel is pretty awesome stuff!

Feb 4, 2015 12:39:36 GMT -5 malika said:

However, why stick to roof gardens?

In the grand scheme of things a lot of other spaces can be made, but in designing this little unit I'm looking at making a flat/ apartment a person would like as a personal, private space.

Feb 4, 2015 12:39:36 GMT -5 malika said:

Speaking of communal gardens we already get to the topic of how a society would work, which is something you need to take into account when designing your buildings.

I agree, but in this small unit, the start of what is to come, we can assume society is just like ours. Or very similar. Think of this as a spring board for later ideas. We get this is place and we may start wondering what else we can do with it. I think there will be a natural development and story, yet all roads lead to Rome, we end up with the Ecoria.

Feb 4, 2015 12:39:36 GMT -5 malika said:

Ponda and me have been discussing a lot about the Ecorium as something that is 'grown' rather than 'built' (check the various threads in the SitA section).

I have, and they are awesome

Feb 4, 2015 12:39:36 GMT -5 malika said:

We're already seeing developments that might bring an end to the 'personal car', from driverless cars to cities fully operating on public transport. I remember a couple of years back they did this experiment in a Belgian city in which cars weren't allowed in the city. Now that more and more is happening online, leaving your house might become redundant: you can work from home and shopping can be done online. However, it might be imaginable that people still want to leave the house, but then resorting to walking to where they need to go, or using public transport to cross bigger distances. But now we're entering the area of urbanism rather than architecture...

One of the reasons I was thinking of including a garage for a flat is not just of car use, because if you do not have a car then it's another usable space. Many a business has started in a garage! (well according to legends ). Also I'm thinking those who work from home may like a large office space, or maybe a little bit of storage space, and perhaps a small work area. I'm also thinking that later, then these pyramids start to become very large that some of the interior space may be for businesses and they will be 'across the road' from a person's home. A case where each person can have a 'business space'.

Feb 4, 2015 12:39:36 GMT -5 malika said:

There's a possible problem with too much covered roads, especially if people would have to walk around there as well: air pollution. Unless we are already dealing with fully electric cars of course. But it's still a tricky area to tackle!

I'm thinking at first there are going to be relatively few of these developments (flats over car parks/ roads), but having said that I'm thinking of open car parks. An open car park is defined (in the UK) as having a vent area equal to 5% (that's all!) of the total surface area of the floor. I suspect that pollution would be no worse than it is now, and as efficiently of cars, and hybrid cars, become more popular that this will reduce pollution as these new hab-units rise in popularity.

Feb 4, 2015 12:39:36 GMT -5 malika said:

The central areas might be the 'public space' I mentioned previously, but it might end up feeling like the inside of a mall, very impersonal and sterile.

That is a danger. I think that LED lighting, in massive square panels rather than fluorescent tubes would help. I also like the idea of LED lighting that can change from daylight to the warms of dusk, and even the blue of early morning. One thing about LEDs is that you can grow plants under then without producing the same levels of heat as halogen. These internal spaces could have real plants - to tackle air pollination, but also provide a sense of nature to the human spirit (it also foreshadows the LED technology of rack farms)

Feb 4, 2015 12:39:36 GMT -5 malika said:

I can't help but think of those really old fashioned 'future visions':

I love that image! I just noticed the trains, I didn't even mention the tube running under the roads

Feb 4, 2015 13:02:50 GMT -5 PondaNagura said:

So would these cities be new builds all together, or are they supposed to be like the organic adaptation building in existing colonized territories (like how cities work now)? I only ask because this will affect how they're structured. Also lifestyle and culture.

Both. A first they are going to have to fit into current cities. Building over car parks and roads is expensive, and only makes sense if the land the car park or road is on is worth a big fortune. Tokyo springs to mind - terrible management of space by my reckoning, and they have the super high prices that would make these hab-units a sensible option... I notice I've started calling it a hab-unit. Perhaps I should give it a name? HU1? A Hue 1 Hewi?

Anyway, once they infect a city, and spread, and the population gets used to them; when architects want to expand, or build new cities, there would be an exception of these HU1s, or something like them (and the technology would be proven). Why not build a new city to this new paradigm if it works? If an architect didn't use it, it would be like saying s/he didn't believe the development will be super successful and become a hub of a new super busy and expensive city. Or at least that is the narrative, whether it would go down like that in reality is another matter!

Feb 4, 2015 13:02:50 GMT -5 PondaNagura said:

So you mention Sanfran, as an example.

What you describe is people adapting to an environment that cannot be changed to accommodate more. I'm suggesting there is a way to accommodate more people, it's just that residents may not like it and want it to remain the same. Fair enough, but then (as you say) many get squeezed out and how long before the new think the current situation should change?

Your report on San Francisco is very interesting, and provokes thought. Even my HU1 will eventually be too little for the ever growing population and what you describe in San Francisco could happen in my blocks! However we do have the next generation of hab-unit the Pre-Ecoria!

Feb 4, 2015 13:02:50 GMT -5 PondaNagura said:

*If street-side parking is eliminated, then bikes would probably get a proper lane.

Up on the second floor of the building I proposed in my pre-amble would be pedestrians, and bikes. Maybe low powered electric vehicles too. Very pleasant, and the more of the city that gets covered the more cycling routes will grow.

Feb 4, 2015 13:02:50 GMT -5 PondaNagura said:

Other random things to think about: modern above ground car parks/garages are built to be open: it provides light and vents combustion exhaust, but it also reduces the weight of the overall structure. Each floor has to be able to suspend the weight of the surface material along with the cars in motion and at rest. As a result they build the platforms in segments to allow for expansion and contraction of road material in different seasons, like bridges. As a result though, and due to their hollow acoustic nature, they are really loud and vibrate a lot.
So other advantages to autonomous cars, aside from less need for parking, and built from lighter materials, lack of exhaust venting, means tighter designated spaces, less vibration issues. Which means you could have your human occupied spaces be adjacent to these roads/garages without as much noise pollution as their modern counterparts.

Good points, and they are noisy - I'm going to slap on a ton of sound and fire proofing. I also imagine that the steel is going to end up a little thicker than the minimum (as this is a good, economical, way to increase fire resistance). With humans being so close to all those cars, I imagine there would be a ton of changes needed, but the concept should hold true. I like your thinking on the lighter cars, and I'm thinking that a road on a higher than ground level would be restricted to lighter and lighter vehicles the higher up the floors you go.

Solid concrete for the tube/ DLR (Docklands Light Railway in London), and perhaps solid concrete for the first 'ground' floor. The steel above that.

Feb 4, 2015 13:02:50 GMT -5 PondaNagura said:

These are things to consider in your planning.

All good stuff. The car placement I cover in my first post, that would be my ideal way of doing things, but getting back to the starter idea, the small hab-unit it may be a little too much For the little HU1 a simple car park will do linking directly to an existing road system. It's literally building a block of flat and making the first floor a car park.

Feb 4, 2015 13:02:50 GMT -5 PondaNagura said:

More important consideration is the actual daily/weekly lifestyle that people actually live/work with. How much work is actually done by humans versus the tools/machines in their space? Do they communicate remotely, come to common public areas, as well as their own private garden spaces?
how would property work between privately held and public utilities? Maybe they work from domestic shops and fabrication facilities, then sell their stuff in public spaces, or can their domiciles also be businesses? How would that effect congestion of people and vehicular traffic.

All this comes up later, as things change, so the people adapt to the new environment and new opportunities. I will also add that converting a steel frame car park into living space is (apparently) economically viable and much easier than a concrete car park. If the cars are given up, then humans may 'colonise' the upper layers of the car park, and only need space for deliveries. Thought as we more to Pre-Ecroia their food starts to be made on-site and that reduces a lot of deliveries.

Feb 4, 2015 13:02:50 GMT -5 PondaNagura said:

How do resources get to them, water/power, sanitation and health facilities. Are they more or less contained or are they moved elsewhere? yes fire safety would definitely be a concern for close proximity and how well such events could be contained. Plenty examples through the ages of city-spanning fires.

A city spanning fire is something I would like to avoid

One aspect of utilities is heating. I put 'solar panels' up on the roof garden in the plans in the first post, but I think some kind of solar heat capture is more valuable. Direct heat capture is far more efficient than generating electric, and then using that electric to then generate heat. I also like the idea that heat capture in the summer can be used to drive absorption fridges/ hot water for air conditioning, but also generate electricity via a turbine. There are products on the market now that do this. Local power generation. I also imagine that each hab-unit is connected to the mains, not only as a backup, but to sell on the excess energy.

Feb 4, 2015 13:02:50 GMT -5 PondaNagura said:

Really it's a question of how people will use the space and how that will impact the shape and layout of the spaces. So if it's in an existing urban area, then they are limited by existing structures, available property and resources. But if they're colonizing new worlds, then that has whole different limitations.

With the pre-pre-Ecroia I'm thinking Earth, and our current time, or rather 'near future' (in a vague sense ). When it comes to colonising worlds I think we are going to need some form of Ecoria.

Feb 4, 2015 13:02:50 GMT -5 PondaNagura said:

How did people get there, how long did it take and what do they intend when they do get there to do? Granted the people living in the city spaces will be generational-removed from the pilgrims who settled it, there wants and needs completely offset by the lack of that journey experience. Same way most Americans prioritize and perceive daily life completely different than our immigrant ancestors.

In Sciror people first turn up on other worlds via the machines. I don't know if you read it, but there is a thread about it. Basically machines colonise a world and build Ecoria all over it, then the machines 'make' humans, the first generation, implant memories and literally wake up a whole population all at once. There are situated, do not need to adjust, know everyone, and basically carry on their daily life from 'day 1' except they do not know anything about it. From their point of view they are still on Earth and have a long history. Hell - they even think they evolved on the planet they are on!

But that's another story...

Philip

[Philip S]

Seeing as my last post was a bit on the long side, I thought I double post;

To make this seems a little more realistic - something like this: Mountain Dwellings by BIG



"Mountain Dwellings, a project consisting of apartments above a multi-storey car park by Danish architects Bjarke Ingels Group (BIG), is nearing completion in Copenhagen."

See: it's not so crazy! We just need to be a little more radical. I love the look of this project, and can see that we could go further in the concept.

If only if covered the rail lines;



Look at all that wasted space!

Anyway, this was back in 2008, so hare is a link to architect's site with photos of the finished project: Bjarke Ingels Group (BIG)

Looks good to me. I see this as a 'step one'.

'Step two' might be to join two blocks together, back to back;



Very rough photoshop jb, but it give the idea. I guess the road I add in could be the rail tracks.

Then join another two blocks to the north of the complex to make four, arranged in a giant square (well diamond in the photo), four times the size of the original plan - then would would be getting somewhere. Might need more vents.

Philip

[PondaNagura]

It's been a while since I read the threads, I wasn't sure if humans had colonized space at all before the machines came to power. Okay, so mostly near future, adaptive construction projects. cool.

Underground parking makes a bunch of sense, in cities in the States, there's actually zoning laws now for housing complexes of a certain capacity must provide parking to the residents so as not co compete/congest with street parking.

All this comes up later, as things change, so the people adapt to the new environment and new opportunities. I will also add that converting a steel frame car park into living space is (apparently) economically viable and much easier than a concrete car park. If the cars are given up, then humans may 'colonise' the upper layers of the car park, and only need space for deliveries. Thought as we more to Pre-Ecroia their food starts to be made on-site and that reduces a lot of deliveries.

This is true, and if they're sloped properly could have utility vents/pipes installed along those circle-hole frames, or if the "floor" is raised to provide room for modular utilities like sewage drains (also insulation/vibration control). Running power lines into places that previously had none is easy, installing sewage pipes is a whole other monster if they weren't previously spec'd for it. there's some rehabbed buildings in New York, where it was easier/cheaper just to gut the whole building interior, leaving only necessary supports/walls and rebuild units than work with existing layout.

Your terrace examples reminded me of these condo/hotels I stayed at a couple years back, that are built along steep hills of Catalina Island (California):





So the roof of one building was the porch of the unit on top, and thy were linked by these winding steps to each end of the level. There was a gap for a walkway/communal tree area between the front of the upper building and and back of the lower. There are other examples of possible building inspiration, I just need to remember where i stored the files...

[malika]

Hmm, this type of buildings remind me a bit of what we already have. Nothing wrong with that of course, but I'm curious to see how we can take it to the next level besides upscaling it to include more houses (which will make it less attractive and more 'generic').

One example could be to have 'moving' buildings, like this rotating tower from 2008, allowing inhabitants to have the access to sunlight/shade more evenly distributed.

Interior parks might also be something to look into, it's already a slow introduction to the Ecoria. The Zaryadye Park proposed for Moscow seems to fit the bill quite nicely!

As for the roof gardens, you could try to go all the way. I also found an article on the BBC about green cities which seems pretty interesting. Recycling is another trend you might have to keep in mind when designing these things.

I'll try to have a more elaborate post later this week.

[Philip S]

Feb 8, 2015 17:23:43 GMT -5 PondaNagura said:

It's been a while since I read the threads, I wasn't sure if humans had colonized space at all before the machines came to power. Okay, so mostly near future, adaptive construction projects. cool.

Yeah, in Sciror humans never made it out of our solar system. Technically no one left our solar system either! As the humans are 'made'

Feb 8, 2015 17:23:43 GMT -5 PondaNagura said:

Underground parking makes a bunch of sense, in cities in the States, there's actually zoning laws now for housing complexes of a certain capacity must provide parking to the residents so as not co compete/congest with street parking.

It's becoming far more common in the UK too, especially in city centres.

Feb 8, 2015 17:23:43 GMT -5 PondaNagura said:

This is true, and if they're sloped properly could have utility vents/pipes installed along those circle-hole frames, or if the "floor" is raised to provide room for modular utilities like sewage drains (also insulation/vibration control). Running power lines into places that previously had none is easy, installing sewage pipes is a whole other monster if they weren't previously spec'd for it. there's some rehabbed buildings in New York, where it was easier/cheaper just to gut the whole building interior, leaving only necessary supports/walls and rebuild units than work with existing layout.

Yeah, it's an issue with a staggered design. After reading up on tunnel fires etc. I want to add in lots of venting. My first thought was something like this;



Where the vents cut up though the floors to the outside. This is needed if the roads are going to stack. However I'm not sure people would like the idea of a road pollution vent right next to their garden space! So I figure my next idea might be to make a 'linked chimney' that vents through the roof of the entire complex. Perhaps with some high chimney stacks on top to clear all the gardens. The venting does take up a lot of space, but it's still better than an open road.

On a smaller scale the upper roads can be removed as the single road lay and parking is probably enough.

I'm also thinking about the slopped car park idea being made into a town centre. Though building such a structure in an existing town centre may not be possible, unless 'side roads' are converted/ retro fitted into sloped parking and massive new foundations sank. Though the UK does not have an orderly road layout! Maybe in the US with their grid system in the bigger cities, though I'm not sure Americans would like their roads going multilevel with the existing architecture!).

This will most likely have to be a new town centre, or more specifically a new development with everything a small town needs built from scratch. There are many motorways and dual carriageways in the UK that are surrounded by dead space, that no one really wants to build on as any buildings would be right next to a massive road! However building over it, with sound proofing, and proper venting to clean up the air, and it may seem like an nice place to move to?

Feb 8, 2015 17:23:43 GMT -5 PondaNagura said:

Your terrace examples reminded me of these condo/hotels I stayed at a couple years back, that are built along steep hills of Catalina Island (California)

I really like the look of those! I imagine that my design could to styled like this. Once the basic format is worked out, you could style them pretty much how you want, and you could make them fit in with existing architecture (similar - not identical!)

Feb 9, 2015 7:38:51 GMT -5 malika said:

Hmm, this type of buildings remind me a bit of what we already have. Nothing wrong with that of course, but I'm curious to see how we can take it to the next level besides upscaling it to include more houses (which will make it less attractive and more 'generic').

It's not a big leap, it's just a side step, and I think one that will become more common in the future. Humans are good at adapting existing technologies, and this is really nothing more that adapting a lot of ideas, from a lot of different places, into one design. I like the idea that the beginnings of Sciror are our current time. That we can 'see' the future from now, and I'm hoping that if real architecture designs move in the direction of Sciror, that Sciror becomes more and more 'realistic' to the viewer. I'm also hoping that if we get this right, that the viewer may start to wonder what else is right. Off course buy the time the 'pre-Ecoria' turn up we might all be long dead, but all we need is to get the first step reasonably accurate and believable to make the rest of the future stuff seem plausible (thought Psidemics are always going to be a stretch!).

Feb 9, 2015 7:38:51 GMT -5 malika said:

One example could be to have 'moving' buildings, like this rotating tower from 2008, allowing inhabitants to have the access to sunlight/shade more evenly distributed.

That's a crazy wonderful idea. I wonder if they can build it?

For my design I'm thinking of something more mundane, more for the 'masses'. I want regular people, those on low incomes, to have decent housing and private green space. This could also be seen as affordable housing, thought less like the projects in the US, or council estates in the UK, and more Scandinavian in feel. I think building have a profound effect on the psychology of humans, and decent living spaces do improve lives (reduce stress levels) of those who work hard for little money. Obviously it's probably will not work for a deprived areas with high unemployment, but it may improve life in some small way for some. The main benefit it better use of space. However I'm sure gangs and such would mess it up and find a way to exploit the design!

Feb 9, 2015 7:38:51 GMT -5 malika said:

Interior parks might also be something to look into, it's already a slow introduction to the Ecoria. The Zaryadye Park proposed for Moscow seems to fit the bill quite nicely!

It would indeed. I'm also wondering if the glass in those roof panels could be replaced with LED panels, or some kind of future light panel, and the whole lot would not need access to direct sun light. This would be more like the later subterranean Ecoria's public spaces (if the Ecoria have them), and foreshadowing the technology in an earlier design might be a good idea.

Feb 9, 2015 7:38:51 GMT -5 malika said:

As for the roof gardens, you could try to go all the way. I also found an article on the BBC about green cities which seems pretty interesting. Recycling is another trend you might have to keep in mind when designing these things.

Love those, and I also like green walls, and the work of artist Patrick Blanc who pretty much invented them.

I'm thinking some of the outer surfaces could be green walls. I think the top most apartment, the one without an apartment above it, could also have a 'living roof' as described in your link.

Feb 9, 2015 7:38:51 GMT -5 malika said:

I'll try to have a more elaborate post later this week.

Look forward to it!

Another thought it that these project may not be built for selling on, and specifically for low cost housing. This may give the extra leverage for the government and councils to get behind it (at least in Sciror's reality!)

Philip

[malika]

Yeah, in Sciror humans never made it out of our solar system. Technically no one left our solar system either! As the humans are 'made'.

I know I'm getting off topic here, but that idea is really growing on me! It leaves for all sorts of potentially interesting 'conspiracy styled' storytelling. However, then it also becomes interesting to explore post-Psidemic space travel, since by then humans will indeed be traveling around. Also, the era in which humanity is bound to our solar system (so the pre-Ecoria, or proto-Ecoria era I guess) is also a very cool one to delve into. It leaves us with many potential scifi 'settings' to play with!

It's becoming far more common in the UK too, especially in city centres.

Hmm, I'd love to see more 'automated' structures. Take a look at the bike parking facilities at Rotterdam's Central Station, it's basically stacks and stacks of bikes. But what if the system is automated in such a way that the cyclist only has to 'drop' the bike into an elevator or something, kind of like those automated baggage systems you've got at airports? So the cyclist leaves his/her bike at the storage, from there it's automatically moved inside the structure. When the cyclist comes back to pick up the bike, he/she just passes on the code (either a barcode or whatever) and the system will return the bike.

You might wonder why anyone would bother with such a system. Well, you seemed to be concerned about wasted space, also you've got he challenge of exhaust fumes and such which will need to be guided away. So what if the car is also driven into this 'conveyor belt' like system, so the driver basically 'drops off' the car (turning off the engine, etc) and then the automated system basically carries the car deeper into the facility. The facility only has space for cars and repair crews to kinda climb through. What this means is that you'd have a much more efficient use of space, no exhaust fumes. Win-win!

This will most likely have to be a new town centre, or more specifically a new development with everything a small town needs built from scratch. There are many motorways and dual carriageways in the UK that are surrounded by dead space, that no one really wants to build on as any buildings would be right next to a massive road! However building over it, with sound proofing, and proper venting to clean up the air, and it may seem like an nice place to move to?

There's a reason why people seem to want to live under very crappy circumstances in some places whilst others seem nicer (cheaper, greener, cleaner, safer). Unless you manage to connect these areas to the big city centers, you're gonna be dealing with villages and periphery areas. I've seen many such 'experiments' with that kinda stuff when I still worked as a security guard. Kinda ironic, the places seemed to nice, but nobody wanted to move there (people felt it was in the middle of nowhere), which meant it had to be guarded from the youths who did live there who ended up vandalizing the area out of sheer boredom.

It's not a big leap, it's just a side step, and I think one that will become more common in the future. Humans are good at adapting existing technologies, and this is really nothing more that adapting a lot of ideas, from a lot of different places, into one design. I like the idea that the beginnings of Sciror are our current time. That we can 'see' the future from now, and I'm hoping that if real architecture designs move in the direction of Sciror, that Sciror becomes more and more 'realistic' to the viewer. I'm also hoping that if we get this right, that the viewer may start to wonder what else is right. Off course buy the time the 'pre-Ecoria' turn up we might all be long dead, but all we need is to get the first step reasonably accurate and believable to make the rest of the future stuff seem plausible (thought Psidemics are always going to be a stretch!).

It's not that it's not a big leap, it's more that here and there it feels more like a leap into old ideas. However, I think I would need to do some serious reading into architectural history and trends to get a better judgement of that.

For my design I'm thinking of something more mundane, more for the 'masses'. I want regular people, those on low incomes, to have decent housing and private green space. This could also be seen as affordable housing, thought less like the projects in the US, or council estates in the UK, and more Scandinavian in feel. I think building have a profound effect on the psychology of humans, and decent living spaces do improve lives (reduce stress levels) of those who work hard for little money. Obviously it's probably will not work for a deprived areas with high unemployment, but it may improve life in some small way for some. The main benefit it better use of space. However I'm sure gangs and such would mess it up and find a way to exploit the design!

Sounds a bit utopian. If the areas are more stable and people's lives do seem to improve, there's very little need for gangs. However, in our free market economy such a project probably wouldn't ever see the light of day. What I notice now in many Western cities is a pattern of gentrification: old buildings with cheap apartments are torn down, replaced for new and expensive living accommodations, meaning that the original inhabitants are forced to move elsewhere. They are basically moved around to such an extent that they move from ghetto to ghetto, or get lucky enough to find something sort of decent.

In the past you mentioned you see Sciror as a sort of 'stacking up' of all sorts of concepts/elements. Meaning that you try to create a more complete picture of the 'future' or 'scifi setting', rather than contemporary humans with ray guns. Thing is that even the near future will probably be quite different than the world we live in now, especially when dealing with the structures you are suggesting. So it might then also be handy to get a picture of what the economic or technological picture would be like for example, and to see how aspects such as these would influence society.

Speaking of gangs, it kinda leads to the theme of security. The Nineteen Eighty-Four scenario of 'listening television screens' doesn't seem that far-fetched anymore, at least according to this article. We could perhaps have a government apparatus dealing with this, or the system could already be a lot more 'automated'. Why am I thinking of The Machine from Person of Interesthere? A sort of pre-pre-Artificial Ghod basically...

[PondaNagura]

The Nineteen Eighty-Four scenario of 'listening television screens' doesn't seem that far-fetched anymore, at least according to this article.

There's a thing now that hackers remotely access people's built-in laptop cameras, just turn them on and watch/record people. Creepy future is now

I really like the look of those! I imagine that my design could to styled like this. Once the basic format is worked out, you could style them pretty much how you want, and you could make them fit in with existing architecture (similar - not identical!)

Yep, help blend them into existing community architecture if need be, or even hearken back to historic regional aesthetics that have been replaced with "cheap" modern cookie-cutter structures.

Hmm, I'd love to see more 'automated' structures.

Something like the revolving car parks they have in a few cities?

Where the vents cut up though the floors to the outside. This is needed if the roads are going to stack. However I'm not sure people would like the idea of a road pollution vent right next to their garden space! So I figure my next idea might be to make a 'linked chimney' that vents through the roof of the entire complex. Perhaps with some high chimney stacks on top to clear all the gardens. The venting does take up a lot of space, but it's still better than an open road.

In the increasing case for electric vehicles, you'd worry less about ventilation for the tunnels, more likely temperature control, minor condensation removal and fluid(oil)tyre degrading on the driving surface would still be a factor. As they're covered you needn't worry so much about road material repairs from sun exposure or potholes freeze/thaw, and snow removal or salinization of meltwater into sewage systems.

Largely tunnel vent placement tends to be to either "end" of the tunnel mouths. A duct runs the length and draws in the fumes, them might bring in fresh air from outside but I'm not sure. There's actually a .4 km tunnel running a few meters down under the block over from me, only vents for it are on top of maintenance buildings at either end.
Now if the buildings are all connected endlessly, then yeah, that's be an issue of placement and chimneys for aesthetic and air quality. Though I'd hope there would be better air scrubber systems, maybe some green filter with adjacent plants or inaccessible "gardens" surrounding it to soak in some of the emissions (not sure if it'd work that way though).

However the need for vents could address interior lighting for mood. Subterranean car parks are lit utilitarian like, enough light to find your way and see other cars, long-lasting lights and low cost. So maybe daytime light tubes to feed light fro the surface, or maybe upper public walks use durable translucent glazing that let ambient light down, and/or tunnel surfaces lined with OLED coating ...

Wait. Actually building off of the plane idea, maybe robocars don't even bother with windowed vehicle in the tunnels, not like there's much to look at down there to begin with. IDEO suggested mobile offices to address the SanFran real estate problem. For some office industries, maybe they just hop in the mobile office drone and ride around underground all day, getting out for bathroom breaks and lunch. They already don't have to worry about driving, foregoing windows means a lighter, stronger vehicle: solid monocoque chassis for safer traveling. Line the interior of the vehicle with OLED displays, to watch what'd be like driving above ground, on a train, at the beach, maybe even as if they're flying, or a fake office view looking out at none-existent car parks and suburban sprawl
Use that model for schools, have ligit outdoor classrooms or lab spaces, but then have kids take IMAX virtual journeys through the stars, under the ocean, through the human body. Make use of the underground space for entertainment/edutainment and transportation. Though I suppose subways could do this too?
Keep the trend of limited utilitarian lights for security/safety, and have well-illuminated or naturally lit welcoming drop off/pick up locations.

[malika]

By the way, food for thought: aeon.co/magazine/technology/can-nyc-be-completely-self-reliant/

[malika]

Oooh, I found something on that automated parking idea:


By the way, another design inspiration: Tietgen Dormitory

[malika]

And a triple post! It's kinda funny...but this pre-pre-Ecoria concept might fit a current emerging trend in scifi, namely 'solarpunk'. Look it up!

[PondaNagura]

That automated parking lot is cool.

I hope that dorm structure was inspiration by Tulou structures and not Panopticons . Though in a dark future scenario, it wouldn't be a stretch to get the latter modified from the foundation of the former.