[Visitaccess] FW: Visitability with rowhouses

Wed May 16 06:36:13 EDT 2007

>From the discussion on _urbanists_

Too static <-> “Life” <-> Too noisy
--Christopher Langton

Bruce F. Donnelly

216 470 9348

-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce F. Donnelly [mailto:bfd at accessplaces.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 6:29 AM
To: 'The free discussion list for New Urbanism'
Subject: RE: Visitability with rowhouses

Here is the first of two images of such accessways I took yesterday, when I
walked to Penn's Landing and back through Society Hill.  They're from a
camera phone, so be gentle.

I knew that if I looked hard enough I'd find examples.

Too static <-> “Life” <-> Too noisy
--Christopher Langton

Bruce F. Donnelly

216 470 9348

-----Original Message-----
From: The free discussion list for New Urbanism
[mailto:URBANISTS at listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of Bruce F. Donnelly
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 7:19 AM
To: URBANISTS at listserv.nd.edu
Subject: Re: Visitability with rowhouses

Richard,

If you mean the access-way between the two adjacent houses, I am thinking of
it as reaching the level of the house floor just behind the front room.
Let's assume that there is at least some distance between the sidewalk and
the house.  If there is 10 feet, and the house is raised up 30 inches, then
the entry can be back just behind the front room, or anyway in the kitchen.
Then, the door can angle toward the access-way so that it is just possible
to see the opening to the street, down the access-way, from the kitchen.
That would be informal, but it would meet the stated goals of Visitability.
If it is not good enough, then that ups the ante.  In any case, the entry
route would not have to go around the back corner of the house where the
person entering wouldn't be visible from the street.

The biggest downside, of course, is that it exposes more of the house to the
outside air, although the access-way could be bridged over so that one or
both houses have air-rights, so to speak.  You would probably want to do
that anyway to maintain the continuity of the facade.  Otherwise, you just
have duplexes with walkways between.

--- Richard Layman <rlaymandc at YAHOO.COM> wrote:

> I have suggested linked porches and linked sidewalks.  The rear access 
> point is important too, one we stress, but some peopel look at that 
> through the eyes of equity and say it is insufficient, a kind of back 
> of the bus equivalent.
>
>   RL
>
> "Bruce F. Donnelly" <bfd at accessplaces.com> wrote:
>   Someone on the list asked for suggestions about how to provide 
> visitability and overlook to rowhouses.
> Since
> I don't think I've thought of everything I'm posting a list here. If 
> you have any to add, please do.
>
> X, I assume that you're talking about roll-in entry from the front, 
> since if it's from the rear there is no problem.
>
> I've thought of some basic approaches:
>
> 1. Provide a raised level that goes across the fronts of the units, so 
> that a ramp can be at one or both ends. This is a compromise, since 
> anyone walking along the walkway would be able to peer inside.
> Therefore, it would have to be semi-private.
>
> 2. Provide a grade-level entry and high ceilings on the ground floor, 
> and a raised seating area at the front of the front room. This raised 
> dais-like area would overlook both the front room (presumably living
> room) and the street.
>
> 3. Provide a ramp shared between adjacent townhouses, so that a row of 
> six would need only two (since you could walk around the ends). This 
> ramp would also connect rear yards -- and could serve as a handy route 
> for lawn mowers. It could also allow a direct path to the front street 
> from any flats in outbuildings; you may remember my interest in this.
>
> Yours truly,
>
> Bruce F. Donnelly
>
> (216) 470-9348
>
> URBANISTS is an open discussion list where New Urbanists may discuss 
> whatever they find interesting and edifying. To sign off or manage 
> your subscription, point your browser to -- when you are asked for a 
> password for the first time, use a password you will remember. Posts 
> are archived at .
>
>
>
>
> URBANISTS is an open discussion list where New Urbanists may discuss 
> whatever they find interesting and edifying. To sign off or manage 
> your subscription, point your browser to 
> <http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?LMGT1=urbanists>
> -- when you are asked for a password for the first time, use a 
> password you will remember. Posts are archived at 
> <http://listserv.nd.edu/archives/urbanists.html>.
>

Yours truly,

Bruce F. Donnelly

(216) 470-9348

URBANISTS is an open discussion list where New Urbanists may discuss
whatever they find interesting and edifying. To sign off or manage your
subscription, point your browser to
<http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?LMGT1=urbanists> -- when you are asked
for a password for the first time, use a password you will remember. Posts
are archived at <http://listserv.nd.edu/archives/urbanists.html>.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: SingleTunnel.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 157175 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.cnunext.org/pipermail/visitaccess_cnunext.org/attachments/20070516/c21b2567/attachment-0001.jpg 