[streetscaper]

Originally Posted by UrbanImpact

I would never call this garbage. While the architecture is not anything fancy, that's a classic Jane Jacobs block and a 101 in proper urban planning.

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

Obviously the "Jane Jacobs" fine grained scale is not what we're debating. Most of these corner properties are going to be eventually redeveloped, and would have been years ago had the original subway plans been constructed before WWII.

More specifically, architecturally speaking, the two walkups on the left are good looking structures but the rest of the corner, aside from being desirable from a intimate scale urban planning POV as stated, is banal dreck.

I do have a complaint though that many large new residential projects that anchor these formally low-rise corners along avenues are being built with one or two monolithic commercial/retail spaces instead of the high density, small shop form you see in that photo and all around the city. I completely understand from the standpoint of the developer and lender that they find signing one or two large corporate chains as being less-risk and more stable than offering smaller retail spaces to a diverse assortment of small businesses, but it certainly is better for the city and neighborhood to not dispose of the kind of small business vitality you see in that photo.

I think the solution may lie in a zoning code reform that specifically prioritizes small retail units in the bases of these new developments over the large spaces geared towards chains as a mandate, but I unfortunately don't see that happening.

Agree with these two posts. It's hard for me to get excited for the demolition for these architecturally bland/drab walkups because we will be losing that fine-grained urbanism that is so special/exciting about pre-war cities.