Quote:
Originally Posted by O-tacular
Why can't we just focus our efforts on making one really good urban village, then once that's done move onto the next. Same applies to the condo towers. Fewer, better projects rather than a plethora of sub-par —.
|
Actually, I am not too concerned if we have a bunch of "sub-par" condos. Not everyone can afford to live in a luxury condo. We need things like Vantage Pointe (yes I said it). To me, the style of the condos is nowhere near as important as the public realm: streetscapes, parks, plazas, etc and achieving the critical mass of people in an area to support a dynamic urban environment. Living an urban lifestyle, and all that it encompasses, is far more important to me than the design of the tower I live in. So, if creating the critical mass for a really vibrant street life means lots of bland towers, so be it. It is the experience on the street that matters, not the design of the buildings.
And I think the market should decided how many "urban villages" (which term I loathe) can be made, not our desire to create "ideal communities." I think great urban communities are great because they are not planned. They are spontaneous, authentic, organic and chaotic. Great retail streets happen spontaneously, not because of some grand scheme. Artist communities, cultural districts etc, are all the product of thousands of individual choices by the people living in those neighbourhoods.
Threaded Mode