I remember Archiseek refering to St. B as the French City, rather than the French quarter. It was a valid delineation, as we've discussed recently, even if the parochial characteristics of St. B are consistent with every Winnipeg suburb. People in Charleshood or Trashcona live and die by their shitty boroughs, and it's all they can do to move to St. James or East K, and they think going to a decent restaurant like the Peasant Cookery is transgressive when you could go to a dump like Sorrentos or the Royal Fork.
The upshot, though, is that St. B has a small-city development pattern. I actually like how its lack of zoning is reaping development benefits, in spite of Winnipeg's bureaucratic underpinnings--all those junk yards in the middle of residential areas can't do anything but upzone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simplicity
I'm the loudest voice in favour of approving things like EIFS finishes because they're what the market can (barely) support downtown. But let's not get carried away. It's neither modern nor funky. It's finished like a tract house in Richmond West from 2002.
I couldn't care less about the design of a project. That's not my gig...
|
I've railed on idiots from Toronto in the Canada section for their delusional opinions on what "taste" can accomplish with shitty materials in shitty climates with shitty soil conditions. But Torontonians are delusional idiots, without exception, and EIFs can look ok. There are some solid examples throughout northern Europe. Some people like to think Winnipeg is comparable only to Siberia and that anything that isn't built by gulag workers is impossible, but I think we both know that isn't the case. There are shining examples of what Winnipeg can accomplish in places like Copenhagen, Stockholm, and Sapporo. What Winnipeg can't reasonably accomplish is what happens in Houston, Carmel, or even Vancouver.