Posted Apr 4, 2019, 3:11 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 22,898
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshal
That's about as reasonable as saying "this is a skyline thread, on a skyscraper site... " so we all agree that all buildings should be skyscrapers - up up and away, as high as we can go. Extrude it all, even the detached houses. Nonsense.
So, Calgarian, how about trying again with some thoughts about cities having different characters relative to high rise construction. Example: central Richmond has become a unique high density environment which, by restricted heights, has developed a somewhat unique typology which relates in different ways to street space and the public realm (parks, squares, entries) as compared to the typical suburban high-rise clusters that dot Metro. It is not interesting so much because its 'different,' but because its difference is producing its own kind of urbanity. In fact, it is probably established to a degree that could accommodate taller buildings; they would likely take a form that was a bit different than the approach being taken at Metrotown, Brentwood, Coquitlam Centre . . .
|
Sure Richmond's atmosphere is a little different than other city centres developing across Canada with strict 16 storey-ish height limits but, the shape of multi-tower building blocks on shared podiums is virtually the same as master plans that allow much taller towers. I'm unconvinced that master planned podium blocks and streets that have naturally grown over decades of intensification are the only two options in community design. One off development taking on the form of organic infill does exist in almost every one of these secondary city centres but, it's few and far between the mega developments. Maybe once the day arrive where buildings aren't sold off to investors in a day.
|
Prev
Linear Mode
