Quote:
Originally Posted by Vin
Exactly, I did say many times before that the Vienna style heights would be acceptable if all of Vancouver is upzoned at the same time, and not just along arterial roads, which have pretty much led to nothing so far. In the meantime, towers do help in increasing densities, while at the same time allowing parklands and other industrial areas to remain.
Many European cities have grown organically over the centuries to their present forms, and the splendid architectural sculpturing of the lower-rise buildings makes this form of housing form appealing over there. For the new world, if we emulate such a concept but instead only put in cookie cutter structures such as those in OV, we would only be successful in creating very depressing and claustrophobic neighbourhoods. Taller towers allow for plazas and other open spaces to be created between the taller towers.
|
If you truly believe in what you say you should be arguing for better architectural standards instead of height limits. Judging by 95% of your posts complaining about height, I think it's pretty clear what you believe.
You have a flawed logic in equating short = ugly and tall = beautiful. If you think OV = cookie cutter, do yourself a favor and take look at the majority of suburban towers. And please spare me the "if developers can build taller, they make more money which they can then spend on better architecture". A look at some of the tall cookie cutter suburban tower trashes that logic.
If you think density is what makes cities liveable, then consider the fact that the OV is denser than Metrotown.
And yea... OV is definitely depressing and claustrophobic...
Oh the irony of someone who lectures others for being melodramatic...
I suppose the reason why the OV is bustling full of people is because people want to see what a horrendous neighbourhood it is...
My butt doesn't hurt, my eyes hurt.