Finally some revival at the once vibrant Michigan Ave.-Junction St. Commercial District after50 years of blight and decay. New apartments are being built in that vacant spot.
Take a look
https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/...Ftp-0p8PlXx_B0
Printable View
Finally some revival at the once vibrant Michigan Ave.-Junction St. Commercial District after50 years of blight and decay. New apartments are being built in that vacant spot.
Take a look
https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/...Ftp-0p8PlXx_B0
Glad I get to pay for quartz countertops and stainless steel appliances for bums when some of my hardworking family and friends don't even have those things.
Seriously though, I'll be impressed when we can build market rate housing there for people that don't need me to pay their rent.
Nice "What about the Neighborhoods" find Danny. Filling low income housing needs too.
Screen snap of proposed projects from the video.
Why are all the construction projects so ugly? Would a little bit of architectural detail really run the cost up?
I'm happy for those who need this.
They look like stacked shipping containers or stacked prefab modules,there seems to be a competition with an award at the end of the year for the one that creates the most ugly project possible.Quote:
Originally Posted by preserve
I would agree for those who need as transitional housing along with job training and substance abuse programs,but the trend seems to be a life long thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by jcole
But it is a bit of a stretch when they contain things that the average worker cannot afford to install in their home and drives up the cost where it could be used for the programs.
Mrs Roosevelt was the stickler,you got a basic roof over your head and 90 days to get a job or you were out of there,they were considered kinda luxury because they had running water and at least a shared toilet on the same floor as everybody else.
Those really look hideous but that's where we are these days it seems. Most new apartment buildings are the same. Unfortunate. Hopefully once we get to a point where development can sustain itself without tax credits, the free market will demand better looking product.
The evidence from elsewhere in the US is that it will not. Certainly sometimes better-looking stuff gets built, but it's not at all the norm. Honestly, it's not surprising; if you live in a ugly building you aren't generally the person who mostly has to look at it. Attractiveness in architecture is largely captured by onlookers who aren't going to pay you for it. You need some kind of development standards across an area so that everyone pays and everyone gets to look at stuff that's nice. Otherwise you are depending on the quirkiness of builders.Quote:
Originally Posted by djtomt
Correct; all the new construction last time I was out in Colorado was basically made to mirror the look of the mountains or look "rustic" which looks exactly like the above rendering of the new apts on Michigan. We are just recently getting this non descript, oft created bit of "architecture" here in the Midwest. It goes up fast, easy and cheap and until someone on one of the coasts comes up with something better, we're stuck with this or shipping containers.Quote:
Originally Posted by mwilbert
Let me just plug my favorite architecture book here.
A Pattern Language, by Christopher WJ Alexander, et. al.
I’d say it’s neither beautiful nor ugly. Just nondescript; but that’s the case with the majority of new builds these days. Certainly better than vacant land. On the positive side, it’s not monochromatic and does have different materials. Could definitely be worse.
There is a story about a 19th C French critic who hated the Eiffel Tower but went up in it every day to have coffee. When asked why he went there if he hated it so much he said, "Because it's the only place I can go where I don't have to look at it."Quote:
Originally Posted by jcole
Point being that I've been in many terrific apartments that were in ugly exterior buildings. I, too, am happy for those who will get to live there.
true that preserveQuote:
Originally Posted by preserve