Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

pillbinge t1_j6jftf2 wrote

Reply to comment by Skizzy_Mars in Maura Healey wants to solve the state’s housing crisis. Here’s step one. by _Hack_The_Planet_

I'm really afraid to ask which of these examples you think the US is closer to, given the state of our current housing.

If you could force the builders to make beautiful works like that, go for it. I can't even convince the average person here that if they built nice, brick buildings like you see in the more expensive parts of Boston, they'd get more public approval.

5

Skizzy_Mars t1_j6jhg03 wrote

I didn't say the US was close to either, just chose a contrasting example of public housing since we're making low effort posts.

Why do you need to force developers to do anything? Public housing doesn't mean you make the developers work for free. If we decided that public housing should be beautiful and long lasting (and were willing to pay for it, which we aren't), I'm sure there would be a long line of developers bidding on the projects.

9

pillbinge t1_j6jmgz0 wrote

But that's like someone saying "the government should have healthcare", and someone pointing to the Tuskegee Study. We have examples of public housing in the US. We know what it looks like. A lot of public housing in Europe isn't what you linked to, either.

>Why do you need to force developers to do anything?

Because they develop in short-sighted ways, and that fucks everyone. They're building on land, which means it's limited and subject to public opinion, to say the least. I wouldn't force anyone to design a cup, painting, or so on, but if we're talking about a necessity that's inelastic, then we should come together to figure something out. No reason localities can't actually put thought into their building codes instead of just adopting whatever people decided elsewhere, which is really what happens.

1

Skizzy_Mars t1_j6jq8qz wrote

Why wouldn't we strive to match one of the best examples of public housing? Why bother doing anything if we can't at least try to make it a bit better than last time?

I don't really think that taking bids on a pre-determined design is "forcing" the developer to do anything. They don't have to bid on the project. The design and build don't have to be one contact fulfilled by one entity. Public housing isn't a charitable act driven by a developer, it is a government contract that is bid on and fulfilled by a developer, architect, etc.

3

pillbinge t1_j6k38vz wrote

I'm totally with you. I'm just of the opinion that this would be 20-30 years down the road at best.

I don't think forcing bids on predetermined designs if forcing anything. I'm big on that and hadn't considered that process. Shame on me! But we're talking about force. I think we're on the same page.

I'm for government force in this case. I'm just for force in ways I want, and I think there are too many NIMBYs who are all heart, no head. Never mind that these modern 5/1 monstrosities tend to make things bland and useless, and real businesses can't really move in.

0

hx87 t1_j6jzr3c wrote

99.9% of the new 5/1 apartment buildings that get built would look beautiful if developers 1) stopped trying to push windows as far to the outside as possible (because residents have a window sill space fetish, apparently) and inset windows 4 inches from the wall and 2) used strong, saturated colors instead of the bland shitty beige/gray palette.

3

pillbinge t1_j6k2xww wrote

My take is this. How many streets in Charlestown look beautiful? The brick and tight streets with shade. Beacon Hill is famous. One of the most famous streets in the country is Elfreth St. People want this.

People have sterile white, gray tones because that's easier to sell. It's ironically easier to sell because it's easy to paint over.

We just need to force developers to develop what we want. They aren't going to build to the vernacular anymore. They keep building stuff that makes no sense to me.

3

hellno560 t1_j6kmhp6 wrote

No it's just that alucabond (the material those are made of) comes in that color. Alucabond is cheap, easy and fast to install.

1

Vivecs954 t1_j6l38j7 wrote

Or if they stopped using hardi cement siding, and used an actually good looking exterior like brick.

Also if the buildings weren’t so huge, like they could build two slightly smaller adjacent buildings instead of one monster

2

hx87 t1_j6l715c wrote

Good brick looks much better than the best fiber cement, but bad brick can be much, much worse than the hackiest fiber cement installation. Think of the column bases of City Hall, or the average 1960s public housing project--acres of nothing but running bond red brick. No depth, no detail, just monolithic liminal space hell, like somebody was intentionally trying to build the backrooms IRL. Brick and architectural minimalism just don't mix.

To make brick look good you have to have contrasting brick bond patterns, actual lintels or arches above doors and windows (not some fake looking row of vertical bricks), actual sills that protrude beyond windows and aren't made of brick, and some depth to the brickwork. At least corbel the cornice, for goodness's sake.

1

Vivecs954 t1_j6n2s3l wrote

I’m not an architect or have any construction experience so when I said “brick” I meant good looking brick or other material. I see all sorts of new traditional style buildings built in Europe and they look beautiful and look like a part of the neighborhoods they are built in.

All the 5/1’s in Mansfield are a story taller than any other building, and are way more massive too. They stick out like a sore thumb.

1