• CompostMaterial@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    6 months ago

    TLDR: money. There isn’t a profit in making a pretty building when you can build a utilitarian one and still milk the poor bastards that have no other option but to leave there.

  • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    I like a lot of About Here videos. He does a good job of boiling down city policy and design issues without sounding condescending.

    • OminousOrange
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      6 months ago

      Strong Towns is good too. They got a new media guy about 10 months ago and he’s put out some great videos.

  • mtchristo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Even Europe has stopped producing those buildings. Each era comes with its own stylistics expressions. Amsterdam’s newer district is full of modern cubical buildings. Even if they look a bit better than the one’s shown in this meme, they belong to the same post modern movement.

    Another thing to consider is that every other extra luxury that is purely a stylistic addition will be an extra expanse on the end buyer

    • frostbiker
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      6 months ago

      Living in an area that is beautiful matters, and our urban landscapes are a big part of that. Trees, decorated facades, town squares, they may add some economic cost, but why is that the only cost that matters? What about the emotional cost of living in an ugly noisy jungle of concrete and glass?

      • mtchristo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        Because other people’s right to have a roof over their heads and afford to buy a house out weights you presumed right to living in a Disney themed park.

        • frostbiker
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          That is a false dichotomy. Housing is expensive in Canada due to zoning laws forcing a very inefficient use of land, among other reasons.

          I lived in Europe for decades, so I know for a fact that making our streets pleasant to walk around isn’t some weird utopia, it is the basic reality in many developed countries.

          • BCsven
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Not sure if that is accurate in BC, we have 3+ story townhomes with mainfloor being shopping/ services. Tons of quadplexes, and 50-100 unit condos like crazy.

  • Showroom7561
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    In North America, every bad design is a feature. 🤦‍♂️

  • LostWon
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    6 months ago

    Anyone else notice Canada was the only country on the map with the two stairwells from 2 floors & up requirement and every other country started it with 3 or higher?

      • LostWon
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        I remember him saying (English) North America requires 3 floors and then I saw that map.

        This isn’t my first video of theirs, btw. I watched it before I even saw this thread, because I’m subscribed.

  • ExLisper@linux.community
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    All the ‘nice apartments’ he’s showing are from beginning of XX century. No one builds like this in Europe anymore. Most new developments are exactly like the ones he shows in America.

  • Dearche
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    6 months ago

    While I think this is an issue, I think it’s a minor one. If it was a big problem, we’d see a whole bunch of 2 storey apartments sprinkled amongst single family homes. But I’ve never seen one in all my time in Toronto. Because there’s a whole ton of regulations that make it impossible by just plain making it illegal without jumping through a whole ton of other hoops that make it far too expensive.

    I’m not saying fixing this won’t help, but it’s just one of dozens of issues, and a minor one compared to some of them.

    • Evkob
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      6 months ago

      Close, it’s stairways and “fire safety” requirements.

    • naeap@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      6 months ago

      It seems to be more that houses in the USA were being built cheap and burn down easier. While Europe obviously had the same issue with fires (looking at you Brugge - how often do you wooden town need to burn down, until you place a fucking stone?), but they approached it with better, fire proof materials - like bricks instead of wood.

      The regulations in the USA seem to include those zig-zag stairs (probably I mixed up the name), where 2 stairways are on the same place, cross crossing each other.
      In case of smoke/fire or demolition of this block, I don’t see how those 2 stairs make a better exit, when they are in the same place.

  • Mr_Blott@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    6 months ago

    That was three minutes of info in a 12 minute vid

    Please fuck off with this shit, it’s ruining Lemmy