|Re: design review: aesthetics & urban sprawl||<– Date –> <– Thread –>|
|From: Hans Tilstra (tilstrasmartchat.net.au)|
|Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 23:48:22 -0700 (MST)|
Here in sprawling Melbourne, a lot of people, when they earn good money, buy a large four wheel drive that will never be used off the road. Also, they buy a quarter acre block in an inner suburb. In my envious opinion, people use money to elbow their way into a house with a full garden in an inner suburb and then complain when the local government makes the reasoned suggestion that higher density living is called for. My vote goes to greater good for largest number of people. Why not learn to make high density living appealing? I've seen great examples of row housing in the Netherlands where the design takes into consideration the interaction, the flow of lines to make rows look good. The NLs has a history of involving aesthetic requirements in the approval process. I think that architects frequently use mirror images and slightly diagonal alignments to increase appeal. Now you couldn't have a bigger contrast with neighbouring Belgium, with its often chaotic mingling of styles & functions. Mind you, if you have ever seen Wellington, New Zealand. There's an example of people who paint their houses and roofs in every colour imaginable. It is quirky yet attractive mainly because it is so consistently diverse. Mind you, the earthquakes force people to build with timber, and the timber invites experimentation with different colours. Finally, Charles Woods, David Wright and Malcolm Wells wrote & drew "Designing your natural house", with tons of aha's on aesthetic design. Hans www.vicnet.net.au/~cohouse/design.htm
- (no other messages in thread)
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.