Re: design review | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Bitner/Stevenson (lilbert![]() |
|
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 17:35:19 -0700 (MST) |
Phew! Took awhile to read that one, but lots of info. I have to disagree with the statement below. Diversity cannot be achieved by making every house different, and far more expensive. That only narrows your pool of buyers! Unless you want only diverse rich people... Our buildings already look dated-to about 1910 or so. If you choose a classic look, it never goes out of style. -- Liz Stevenson Southside Park Cohousing Sacramento, California ---------- From: "Kay Argyle" <argyle [at] mines.utah.edu> To: Multiple recipients of list <cohousing-l [at] freedom2.mtn.org> Subject: Re: design review Date: Wed, Dec 22, 1999, 11:22 PM The more that all of the buildings adhere to a single style, the more dated your community will look in thirty years. The style of your buildings communicates what sort of people are expected to live there. You're never going to achieve diversity if prospective members look at the architecture and say, no, this is a community for upwardly mobile professional people, I won't fit. Diversity of style will attract diversity of people. Kay Argyle Wasatch Commons
- Re: design review, (continued)
- Re: design review Unnat, December 19 1999
- Re: design review Bitner/Stevenson, December 19 1999
- Re: design review Marya S. Tipton, December 19 1999
- Re: design review Kay Argyle, December 22 1999
- Re: design review Bitner/Stevenson, December 22 1999
- Re: design review Marya S. Tipton, December 22 1999
- Re: Design Review psproefrock, December 23 1999
- RE: design review Rob Sandelin, December 23 1999
- Re: design review Howard Landman, December 27 1999
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.