Not so long ago, density was promoted as a way to enliven underpopulated cities, particularly their downtowns. Then it became a tool for fighting climate change. Now, density is increasingly seen as an equity issue. [...]
Two notorious projects help us understand the difference between density that enhances a neighborhood and projects that big-foot their surroundings.
— The Philadelphia Inquirer
In her latest column for the Inquirer, architecture critic Inga Saffron dissects two new mid-rise apartment building projects at opposite ends of Philadelphia (the "poop building and the Scrooge building," as she nicknames them) and how their individual approaches toward urban densification can have beneficial or detrimental effects on their surrounding neighborhoods.
Related on Archinect: Every City Needs a Crank; A conversation with architecture critic Inga Saffron
"Our challenge is to accommodate new housing while still maintaining our quirky, beloved, lived-in neighborhoods," writes Saffron. "That’s why we need the right density in the right place."
1 Comment
It's funny to me that advocates of big developers without any architecture consideration, trying to transfer homeowners into rent slaves, have rebranded themselves as the Good Side.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.