minus-squareVingst [he/him]hexbear3·9 months agoThat's a false dichotomy. High rises aren't even materially efficient. All that weight requires more reinforcing material. The Vienna socialist housing projects are decent examples. Mostly mid-rises and their one high-rise isn't a spartan, drab eyesore. It's not a trade-off, it's just shitty thoughtless design. link
minus-squareComradeSharkfucker@lemmy.mlhexbear6·9 months agoOh? I'm no civil engineer so I can't argue against that lol. I always assumed high rise housing was primarily space and material efficient and that was the reason for their construction. linkfedilink
minus-squareVingst [he/him]hexbear3·9 months agoYes, and also I think there are even better looking mid-rise Khrushchevka housing projects. This "soulless highrise towers" meme is fraught toxic reactionary propaganda. I feel like I got little caught up and heated there. link
That's a false dichotomy. High rises aren't even materially efficient. All that weight requires more reinforcing material.
The Vienna socialist housing projects are decent examples. Mostly mid-rises and their one high-rise isn't a spartan, drab eyesore.
It's not a trade-off, it's just shitty thoughtless design.
Oh? I'm no civil engineer so I can't argue against that lol. I always assumed high rise housing was primarily space and material efficient and that was the reason for their construction.
Yes, and also I think there are even better looking mid-rise Khrushchevka housing projects.
This "soulless highrise towers" meme is fraught toxic reactionary propaganda. I feel like I got little caught up and heated there.