Quote:
Originally Posted by Toasty Joe
From an optimist's POV, they add a splash of color to a cheap building. From a realist's POV, it's easier to get local support for an affordable development if the building is obviously cheaper-looking than the neighbors' full-priced homes, even if it means their neighborhood looks tackier.
.
|
This is some pretzel logic. Somehow the neighbors have higher property values if it looks like poor people live nearby?
I think a better explanation is that socially-minded architects are intentionally choosing to reject the kind of muted color palettes that are now associated with luxury housing / gentrification. In this view, bright colors are seen as "working class" with a positive association. It's also a rejection of the dour material palettes of 20th-century public housing, and it's subtly linked to cultural traditions from Latin America, Africa and the Caribbean.