Quote:
Originally Posted by rlw777
The complaint about "fultonization" is not about mixed use development paralleling transit etc. The complaint is about the lazy over use of a particular faux-historic design language that actually takes away from historic preservation efforts. Developers can still follow a good development pattern and have more variety and creativity in the building designs. I don't mind a few buildings using this design language particularly when it's clear the development (like 800 w Fulton) is clearly not pretending to be some modified historic building. We have enough faux-historic red brick warehouses with glassy hats. I think more variety would make for a more interesting experience one that creates some contrast and draws attention to the actual historic buildings in the neighborhood.
|
Precisely this.
Fultonization is a thing - and it's bad. At the same time, as Briguy and Steely point out, it's important to maintain a relative sense of perspective. River Northification is worse, because it's a combination of not only crap design (albeit a different sort of bad from standard crap Fulton design), but crap massing, crap urban design, crap pedestrian experience, garages on steroids, etc etc etc.