Urbanism and Architecture in the DR

PICHARDO

One Dominican at a time, please!
May 15, 2003
13,280
893
113
Santiago de Los 30 Caballeros
Urbanism and Architecture in the DR!

Here I want to use this thread to view and discuss the urbanism and architecture of the Dominican Republic.

How is the urban personality of the cities changing since the last two decades. How much impact does the exported design trends encase much of that detail in urban development here. Is the push of urban growth vertical or does it continues to engulf the city limits as before. How are designs creating more attention towards a refreshing look at modernism over basic functionality.


Victorian Geometry
victoriangeometry.jpg




San Francisco de Macor?s
Torre Vista Park

dscn1312pa7.jpg




Torre Paseo Del Norte
Santo Domingo

5759733li8.jpg



Santiago
Torre Pinel

imagen165uv3.jpg



Santo Domingo
Torre Veiramar

e78a8c3ef6a743a3bf55467455d443dc.jpg



Santo Domingo
Torre del Conservatorio

picture039xq4.jpg




Santo Domingo
Torre Ejecutiva Sonora

sonora+1.jpg



Santo Domingo
Torre Spring Center

exteriorlateral6vo.jpg



Santo Domingo
Torre Terraza del Mar

424500.jpg
 
Aug 19, 2004
572
30
0
Can I be so bold to suggest to the moderator that this post should be moved to debates and 90% of the photos removed to allow people to be able to use their computers. I think you can prove your point with about 10 photos Pichardo the rest don't really contribute a great deal.

The "urban personality" is clearly changing but it is still based on an assumption that the car is the only way to get around the city.

The main issue to be debated is the lack of urban strategic planning in the city and how that can be resolved. At the moment it would appear that if you own the land you can build waht you like where you like. You end up with dspersed services and no defined service/town centres. As a resuult of this the only way to access these services is by car which results in congestion. The Metro is being built but unless some thought is given to urban land use planning and then it will be a waste of money.

Some thought should be given to self contained neigbourhoods that are pleasant palces to live rather than trying to build the biggest building possible.
 

Ezequiel

Bronze
Jun 4, 2008
1,801
81
48
Can I be so bold to suggest to the moderator that this post should be moved to debates and 90% of the photos removed to allow people to be able to use their computers. I think you can prove your point with about 10 photos Pichardo the rest don't really contribute a great deal.

The "urban personality" is clearly changing but it is still based on an assumption that the car is the only way to get around the city.

The main issue to be debated is the lack of urban strategic planning in the city and how that can be resolved. At the moment it would appear that if you own the land you can build waht you like where you like. You end up with dspersed services and no defined service/town centres. As a resuult of this the only way to access these services is by car which results in congestion. The Metro is being built but unless some thought is given to urban land use planning and then it will be a waste of money.

Some thought should be given to self contained neigbourhoods that are pleasant palces to live rather than trying to build the biggest building possible.

That's the way is supposed to be! If you buy a piece of land you don't need nobody, including the government, to tell what to do with it or what to build in it. It's call freedom!!!!!!!!!
 

PICHARDO

One Dominican at a time, please!
May 15, 2003
13,280
893
113
Santiago de Los 30 Caballeros
Can I be so bold to suggest to the moderator that this post should be moved to debates and 90% of the photos removed to allow people to be able to use their computers. I think you can prove your point with about 10 photos Pichardo the rest don't really contribute a great deal.


No you can't and as far as "prove a point" I lost you there?



The "urban personality" is clearly changing but it is still based on an assumption that the car is the only way to get around the city.

Have yet to see the city with over one million where there's urban development and lacking anything to support "cars" as main medium of transportation around it... There are countless of actions that are being taken by a multitude of cities, even larger, to offer an alternative transport mode to the denizens, but all of them still rely on cars as far as I know as main mode of transportation and mobility...


The main issue to be debated is the lack of urban strategic planning in the city and how that can be resolved.

No really! It's a part of what can be debated but not the it for this thread! As I pointed out in the tittle and introduction!



At the moment it would appear that if you own the land you can build waht you like where you like. You end up with dspersed services and no defined service/town centres. As a resuult of this the only way to access these services is by car which results in congestion. The Metro is being built but unless some thought is given to urban land use planning and then it will be a waste of money.

100% on the cue ball there! At the moment it seems, but isn't the case so far. There are several large projects that have been halted on their tracks by community associations, even some in advanced stages of construction, opposed to certain uncontrolled development actions by individuals in the city. I can post here plenty of cases to that effect to debate further on that! I don't think it's the role of government to decide upon itself that cars should be phased out from transit in long term plans, leaving the individual to accept mass transit as sole mode of transportation. The rights of individuals is what creates the need for proper urban planning! As far as the Metro, I think the reverse is truth, the more the lines expand in the central corridors, the more optimized the land usage will be, pushing land and property owners to think into density rather than Pomposity in individual units.

Some thought should be given to self contained neigbourhoods that are pleasant palces to live rather than trying to build the biggest building possible.

Then all we would experience in the end is horizontal urban sprawl! Eating away at the green and open spaces that create that effect in the first place...

I see a lot of small residential towers that create the needed density, yet self control the area's population impact on the same by their limited size. Another aspect is the architectural departure from the molded city and more like a pastel of designs with little shared between each other, again other than their functionality as residences. I'm talking about the way some areas in major world metropolitan cities created the row effects with duplicity and similar designs in both residential or commercial urban architecture. I could point to the endless canyons of brick buildings in NYC, the monotony of boxy buildings of Colombia's main cities, France, the U.K., Holland, Russia...
 
Aug 19, 2004
572
30
0
I don't think it's the role of government to decide upon itself that cars should be phased out from transit in long term plans, leaving the individual to accept mass transit as sole mode of transportation.
Possibly not but as the majority of the people of Santo Domingo cannot afford to own car (or would probably save a fortune by not having to own a car out of a necessity) the government should provide a decent public transport system as an alternative + design a city through effective urban planning that takes this into account and reduce the number of wasted journeys that need to be made to satisfy basic needs.

As to the quality of the architeccture - "room for improvement". The interesting thing about your photos is that you rarely show the buildings at street level - what efforts have been made to provide a safe and integrated pedestrian environment. Except for Av Churchilll I have found very few safe pavments to walk down in SD - now that is a sign of mature urbanisation.

With regards to your final paragraph can you please ask the person who wrote it to use plain English. Psuedo intelletual waffle doesn't fool anyone.