[mytailorisrich]

Well, they are more efficient and free up space so you could have green spaces around them.

See a bit what Le Corbusier was doing with its "Unité d'habitation": A large building that also included amenities and a park around it.

Edit in response to Barry below: Whatever Le Corbusier's faults, "Unité d'habitation" [1] was indeed designed to be pleasant and liveable, and including a school (originally) and a floor for shops and amenities.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit%C3%A9_d'habitation

[barry-cotter]

Examples of this working in practice would be appreciated. Le Corbusier’s name is mud among urban designers because he focused on how things would look in scale model or from an airplane, not on whether it made for a pleasant or livable environment. Architects love him obviously, but like Frank Lloyd Wright his individual residential buildings are surprisingly affordable because they’re great to look at rather than to live in.

Le Corbusier’s ideal city was something like Brasilia, which he designed. Hostile to pedestrians, made for motorists, with no mixed use spaces anywhere, with residential, commercial and industrial spaces completely separated.

[throw0101a]

> Examples of this working in practice would be appreciated.

There probably aren't:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Towers_in_the_park

Toronto is demolishing its community housing that was built this way and rebuilding in more modern ways. The residents hated it.