Oh, and second from the bottom ... I LOVE that building. It's so much prettier and sleak in person.

1. Mediocre, but not god-awful.
2. Decent.
3. A bit garish, but I like 'em.
4. Mediocre, but not god-awful.
5. Yes!
6. Bland and unappealing.

Yes, I know, I'm picky.

I love good, red-brown brick. A lot of brick I see in new developments (here, in Toronto) is a sandy pink, straining to be classy and elegant, mostly in the suburbs. Yellow brick is acceptable; I see it mostly on old Georgian houses. The new opera house here is built from this beautiful slate grey stone brick with a slight sheen to it, and it would be absolutely gorgeous except we used far too much of it and ended up with rather bleak facades. Don't even talk to me about cinderblocks.

The rest of those homes should die, die, die.

-and-

@ 1) Will:

Are you talking about the hideous structures on Meridian and 35th?!?!? Please say it isn't so!

Doors, stoops, porches, little yards with low fences are all great ways to connect to the street and make the streetscape friendly and enjoyable.

The second thing would be to prohibit the cedar fences that block off the townhouse from the street.

The third thing would be to allow a townhouse to have a separate apartment in the lower floor or the upper floor. Lots of townhomes are built in 6 story zoning but cannot take advantage of the 6 story envelope because currently we require parking with every unit.

Think "Huxtables."

On first glance I didn't mind the 3rd, but a few seconds later I couldn't see anything beyond a sanitized Disney version of the Wild West. Ouch.

Anyway, I say #1 and the second from bottom (which appears to be the most popular choice). Not particularly my style of architechture, as I prefer 1920's style brick buildings (like so many around here on Capitol Hill) and the style of the old academic buildings on the UW campus, but the aforementioned photos have the cleanest and most urban feel out of all of those pictured.

2. Nice. Classic Baltimore or DC.

3. Meh. Too many clashing shapes.

4. Meh. Faux-Southern.

5. Me likey, along with everyone else.

6. I want to like it, but I don't.

I don't know what the hell kind of townhouses those are that you put up. They look like they were built in a factory.

#1 and #5 are excellent. More of those please. Let's design for the environment, for functionality, and for beauty—as it is now—from here on out.

The rest I don't mind.

No, the ones they're building now just north of the 1900 block of N 34th. That look out onto I-5 and Lake Union.

I don't actually like the second from the bottom ones you guys seem to like. They feel sterile (with the high up balconies), or the fake rock star building above that.

#1 seems to have a decent neighborhood concept, but is uninspiring (and what's with the fire escape in the end unit?).

#2 gets bonus points for having diversity among units, but is just ugly.

## 3 and 4 are fortresses that are pedestrian unfriendly.

#5 isn't bad and may have the most potential, but I'd like to see a wider shot to see the whole building, and it seems like the interiors could be depressingly dark.

#6 is ok, but like #1, very uninspiring.

#5 is soooo overrated...too ayn rand for me...a look i like to call Ecotopic Gestapo...

#1 is ok.

others bite, hard....

bitches.

One seems to be on its own private alley, which is a little antiurban. Five, to like five is to say, pretty picture, because you can tell nothing about the building from it.

Three and six, which look like a lot of new outer-borough construction in NYC, are awful fortresses. They have nothing to do with the city, as dense as they might be.

What would make any of these look a lot, lot better is for vegetation, and especially trees, to grow in. Right now they all look naked.

its appeal is that it isn't a lie. this is 2007. not 1914.

What kind of architectural fairy tale do these people want to be living in? I think if you feel the need to burn down every house that isn't some kind of masterpiece, you are too good for this world. Maybe need to kill yourself? Yes, maybe.

But we are not alone in bad architecture. The condos and townhouses going up in my old hometown of Chicago are just as bad as what goes up most of the time around here. They are usually just featurless blobs of brick that try and mimic the old Victorian 3 flats, but fail fail FAIL. See what I mean: http://activerain.com/image_store/uploads/3/6/7/7/6/ar116964171467763.jpg Oh I just want to cry when I see them. And what's up with that blank brick pediment? Why bother?

we actually do have some great examples around in seattle. just not the majority of what is going up.

#29 very nice, but totally too expensive.

Any of those pictured is better than the generic boxes with attached woodwork that are being cloned throughout the city.
But, any of those pictured are also too expensive for Seattle.

Let's face it, if all you have to work with is $375K - $500K, you aren't going to get much more than what's going up.

1 is not bad. i do agree that the seeming lack of accessibility is a problem (maybe they have units w/ ramps or elevators we just can't see?). although looking at it more, 1 does look a little uninspired. but i wouldn't mind living next to it.

2: FUCK NO! Looks like new units in the college/downtown part of my hometown, and i came here to get away from that. They're too tall for the style and the lack of trees really hurts them. too close to the street.

3: um, uh, no, prob not. they're nice. they don't appeal to my tastes though. I think it's the color; it's a nice color, just maybe not on these particular buildings. No trees, too close to the street, too big/tall. too many stylistic elements. there's something i don't like about the driveways/gates/garages. it could be nice for a suburb in California though.

4: even though they're not my favorite and don't totally do it for me, they're not totally bad. they're at decent heights and they mix those up a bit. they do have trees. the patios are nice. different materials are nice.

5: nice. i like it. probably my favorite. wouldn't mind living next to it--or in one :). very simple yet pays attention to form. love the materials. medium mature trees--evergreens, small trunk deciduous--would make them even better and some grass might (on the ground, of course, I would like to see this unit's environs). somehow tastefully incorporate a couple of big windows for sunlight/nature into the essential concept and form of the design. maybe bigger decks? maybe not. (that's just me, i like decks.) only if it fits into the form. and maybe a few units, say top, with translucent or opaque siding for the deck for some topless (or maybe nude on seattle's warmest days in the summer) sunbathing.

6: not bad. color's not bad. nice big patios. maybe for outskirts of a desert town or middle of nowhere in a desert. maybe also for the waaay outskirts of seattle and/or king co. but looking at it more: 1. maybe the photo composition (closeness to subject of picture) is affecting my neutral judgment, 2. the lack of cars help it out, 3. that looks a lot like--maybe the backside of--#3's units or another bldg in its complex.

so the order i would put it in from fave to least is: 5, 1, 4--if we had to, 6--if we had to, 2--if we absolutely had to but shorter please and further back from the street, and 6--probably not. 5 and 1 would go best in seattle.

do you live in montreal? while much of the city is beautiful, you did pick nicer streets. unfortunately, many of the old buildings/townhouses are decaying and many have structural and vermin problems. just to be the negative voice on montreal, a great city nevertheless.

I think I might like #1 depending on its context. It might, as several have said, be a bit too mid-century modern (60s boomer school building), but it looks to have enough 00's detailing to pull it away from the more dreadful examples of that era.

#3 is not only gaudy, but it's the most pedestrian unfriendly of the group with the high fences and garage doors greeting the few who might dare try to walk on those sidewalks. #6 isn't much better, but at it least has a suggestion of Spanish-courtyard about it.

And I know from the picture that #2 isn't an old townhouse development, but it does a great job of pretending to be that. And this one really does look like it's created a nice neighborhood.

I like concrete boxes, and I'm looking forward to buying something like #5 someday.

Although good design principles are of course important, context is key. I love the San Francisco townhouses, but I'm not sure that I would love them here.