the enormous "Streets of Southpoint" Mall is another great example of this awful idea - no place to live, but fake cobblestone "streets" to walk down as you spend all your money. to add insult to injury, the "architects" decided that they would make a half-assed attempt to make a section of the superstructure look like an old tobacco factory/warehouse, right down to the faux murals on the walls, carefully painted to look aged. i could hardly believe my NC-native friend when she said the whole place was a pine forest five years ago. it's brought to us by the same people who made the godawful "Providence Place" monstrosity in Providence, RI.

This is a phenomenon that we have been watching for a while, and that we began to cover after our visit to Victoria Gardens. We are all for mixed-use and quality pedestrian spaces. In this instance, the upper floors are apartments and offices, which is nice to see. Without rehashing all of the commentary posts we have made on the subject, the issue for us is partly about faux-historicism, but it is even more about private developments using the "look and feel" of traditionally public spaces (real town sidewalks, parks, squares), while denying the inherent freedom implied in such an environment. For more on what we are thinking, check out the "reference" links above.

James, well, I admit to being peeved at faux-historicism as well. I remember visiting brand-spanking new "townhousese" in Oakton, Va., and thinking that the place gave me the heebie-jeebies. The problem is not the design, which we agree is better than strip malls and suburban subdivisions. The problem is the way that it is financed. Jane Jacobs has an excellent chapter on piecemeal investment versus cataclysmic investment. She criticizes environments created by cataclysmic investment on a number of levels. She was thinking of urban tower-in-the-park housing projects, but the principle applies to places like Crocker Park as well: Attempt to build a place all at once and it will be lacking in character. This seems to apply even to pedestrian-friendly streetscapes that mean well if are poorly executed. The best place for developers to invest in my view is urban infill projects. A new building on a vacant lot in an old town center is preferable by far to trying to create a whole new town center. Before the current era, cities and towns were never built at one time, and that is one reason they retain their appeal for so many people. The problem is that now, developers want to do huge projects. I guess my overall reaction to this is that of the huge projects I've seen, this one is among the least worst.

What I find abhorent about what has become Crocker Park, is what residents were told this would be. It is truly another strip mall just rearranged buildings, not environmentally friendly, etc. It isn't doing the 'value added' benefits it was touted to do 4 years ago, before they cut down 75 acres of woodland to build this. As far as I know they have not been able to rent the office space and no one is talking about the apartments?

As a resident of Westlake, heres some insight. I dislike some of the people that it brings into our refined community. On the other hand, so long as nicer shops are renting space, that should stay at a minimum. Now, this development provides a European feel to relaxing, walking, sitting outside and drinking coffee, or havign a meal. These things are lost to a society pre-occupied with owning, and working, and too stressed to appreciate. Just walking around, relaxing with your friends, taking in a movie, in a safe community, thats what it is about. How is a mall enclosed where you walk aroudn in filtered air, passing through a "food court" better?