Please ignore the missing filename error.
This eyesore is in Mississauga near my parents’ house in an otherwise low-rise neighbourhood. How is this aesthetically pleasing.
How is that aesthetically pleasing?
3 Responses to “How is that aesthetically pleasing?”
rrww on December 15th, 2009 9:40 am:
I would argue the carbon footprint is higher in this energy in-efficient buildign. Probably built +30 years ago with no consideration to upgrade as a homeowner would. I am also advised that some condo / apt dwellers do not have to pay for utilities, therefore, no incetive to reduce.
Zeeshan Hamid on December 21st, 2009 4:23 pm:
@rww,
True that. But there’s got to be a better way of achieving both (aesthetics and environmnt).
Well the housing carbon footprint of all those residents is probably considerably lower than that of all those people living in the pretty boxes made of tiki taki.