Architecture and interior design thread

Which ones?

The typical architects' cop-out. Oft spouted when one of their 'wonderful visionary designs' has bin proven to be a failure.

From living on nasty estates, I can tell you that such architecture is oppressive, restrictive and depressing. Such buildings seldom, as is claimed in the plans, bring people together in one lovely warm 'community', but instead isolates and divides. One major problem is the lack of personal space such as a garden; people are expected to share communal spaces at all times. These spaces, instead of belonging to 'everyone', end up belonging to no-one. A communal space is fine if you also have your own private space too. Forcing people to share the same space means that the problems of individuals become the problems of the entire 'community'.

Also, as I have learned through my own experience (rather than some pretentious flowery academic waffle), many designs actually restrict and prevent social interaction; tower blocks are terrible for this. You rarely get to see your neighbours. And when you do, they're either coming in or going out; you don't get to chat in the street over the garden fence or owt. Plus the designs often create dark corners for nefarious types to hide away in; this creates a very intimidating environment which makes people rush in to shut their front doors against the scary world outside.

Recent redevelopments have seen the demolishun of large blocks, replaced by lower level housing often with some sort of garden/private space. As this is seen as the better model for social housing. What does that tell you about previous ideas?

On the other hand, don't think any kind of architecture would solve the problem when there's no money for upkeep and maintenance. Both has to be there for it to work.