I actually work in the architecture field, and while computer programs are nice when you want to show a nice slick looking rendering, nothing beats a physical model to actually show how something will look. It gives you a better sense of space and the buildings relationship to one another. You can't get the same sense of scale on a monitor. While we do most of our models in cardboard, I imagine the Legos were used because they are modular and fit together without any difficulty.

I actually like the idea of doing the mock up in Legos. I used to play with them when I was a kid and it is what got me interested in architecture

I agree with Michael on the 3D aspect of modeling.

I can show scale drawings and three dimensional renderings to customers all day long and most of them will pretend to understand. But I can't tell you how many times the finished piece has been delivered to comments of, "I had no idea it would look like this," or "It's way bigger than I thought."

Spatial abilities vary among the populace.

What seems to be missing in this story is that many people who are not on the City's payroll were able to participate. When you use a fancy computer, it does not get people playing and imagining...besides, it is usually just one person doing the designing.

I had fun "working" on the project last Friday. This process can increase the degree of community buy-in because the community becomes part of the process.

First three posts are right on. Obstructionists: run along. And c'mon, Felicia. You're not going to turn into a shallow column-writing curmudgeon I hope.

I'd much rather the city spend this amount of money and have community involvement than to pay an outside consultant to do another study that will just sit on a shelf and collect dust.

I hope the new council and mayor will not be as opposed to different ways of thinking as McEwen, Dages and Duncan have been.

let me be the next commenter to disagree with you, felicia. and bill mcewen.

this is a tangible way for people to see what exists in downtown and get creative with what could be. i love computers, but building a model on a computer is only one way to plan and for many it doesn't really help them connect.

let me also throw it out there that coucilman duncan threw this out to mindhub, and the wolves are nipping at his heels over there for missing out on the value of such an exercise.

On this I'm a ditto-head with the above folks.

I'm sort of floored that the naysayers on this are also intelligent creatives.
-we have model governments
-model U.N.'s
-we totally get the idea of a 'mock-up'

-and it's no secret that when people get 'hands on,' and have tactile creativity happening (with more than one senses invovled) -that thoughts grow, and people not just envision things, but see how easy it is to do them...

This was an excellent idea.

It makes me really wonder:

The folks who ridicule this (relatively inexpensive and brilliant brainstorming about rebuilding downtown)

--WHAT is your problem with others efforts to actually DO something,
envision it,
and make it that much closer to reality?

Are there plans of YOUR OWN that you don't want challanged?
Eh?

Shoes on the other Hand,now,
huh bub...

(PS: in the spirit of our newfound multicultural wonderfulness?
I'd like to remind the creatives of one additional thing: Lincoln Logs.

--And yes, I have a lot of HotWheels,
STILL collect them, and (no) will not share... (phbbbltt.)