Talk:Alta de Lisboa

Urban renewal
Has this project been developed on a previously developed site? Development on a greenfield site is not consistent with the concept of urban renewal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Diffly (talk • contribs) 07:09, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * A large portion of the site used to be a mixture of shanty towns, scattered informal workshops, some clusters of older settlements, including the town center of a rural settlement, and some early examples of social housing projects. It is acceptable to consider it a redevelopment, as most of the area already had urban uses before the project was started (albeit with big variations in density and formality). You can check an aerial photo of the area before the project started: Pedrojpinto (talk) 10:43, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
 * The recovered link to the University of Calgary website provides the needed clarification: it is obvious for us here in Lisbon that this is a renewal project of a large area formerly occupied mostly by informal housing and warehouses, but having a foreign institution say so renders this issue beyond question. Plus, no one has bother to check or question my earlier assessment, which is disappointing given the haste with which the article's credibility was put into question. This is a long, long process of urban renewal, but it is indeed huge and continuously supported by the municipality itself, as the agreement with the private developer partnership has been amended and renewed twice (1997 and 2011) since the original signing in 1984. It was promoted initially by the municipality itself, as it needed to provide decent housing conditions for the people in leaving in the shanty towns. The land-use redevelopment scheme was set up by the municipality in agreement with the developer that one an international competition. It is a public-led project, developed by a private promoter. This has been substantially clarified by the provision of new references and the recovery of others. Therefore, I'm removing the neutrality check banner. Pedrojpinto (talk) 15:36, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

New Urbanism dispute
This development does not appear to implement any of the defining elements of New Urbanism. A quick glance at the photos on the project's website confirms this (here's an example). I suggest removing any reference to New Urbanism and removing the category New Urbanism communities. Diffly (talk) 12:18, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * LOL, agreed. Doing it. Genjix (talk) 18:41, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

200 million euros a year
I've found no references supporting the 200 million euros a year statement. If none is added, that sentence should be removed. Pedrojpinto (talk) 15:36, 15 December 2017 (UTC).