Where debating everything under the sun is only the beginning

Quote from: Krake

Probably a marxist bear since it was the  Soviet Circus

And for all we know the bear was a geographer who couldn't get a job in their field.

Quote from: Belfrager

A marxist geographer eh?
I've seen many things in life, including a bear that could ride a motorcycle at the Soviet Circus, but this one it's a novelty.

Probably a marxist bear since it was the  Soviet Circus

A marxist geographer eh?
I've seen many things in life, including a bear that could ride a motorcycle at the Soviet Circus, but this one it's a novelty.
Does he interprets the tectonic movements as a war of classes?

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/marxist-and-geographer-david-harvey-on-urban-development-and-power-a-900976.html

Quote

Cities try to secure themselves a prime position on the market [by constructing such projects] -- like a rare wine of an exceptionally good vintage.

Twisted.

And compared to the huge cost of constructing and maintaining roads, they are made for pennies.

Most of these are way cool.

The Norwegian Road Authority has designated some of the roads National Tourist Routes, mostly places with dramatic nature that definitively was around well before the 21st century. But particularly the positive feedback they got from across the world of the design of one viewing platform, Stegastein (2006), made them realise that they could make viewing/resting platforms much nicer than the usual ugly/kitsch/both affair.




This article shows some of the other ones, in some cases more interesting than the nature the tourists are supposed to watch.

Quote from: aefields

Quote from: jax

Some beautiful pictures of one of my favourite city in the world.

Neat pictures.  But the subject makes me shudder.  Living in boxes piled up... 

The pictures are actually off-topic as the buildings were made before 2000, but I thought they fitted best in here. These bird cages, as they are called, can be surprisingly comfortable. Well, they are called bird cages in Mandarin, most Hong Kongers speak Cantonese, but I guess the sentiment is the same. I have stayed in similar places in Shanghai, and stayed in hotels in Kowloon not so different from the first picture. You share the hallway and particular the elevators with a good number of neighbours, but otherwise you have privacy. While Hong Kong has suburbs too, in most cases the buildings are a short walk from the city, sometimes they are the city.

The average square meter price in Hong Kong is above 20,000$/m2 (around 2000$ per square foot), so space is at a premium. Small flats are subdivided into submission, like this mansion. Tokyo have small apartments as well, but the Hong Kong ones are grittier. Coming from Bangkok I paid the same for a five star luxury hotel in Bangkok as I did for a room in Hong Kong that was basically a bed, some luggage/clothing space, and a shower/toilet cubicle.

[VIDEO]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKf08vWTkKA[/VIDEO]

Quote from: jax

Plans for Kigali, capital of Rwanda.

[IMGLEFT=http://www.topboxdesign.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Kigali-masterplan-Urban-Planning-design-Exterior-2.jpg][IMGRIGHT=http://www.topboxdesign.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Kigali-masterplan-Urban-Planning-design-Exterior-1.jpg]






















[IMG=http://s3images.coroflot.com/user_files/individual_files/original_81504_TJ_ksP8N7QBDscQFeqNnAAt5A.jpg]



Proposal for Makoko, Lagos, Nigeria

[IMG=http://www.architizer.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/nle-makoko-floating-school-1-600x328.jpg]

That photo of Makoko looks somewhat like Des Plaines,Illinois right now. Problem: Des Plaines wasn't designed to look like that.

Edit: I had a look at the link Jax supplied concerning Hong Kong. Please, a thousand times, no. After looking at that, the very worst neighborhoods in Detroit or Chicago don't look so bad.

Those closeups of the flats horror remind me of the first time I see "1984" on the BBC years ago.

Quote from: jax

Some beautiful pictures of one of my favourite city in the world.

Neat pictures.  But the subject makes me shudder.  Living in boxes piled up... 

Plans for Kigali, capital of Rwanda.

[IMGLEFT=http://www.topboxdesign.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Kigali-masterplan-Urban-Planning-design-Exterior-2.jpg][IMGRIGHT=http://www.topboxdesign.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Kigali-masterplan-Urban-Planning-design-Exterior-1.jpg]






















[IMG=http://s3images.coroflot.com/user_files/individual_files/original_81504_TJ_ksP8N7QBDscQFeqNnAAt5A.jpg]



Proposal for Makoko, Lagos, Nigeria

[IMG=http://www.architizer.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/nle-makoko-floating-school-1-600x328.jpg]

Some beautiful pictures of one of my favourite city in the world.

Quote from: jax

It may fit, but I think it is a better fit into signal buildings, buildings designed to make people pay attention to a city or company.

Fair enough. Btw, the basic design itself is from 1999.

Quote from: jax

Of course, then you got buildings that really are a bunch of stacked containers.

Hah. That doesn't seem like they'd be insulated properly.

It may fit, but I think it is a better fit into signal buildings, buildings designed to make people pay attention to a city or company. Most of the single buildings I have linked to above are of that category. It also fits perfectly into the fairly small but growing  "evokes a bunch of stacked containers" category. Two other cases are in Oslo, Norway (under construction) and Vancouver, Canada (redesigned).


[IMGLEFT=http://img801.imageshack.us/img801/6195/statoil4x1000.jpg][IMGRIGHT=http://pricetags.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/marine-gateway-2.jpg?w=600]

[IMGLEFT=http://img803.imageshack.us/img803/5093/statoil6.jpg][clear]





Of course, then you got buildings that really are a bunch of stacked containers.

[IMGLEFT=http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4H2ZOKy4MO8/TfBdx8hHkII/AAAAAAAAAZ8/TIP84MJKgwY/s400/container+architecture.jpg][IMGRIGHT=http://duckflash.vectroave.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/City-Center-Lofts-by-Adam-Kalkin-Shipping-Container-Architecture.jpg]


[IMGLEFT=http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ewmvjQfGUQg/TfBhTrfxebI/AAAAAAAAAaM/q2fQpfsOOvU/s400/openschool-apap-lotek-11.jpg][IMGRIGHT=http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/1313576175-lorigami.jpg]

Quote from: jax

There is a post-millennial style that I dub North European because I've seen it most often there, the South Europeans have mostly been busy with austerity. The buildings are large, boxy, have large balconies, and angular with irregular details and exposed material.

I suppose the Museum At The Stream probably fits into that category as well? It evokes a bunch of stacked containers in the harbor.

The world's next holiday resort will be Khartoum, Sudan, according to the developers Qataridiar (a property arm of the sovereign wealth fund). Relative to other projects this is a fairly modest one, but all grandiose schemes have to start somewhere.

[VIDEO]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-vsaKTBMDc[/VIDEO]

There is a post-millennial style that I dub North European because I've seen it most often there, the South Europeans have mostly been busy with austerity. The buildings are large, boxy, have large balconies, and angular with irregular details and exposed material. They are typically in reclaimed industrial or seafaring areas.  In part newer environmental and accessibility building codes have an impact on the design. Interestingly many of these projects look better up close than from a distance. Pictures from Oslo,  Malmö, Hamburg, Prague.

Quote from: ensbb3

Sustainability seems just as important to me as how pleasing it is to look at. Also not taking away from the older buildings around it is nicer to me. You can build a uber-modern district in a city, but you just wrote it's epitaph. It's lost its place 50 years from now when they just build a new district. I like the history and the future to stand together in a pleasing way.

America seems to be worse at this than we are. I recently even saw some opinion piece in the NYT (I think) that said desert land in California was just rotting away. Okay, different category, but it's a similar sentiment.

Urban architecture is commonly divided into brownfields, land with previous (industrial) constructions, and greenfields with none, where there are no constraints except the ones the regulators and clients come up with. The former tend to end up better than the later. I have seen some try to introduce bluefields for water reclamation projects, but after the reclamation is done it is basically greenfield. Bjørvika in Oslo and Eko Atlantic in Lagos (above) are examples of that. Most Chinese development is greenfield, if there are any previous buildings they are torn down, turning the plot into a greenfield. The same goes for much African and Asian development. Cities in rapid growth are mostly greenfield, where tilled fields are turned into urban areas, while cities in slow growth are mostly brownfield, as buildings slowly accumulate and become more urban. European cities had their greenfield phase by the late industrial revolution (second half of 19th century mostly), while now the brownfield projects predominate. Nydalen (the New Valley), a light industrial area outside my window, has had both. This had late 19th century industry clustered along the river for energy, turning into much larger plants and steel mills, which when they lost in competition with the districts, were sold to a developer who repackaged it and turned it into a massive profit for himself (about 10,000 years' worth of wages) and a rejuvenation of the district from warehousing to tech, education, and media. Opera Software moved their new HQ there. Me, I cannot complain as this redevelopment has led to my flat being worth at least 1 years more of wages.  Anyway, I like the way the 19th century factories have been turned in offices, residential, schools, and entertainment. By Frenzie's first example I guess he thinks likewise. I couldn't find any good sample of the 19th/21st century architecture I was looking for, from the above angle it might as well be 1899.

Something else to look at is usefulness. What else can it be used for and reasonably converted to? A good example from my neck of the woods is "The Great American Pyramid". Which is in no way great for anything. The fact it's an iconic structure in Memphis, Tennessee is the only reason it is still standing.



The cost to upgrade to any kind of modern stadium left it empty for a good while. It's completely nonstandard. Saved only by a retail store. Who knows what incentives the city had to offer to get it occupied. What cost has look over function cost them? I doubt they'll say.

Seems your book is gonna take some if not most of my arguments, if the summary is any indication. If there's a bit about compartmentalising sections so to make renovation part of the design I'll be without points. As a builder I understand the need to standardize construction and the durability of materials. Cost is a big factor for buildings only decades old. I can estimate a job easily if I know the method used to build it. I don't have to tear into a wall to tell you what's there or what it will take to redesign/replace/restore. But nonstandard construction mean you won't know what is really there until you get into it and any parts will have to be manufactured specifically for the job. Cost skyrockets quickly and price per unit of a special order, say, curved window is higher and decades later materials may not even be the same (so more cost depending on the variances). And when restoring old you quickly find the worth is measured by what the building mean to the community (individuals) vs moneys of renovation/restoration (whoever fronts the bill). Often more money is spent to restore than a new structure would cost regardless, but without the presence and meaning behind it, fancy architecture can become useless junk when it's worth less money to put something else there that's much better.

Sustainability seems just as important to me as how pleasing it is to look at. Also not taking away from the older buildings around it is nicer to me. You can build a uber-modern district in a city, but you just wrote it's epitaph. It's lost its place 50 years from now when they just build a new district. I like the history and the future to stand together in a pleasing way.

Quote from: ensbb3

I like to give an eye to the future with architecture. Not just how modern does it look now but how out of place will it look 20 years from now and further down the road. You need only to drive thru a housing development or tower complex from the seventies to see what I mean. Superfluous design beyond function meant to be modern, now torn down as the ugly eyesores they are. Boxy, protruding plains and yuck glass incorporated in gaudy amounts. Such will be the way of glass bubbles and odd architectural curves in the future.

Stewart Brand's book How Buildings Learn, and the series based on the book comes strongly recommended.

[VIDEO]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvEqfg2sIH0[/VIDEO]

When I look at a building, I add a couple decades aging, grime, and a few years with insufficient maintenance. Curvatures and bubbles are fine, but you have to realise that they close a building in on itself, much like a hedgehog. White is a popular colour, but will only remain so if cleaned regularly.

Quote from: jax

The architect of this museum is the Italian Renzo Piano. In Britain probably best known for the Shard (left), in France for Centre Georges Pompidou (not pictured for being previous millenium).

Interesting.

Quote from: jax

To me this is a very egotistical building. Tall and thin skyscrapers are fine, as are smaller squat buildings. But when they are tall and wide like here they are taking away a lot of light without giving anything back.

Wholly agreed.

Quote from: jax

And since each wing is relatively narrow, it actually doesn't add a lot of usable hotel, now mixed, space.

And that might well be because otherwise much of the inside wouldn't have had natural light. Which perhaps ironically makes it so. much. worse.

Quote from: Frenzie I quite like the look of that Norse museum

The architect of this museum is the Italian Renzo Piano. In Britain probably best known for the Shard (above), in France for Centre Georges Pompidou (not pictured for being previous millenium).


Name architects do make their mark. Take Zaha Hadid, with the arts centre and SOHO buildings above.

This is Bratislava:




This is Bratislava on Hadid: