Comments by "vangrails" (@vangrails) on "The B1M" channel.

  1. China definitely has a long history but so many important buildings have been destroyed during the cultural revolution and later on many old buildings have been replaced by shopping malls.
    1
  2. So much of the old buildings have been destroyed in China, especially during the Cultural Revolution. A lot of the old stuff in China has been completely rebuilt and the old buildings that are still left are merciless exploited for tourism, see the crowds in Lijiang. Alex Kerr has written extensively about the destruction in Japan, read 'Lost Japan', he desparately tries to save old Japan and its houses of eal in Kyoto. Taiwan has so called Old Streets but with new buildings, most old is gone.
    1
  3. Your skyscrapers are not fast skyscrapers, they don't move at all :)
    1
  4. I am not saying that you are wrong but can you give some real examples of that?
    1
  5. The higher the building the more elevator shafts you need.
    1
  6. There are skyscrapers in Europe but often in cities that tourists don 't want to visit like for example Rotterdam and Frankfurt. Or in special areas of cities that tourists mostly skip. Few tourists visit the skyscraper area of Paris.
    1
  7. There are currently 6 buildings > 150 meters in Madrid.
    1
  8. But you can still build modern buildings near the cathedral, change is still possible, just not high rises/skyscrapers afaik. And I see nothing wrong with business districts a bit away from the historical centre of a city instead of destroying its historical centre and replacing it with business offices. You need metro lines to connect it all but Cologne has metro lines. Is it really needed to build a lot of skyscrapers in Cologne? Do you want them everywhere or just in specific areas? Both New York City and Venice are extreme examples. New York City makes a lot of money out of finance but this planet needs only a small number of places that act as a global finance hub. Cologne will not become the new New York even when you build skyscrapers immediately next to the cathedral. Cologne attracts tourists, maybe you lose them if Cologne becomes a bad copy of NYC? NYC is interesting because of the mix in skyscraper styles, copying that is hard because it is probably no longer possible to build in the 1920s-1930s style. Most iconic buildings in NYC are build many decades ago. If every European city has skyscrapers then they stop being remarkable.
    1
  9. No, it si very easy to change such laws so that is not a good explanation.
    1
  10. How many of todays most innovative companies are housed in skyscrapers?
    1
  11. Just create something new if you want but I don't understand why you want to knock down the old. Just focus yourself on the new. When you travel the world then you will see that all cities are looking more and more similar and most modern cities look the most similar.
    1
  12. In practice it is more that you are not allowed to build a skyscraper right next to the church but you can build one 1 kilometer away from the church.
    1
  13. Why exactly? But Germans call this city differently than AngloSaxon people.
    1
  14. The inner city of Paris has a high population density and only 1 skyscraper and it makes a lot of money from tourism.
    1
  15. But are they skyscrapers? How tall are these new buildings?
    1
  16. True but why is that relevant here? Feel free to explain.
    1
  17. Paris has such a skyscraper neighbourhood.
    1
  18. China has plenty of culture but so much of that has been destroyed. So many soulless shopping malls.
    1
  19. What is HnS?
    1
  20. Plenty of skyscrapers in China and China is not such a free country. And countries like Turkey and Russia do have skyscrapers but are not really prosperous.
    1
  21. But many European cities are already high density. Much more high density than most American cities. In the US it is either a skyscraper or freestanding single family home with a garden. There are not that much buildings in between. A lot of Europeans live already stacked upon each other, just not as high as a skyscraper. Manhattan has plenty of skyscrapers but rent is still outrageous. Why not build a direct metro line from Manhattan to Staten Island and replace the single family homes of Staten Island with buildings that are between 5 and 15 floors high? And the historic inner cities of many European cities do have character, it is not some kind of fake claim to fame. Do you want to destroy 17th century canal houses in Amsterdam and replace them with skyscrapers? It is UNESCO world heritage, it belongs to mankind. Bu anyway there are new high rises popping up in the Netherlands outside the historic inner cities but often near train stations, often their heights are between 100 and 150 meters, too short to be called skyscrapers but they are still high high rises.
    1
  22. China has plenty of history and culture but they don't care that much about preserving old buildings, many have been destroyed and that saddens me.
    1
  23. That is Florence. You shouldn't go there, it has no skyscrapers. Millions visit each year but you should know better.
    1
  24. Plenty of American places have only buildings of one or two stories.
    1
  25. Please visit Paris but read about common scams in Paris first.
    1
  26. I don't know about that. Many of Europe's skyscrapers are in the less wealthy countries (wealth per capita). For example Spain, Poland, Turkey and Russia. It is tempting to think that skyscrapers mean high wealth per capita and no skyscrapers per capita means little wealth per capita but then Russia probably wouldn't have the highest skyscrapers of Europe. I think that Russia's skyscrapers have been built in a quest for status. Manhattan really needs skyscrapers because it has so little space but is that also true for Saint Petersburg Russia or Moscow? And some countries simply lack big cities and therefore have less need for skyscrapers.
    1
  27. No, you are not that unique. Plenty of people like skyscrapers. To me skyscrapers look great from far away but walking between skyscrapers is far less great. The best way to enjoy Manhattan is to see it from Brooklyn or the ferry to Staten Island. Same with Pudong (stand on the Bund and look across the water) and Hong Kong (stand in Kowloon and look across the water).
    1
  28. Come on, please answer my qeustion.
    1
  29. American tourists don't want to visit Rotterdam, they prefer visiting Amsterdam. Rotterdam doesn't stand out enough compared to American cities I guess.
    1
  30.  @sanderoord4200  I live in Leiden, next time my American friend visits me I will try to convince her to visit Rotterdam together but I know that it will be a tough sell.
    1
  31. There are such areas in Europe, for example La Défense. In Moscow the skyscrapers are also outside the inner city.
    1
  32. A lot of European cities are high density compared to the average American city. I live in the Netherlands and a lot of people cycle to their schools, universities and offices or travel by train. That lowers the carbon footprint. The inner city of Paris might look terrible inefficient (it has only one skyscraper) but it is actually a high density area when it comes to people and jobs. Manhattan is of higher density with its skyscrapers but the difference isn't that big.
    1
  33. No, the Chinese for example are not savages of course but they did chose to destroy a lot of their old stuff and I really wish that they hadn't done that.I truly enjoy ALL old architecture, not only old European architecture.
    1
  34. There will be a 140 meters (higher than the Dom Tower) tower in Leidsche Rijn.
    1
  35. Why then are the streets of Lijiang packed with Chinese tourists? There are no big buildings in Lijiang. I think that China is in a period of transitions and they will start to regret that so much of the old China has been destroyed and replaced by soulless shopping malls.
    1
  36.  @aldofromsf  I have been to China. Lijiang is really packed with tourists. China in general doesn't feel claustrophobic to me.
    1
  37. American tourists almost never visit Rotterdam. They prefer visiting cities with old buildings.
    1
  38. Does Turkey have a bright economic future? I hope so but I am not sure.
    1
  39.  @Majorohminus  Conserving buildings is not conservatism because every generation can think new things in an old building. I have lived in buildings build in 1670, 1920, 1972 and 1984. That didn't change my values or my skills...Harvard is founded in 1638 but it has evolved of course.
    1
  40. Yes! But not in the historic part of the city.
    1
  41. Yes, some people obsess about living in the inner city of Amsterdam and they want to and need to pay big money to make that a reality. And then you want to destroy these expensive buildings that attract so many visitors and where so many people want to live. If nobody cares about a building and nobody wants to live in that building then it will indeed be replaced with something else but many people do care and tourism (like it or not) is a big money maker. Amsterdam will never be able to compete with Manhattan, Dubai or Shanghai when it comes to skyscrapers, it has to compete differently. I am not against skyscrapers outside the historic areas of Amsterdam, I am not against growth and change but I am against replacing. So many modern cities look already almost identical. It is like the shopping areas of airports, these areas look the same everywhere, it is always Toblerone chocolate. Do you find those shopping areas in airports inspiring or exciting?
    1
  42.  @khj5582  There is ample space outside the city center to build high rises and skyscrapers in Amsterdam. There is really no need to destroy old buildings. There is now a North South metro line and that makes it possible to build extra high rises or skyscrapers in Amsterdam North. Rotterdam doesn't have all those old buildings but average income in Rotterdam is much lower than Amsterdam. American companies often prefer Amsterdam above Rotterdam when they want to open a new branch office because creative and talented people prefer to live in Amsterdam instead of Rotterdam. Changing Amsterdam into a new Rotterdam will not be a good thing. Those wealthy people have their reasons for wanting to live where they want to live, let them live where they want to live and don't destroy their homes.
    1
  43. Yeah, that is what I want to know. How efficient are skyscrapers? I understand that Manhattan needs them but that doesn't automatically mean that all cities need skyscrapers.
    1
  44. But how efficient are skyscrapers? When you compare the population density of the inner city of Paris with the population density of Manhattan then the difference isn't that big.
    1
  45. The shard is just a figment of your imagination.
    1
  46. I don't understand this. Where came gay marriage into existence for the first time? Was it a brand new suburb of Phoenix Arizona or the inner city of Amsterdam with its mostly 17th century buildings? Indeed, it was of course that brand new suburb of Phoenix Arizona because new buildings means progressive people and old buildings mean conservative people. Only it wasn't, gay marriage came into existence for the first time in the inner city of Amsterdam.
    1
  47. Some people say or suggest that wanting to preserve old buildings is wanting to preserve traditions and traditional thoughts and concepts but gay marriage first came into existence in the inner city of Amsterdam, an area where most of the buildings are 17th century buildings. Preserving historic buildings and modern ideas can walk hand in hand. Gay marriage didn't came into existence in a suburb of Phoenix Arizona.
    1
  48. That is really nitpicking.
    1
  49. Many Russians themselves don't consider Russia to be a part of Europe. The Ural Mountains is just a more or less randomly chosen line. In the past a line more to the West was chosen. Maps and map makers are not divine dictators that we should obey without questioning. The Russians themselves should have a say too about the question whether Moscow is in Europe or not. If most Russians say that Moscow is not in Europe then maps should be adjusted.
    1
  50. It is, but often in the 100 - 150 meter range, therefore not tall enough to count as skyscrapers.
    1