5 ms·

The article seem to ignore a large part of the 20th century were in the post-war period many European countries took the "just build more and higher" approach e

by gozo 11y ago

The article seem to ignore a large part of the 20th century were in the post-war period many European countries took the "just build more and higher" approach extending cities with high-density suburbs. At the time forward looking and idealistic planned communities, today neglected and infamous for their social problems. I'm a "city kid", I've always have lived and prefer to live in urban areas. I think these suburbs often have a undeserved reputation, but that doesn't mean that a simplistic argument of "thing we didn't like before turned out good, so maybe doing thing people don't like now will be fine" has any bearing. Like anything else you still have to look at the facts, weigh the arguments and if you try your best hopefully come up with a winning compromise.

Brakenshire 11y ago
You hear a lot about the bad examples of this, but little about the good examples. I remember wandering through a working class high rise area in Southern Spain, and being amazed by how friendly the atmosphere was, but you'd never hear that area discussed in newspapers and magazines. The fact is living in apartments is very common all across Continental Europe, and that area is not well-represented by the Banlieues, or bad council estates in London. FWIW, although I don't like Brutalist architecture, my attitude is that these mistakes are almost entirely down to social policies that came with the construction - or at least a mismatch between construction and policy. In particular, it was a mistake putting large percentages of very disadvantaged, vulnerable families together into brutalist, modernist constructions that they found ugly, where they didn't want to live, and then not putting in the money necessary to maintain them. I don't think the same problems are likely to be repeated if you're replacing low density suburbs filled with wealthy professionals, with high density flats filled with wealthy professionals, who are specifically choosing to move there.
- stephengillie 11y ago
  If one were to follow the highly-cynical concept that 'every article is a "submarine article" for something', then it could logically follow that many of the apartment-bashing articles are secretly advertisements for house sales. If you run a house construction general contractor, or maybe you're a lumber producer, and your sales hit a slump, how do you advertise? Everyone hates "normal" ads, but "native" ads are too new to be known. So you write up an article about the pains of apartment living, and shuttle it off to your friends at an influential newsblog.
- kbenson 11y ago
  > then not putting in the money necessary to maintain them. I think this is key. Brutalist architecture tends to weather well on the outside. Steel reinforced concrete needs maintenance just like everything else, but possible not on the same schedule, and not always of the same type. I think there's a reinforced loop of politicians not wanting to spend money maintaining these large, "ugly" (in appearance and purpose) structures, and getting away with that for a while, possibly for longer than their term. Then they start degrading from neglect, and now they are truly ugly,both in appearance in in what has happened to the people that live there (through more neglect).
- eru 11y ago
  Singapore and Hong Kong (and to some extent even New York) seem to be doing fine with wealthy people in dense housing.
  - Turing_Machine 11y ago
    We only see this type of density in areas where there is no other choice. You don't find Singapores in the middle of North Dakota, or even in Ohio. Why not?
    - eru 11y ago
      Because approximately no-one wants to live there?
      - Turing_Machine 11y ago
        Ohio has a population of 11.59 million. Singapore has a population of 5.3 million.
- klibertp 11y ago
  > The fact is living in apartments is very common all across Continental Europe I had to google what a "Brutalist architecture" is. Turns out it's somewhat similar to how Central and Eastern Europe countries look like as a whole: socialists governments used to love this style and were building tons of these. It's now extremely common. Wikipedia says that 1/3 of Czechs live in buildings like this: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/17/Dlhe_diely_panorama_zo_starych_gruntov.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/17/Dlhe_die... Which is probably representative to the whole former Eastern Bloc. Here in Poland these building were being built from 1950-ties to early 1990-ties, non-stop, one after another, district after district, city (and, to a lesser degree, town and village too!) after city. I've lived all my life in one or another of those. They are old, very badly constructed and ugly as hell, but they are inhabitable and they provide homes for millions of people. It's somewhat gross to hear your neighbour peeing at night, but it somewhat "works" - you have a cheap shelter for really many people close to city centres. I don't really want to make any point, I just wanted to provide some context to your statement about how common living in apartments is on this side of the Berlin wall.
  - Symbiote 11y ago
    Brutalist is a particular style, I think what was really meant was "prefabricated" — the buildings could be assembled on-site from parts (wall sections etc) manufactured elsewhere. A huge number of houses had been destroyed in WW2, so rebuilding them quickly and cheaply was a priority. It wasn't just socialist governments, the UK built loads of these too — though as prosperity increased, they became much less common.
cowsandmilk 11y ago
> forward looking and idealistic planned communities, today neglected and infamous for their social problems. I meet many people who believe tall buildings = social problems. But when you go to Boston, the places infamous for their social problems aren't tall buildings. They have triple deckers like this: https://goo.gl/maps/a5iJXP5FE4t https://goo.gl/maps/a5iJXP5FE4t Cars were shot up on that block over the weekend. Neighborhood has the same triple deckers as parts of Cambridge where each of those buildings would fetch $2MM. Despite people's beliefs that social problems come in the form of tall buildings like Pruitt–Igoe, the honest truth is that the causes of social problems generally are not related to the shape of the building. In the case of Pruitt-Igoe, one only has to look across the city to Cochran Gardens to see that success came in exactly the same building form.

by gozo 11y ago

Brakenshire 11y ago

You hear a lot about the bad examples of this, but little about the good examples. I remember wandering through a working class high rise area in Southern Spain, and being amazed by how friendly the atmosphere was, but you'd never hear that area discussed in newspapers and magazines. The fact is living in apartments is very common all across Continental Europe, and that area is not well-represented by the Banlieues, or bad council estates in London. FWIW, although I don't like Brutalist architecture, my attitude is that these mistakes are almost entirely down to social policies that came with the construction - or at least a mismatch between construction and policy. In particular, it was a mistake putting large percentages of very disadvantaged, vulnerable families together into brutalist, modernist constructions that they found ugly, where they didn't want to live, and then not putting in the money necessary to maintain them. I don't think the same problems are likely to be repeated if you're replacing low density suburbs filled with wealthy professionals, with high density flats filled with wealthy professionals, who are specifically choosing to move there.

stephengillie 11y ago
If one were to follow the highly-cynical concept that 'every article is a "submarine article" for something', then it could logically follow that many of the apartment-bashing articles are secretly advertisements for house sales. If you run a house construction general contractor, or maybe you're a lumber producer, and your sales hit a slump, how do you advertise? Everyone hates "normal" ads, but "native" ads are too new to be known. So you write up an article about the pains of apartment living, and shuttle it off to your friends at an influential newsblog.
kbenson 11y ago
> then not putting in the money necessary to maintain them. I think this is key. Brutalist architecture tends to weather well on the outside. Steel reinforced concrete needs maintenance just like everything else, but possible not on the same schedule, and not always of the same type. I think there's a reinforced loop of politicians not wanting to spend money maintaining these large, "ugly" (in appearance and purpose) structures, and getting away with that for a while, possibly for longer than their term. Then they start degrading from neglect, and now they are truly ugly,both in appearance in in what has happened to the people that live there (through more neglect).
eru 11y ago
Singapore and Hong Kong (and to some extent even New York) seem to be doing fine with wealthy people in dense housing.
- Turing_Machine 11y ago
  We only see this type of density in areas where there is no other choice. You don't find Singapores in the middle of North Dakota, or even in Ohio. Why not?
  - eru 11y ago
    Because approximately no-one wants to live there?
    - Turing_Machine 11y ago
      Ohio has a population of 11.59 million. Singapore has a population of 5.3 million.
klibertp 11y ago
> The fact is living in apartments is very common all across Continental Europe I had to google what a "Brutalist architecture" is. Turns out it's somewhat similar to how Central and Eastern Europe countries look like as a whole: socialists governments used to love this style and were building tons of these. It's now extremely common. Wikipedia says that 1/3 of Czechs live in buildings like this: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/17/Dlhe_diely_panorama_zo_starych_gruntov.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/17/Dlhe_die... Which is probably representative to the whole former Eastern Bloc. Here in Poland these building were being built from 1950-ties to early 1990-ties, non-stop, one after another, district after district, city (and, to a lesser degree, town and village too!) after city. I've lived all my life in one or another of those. They are old, very badly constructed and ugly as hell, but they are inhabitable and they provide homes for millions of people. It's somewhat gross to hear your neighbour peeing at night, but it somewhat "works" - you have a cheap shelter for really many people close to city centres. I don't really want to make any point, I just wanted to provide some context to your statement about how common living in apartments is on this side of the Berlin wall.
- Symbiote 11y ago
  Brutalist is a particular style, I think what was really meant was "prefabricated" — the buildings could be assembled on-site from parts (wall sections etc) manufactured elsewhere. A huge number of houses had been destroyed in WW2, so rebuilding them quickly and cheaply was a priority. It wasn't just socialist governments, the UK built loads of these too — though as prosperity increased, they became much less common.

cowsandmilk 11y ago

> forward looking and idealistic planned communities, today neglected and infamous for their social problems. I meet many people who believe tall buildings = social problems. But when you go to Boston, the places infamous for their social problems aren't tall buildings. They have triple deckers like this: https://goo.gl/maps/a5iJXP5FE4t https://goo.gl/maps/a5iJXP5FE4t Cars were shot up on that block over the weekend. Neighborhood has the same triple deckers as parts of Cambridge where each of those buildings would fetch $2MM. Despite people's beliefs that social problems come in the form of tall buildings like Pruitt–Igoe, the honest truth is that the causes of social problems generally are not related to the shape of the building. In the case of Pruitt-Igoe, one only has to look across the city to Cochran Gardens to see that success came in exactly the same building form.