Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Montparnasse tower is here to stay. It looks out of place because it is alone.
Building more skyscrapers here in Montparnasse would improve the cityscape by having a skyline rather than a stand alone skyscraper.
This raises the question of what's more important to quality of life for people living in that area. A skyline or the status quo?
You can build skyscrapers with strict regulations that their bases have plazas, parks etc. Albeit windy ones.
You will have to tear down existing buildings of course. How much in Montparnasse is considered historically worth saving? How much of what will be destroyed is more affordable for business and residents than what will be built.
Will the new skyscrapers just be office space or residential or a mixture of both?
As for it being here to stay, most likely, but it's not like skyscrapers haven't been demolished before.
From a distance skylines are awesome but at ground level usually I prefer the old Main Street look. Since pretty much all cities in North America have high rises the best case is a good combination.
This is pretty much the way I feel. As as kid I was very impressed with skylines with skyscrapers but once once start visiting those areas and especially walk around them, in most cases they aren't very human-friendly or lively. Although there are a few exceptions - but most of these aren't in North America.
A city doesn't need to have any skyscrapers at all in order to have a vibrant centre.
This is pretty much the way I feel. As as kid I was very impressed with skylines with skyscrapers but once once start visiting those areas and especially walk around them, in most cases they aren't very human-friendly or lively. Although there are a few exceptions - but most of these aren't in North America.
A city doesn't need to have any skyscrapers at all in order to have a vibrant centre.
The big difference is whether or not those skyscrapers are residential or strictly office towers.
This raises the question of what's more important to quality of life for people living in that area. A skyline or the status quo?
You can build skyscrapers with strict regulations that their bases have plazas, parks etc. Albeit windy ones.
You will have to tear down existing buildings of course. How much in Montparnasse is considered historically worth saving? How much of what will be destroyed is more affordable for business and residents than what will be built.
By existing buildings, this means an ugly shopping mall and office buildings built during the 60's and 70's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natnasci
As for it being here to stay, most likely, but it's not like skyscrapers haven't been demolished before.
Skyscrapers have all been destroyed to build taller buildings with more sq ft.
The cost of the demolition of Montparnasse tower would be above the billion, nobody is going to pay this amount of money if he can't build more to have a profitable project.
The reason I bring it up of course is Vancouver. Many of our " skyscrapers " are residential. With thousands living in one city block and cafes, restaurants and stores at the base of these towers, the streets are very active and lively.
The reason I bring it up of course is Vancouver. Many of our " skyscrapers " are residential. With thousands living in one city block and cafes, restaurants and stores at the base of these towers, the streets are very active and lively.
This is not unlike Toronto or Montreal either.. I made a similar point in the Canadian vs Nordic cities thread.. Its good that we clear the air that just because a DT has lots of scrapers - doesn't mean it is devoid of urbanity or ped vibrancy.. A big part of it is that the big 3 Cad cities have plenty of mixed Commercial/residential activity in their Downtowns so they aren't ghost towns after 6pm.. They aren't just a big business magnet for the city but also the cultural hub of it as well.
This is not unlike Toronto or Montreal either.. I made a similar point in the Canadian vs Nordic cities thread.. Its good that we clear the air that just because a DT has lots of scrapers - doesn't mean it is devoid of urbanity or ped vibrancy.. A big part of it is that the big 3 Cad cities have plenty of mixed Commercial/residential activity in their Downtowns so they aren't ghost towns after 6pm..
By existing buildings, this means an ugly shopping mall and office buildings built during the 60's and 70's.
Skyscrapers have all been destroyed to build taller buildings with more sq ft.
The cost of the demolition of Montparnasse tower would be above the billion, nobody is going to pay this amount of money if he can't build more to have a profitable project.
Well I for one wouldn't be sad to see ugly shopping malls and ugly buildings go. This is in Montparnasse. The building on the left I feel should stay, the right go.
Any new buildings would have to be more street friendly than the ones on the right.
There are certainly some valid concerns regarding infrastructure and public transit not keeping pace with growth, this is particularly the case with Toronto (not as sure about Montreal or Vancouver) and also in the case of Toronto some rather lacklustre architectural merit to many of these condo's, but I can't say that attracting more people close to the urban/cultural/business heart of a place is a bad thing at all. As long as it doesn't cross the density threshold of being too cramped, though I don't think in the case of Canada that any of our cities have crossed that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
