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.
I am talking architecture here. Warsaw, London, Moscow... Their skylines are getting very modern and some people are bothered by that. Do you think this modernization of European skylines are bad or good?
I am talking architecture here. Warsaw, London, Moscow... Their skylines are getting very modern and some people are bothered by that. Do you think this modernization of European skylines are bad or good?
Excellent question!!
I don't know. Usually Paris is seen as a museum city -buildings are outside - but strictly talking about architecture, there are a lot of projects to modernize buildings..
Not always very very good :/
I ll detail more later.
So, yes but with limits because sometimes modernity is quite ugly.
they can build new modern cities outside the old city, can't they? Paris did that and it works fine. European cities usually have pretty small core, which should be maintained and not ruined by modern buildings.
Skylines are vastly overrated. Whatever beyond the 4th story usually doesn't matter for the street.
Skyscrapers can be built very easily and at any time (just look Shanghai's skyline 1997 vs 2017), however, when old buildings are gone, they are gone forever.
I am talking architecture here. Warsaw, London, Moscow... Their skylines are getting very modern and some people are bothered by that. Do you think this modernization of European skylines are bad or good?
It depends where the modernisation is, in London there are conservation areas and many historic areas are protected.
Major modernisation projects tends to be concentrated on the old disused docks such as Canary Wharf, Wood Wharf, the Royal Docks etc and areas that are either old bomb sites or are not utilised fully such as Nine Elms, Old Oak Common, Bishopsgate Goods Yard etc.
London has a number of such old under used sites, so it's sensible to build homes, offices, shops and lesiure facilities on such land.
they can build new modern cities outside the old city, can't they? Paris did that and it works fine. European cities usually have pretty small core, which should be maintained and not ruined by modern buildings.
Skylines are vastly overrated. Whatever beyond the 4th story usually doesn't matter for the street.
Skyscrapers can be built very easily and at any time (just look Shanghai's skyline 1997 vs 2017), however, when old buildings are gone, they are gone forever.
skyscrapers turn city streets dark, shadowy and depressing, give me the sunlit beauty of 'older' cities anyday, some of the older buildings in London or other British (and probably European cities) are FAR more ornate than the soulless modern office blocks too. The domes of Rome or the 'dreamy spires' of Oxford are much more beautiful than the 'samey' skyline of a lot of 'so called' modern cities.
These modern steel+glass skyscrapers are horrid, just soulless things, no beauty in them.
This is the epitome of fugly. Construction of such monstrosities should be made criminal and not be allowed in the first place.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and tbh I don't find Renzo Piano's Shard to be particuarly ugly, nor do I dislike skyscrapers providing they are in the right place, the Shard is of course close to London's Financial District 'The City'. NYC has a lot of wonderful tall buildings and the NY Skyline is quite beautiful.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and tbh I don't find Renzo Piano's Shard to be particuarly ugly, nor do I dislike skyscrapers providing they are in the right place, the Shard is of course close to London's Financial District 'The City'. NYC has a lot of wonderful tall buildings and the NY Skyline is quite beautiful.
Most of "modern" architecture projects aren't in CBD of cities but sprayed everywhere and also have a very strong impact on the area, they are malls refurbishing their exteriors for example, new train stations...
Sometimes it's good, a good example of Modernity meeting old architecture is the pyramid of the Louvre:
Most of "modern" architecture projects aren't in CBD of cities but sprayed everywhere and also have a very strong impact on the area, they are malls refurbishing their exteriors for example, new train stations...
Sometimes it's good, a good example of Modernity meeting old architecture is the pyramid of the Louvre:
Most of the train stations in London and many other European cities are often historic buldings and protected, whilst shopping malls are usually far away from city centres. St Pancras and King Cross in London have undergone superb refurbishments in recent decades.
In most cities you have the traditional areas, which are often condervation areas, financial districts which encourage modernity and brownfield or disused land that is ripe for redevelopment. The latter is also usually outside of the main tourist areas and city centres.
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.
