19:00 You hit the nail on the head, you're a genius, you've shown how to create cities that are not only functional and beautiful but also ethical and equal.
@nekomakhea94403 күн бұрын
It really shouldn't be that hard, how to make city layouts not suck has been known since Ancient Rome & Greece. Look at any city built before 1890, and copy that. The idea that progress is constant, upwards, and linear drives me nuts, city planning is a clear example where technology has regressed majorly and become far worse than what we had since literally Before Christ.
@b.chastpeen4906 күн бұрын
I can appreciate cities and their layouts and sight lines and everything else that goes into designing them but I would never live in one. I’m a rural/ suburb guy through and through. Too many people in the cities and with a low trust society that’s just asking for trouble( yes I live in America)
@hydrogenbond73038 күн бұрын
You're wrong in one point. I think you are a genius.
@anonymouslyopinionated65611 күн бұрын
weirdly euro-centric and dependent on a pre-existing old town
@ІванІндукаєв14 күн бұрын
14:16 ANTONOV PLANT AND FAINA TOWN YIPPEEEEE
@konstantybar275918 күн бұрын
You praise the uniformity of Paris without realising that at the time the style that Hausmann chose was the "modern" and "trendy" style of architecture at the time, there could be a guy, 150 years ago, sitting in Paris, printing a newspaper and writing "This new style is absurd, it completely ignores French regional culture and mutilitates nice neighbourhoods that we all love, this is abandoning tradition and structures we all love, yatta, yatta, yatta...." You got to learn some more history, also, the nice old building that You can see are what remains of an era, buildings of the rich, if you actually went back and saw where most people lived in 1800s, you would quickly change your mind, modern architectures target is to make people live in clean places with running water and heating. Use brain pls, other then that, good viedeo
@danni919020 күн бұрын
I am sorry, but to add to the beginning of your video, many old parts of a city and the complicated street tram are the results of interventions made after the 15th century and much beyond that. A lot and I men a lot of cities were built on a Cartesian pattern, which is the rectangular pattern in question. There many reasons for that, economical, military and others. Long straight roads were very popular throughout the renaissance and baroque and modernism, post modernism etc. Weird wobbly trams are fun yea, but they are objectively superior as a disposition of a city. Thank you
@porteauloin20 күн бұрын
please make a video about Toronto :D
@diazalex531422 күн бұрын
Great argument. The solution to unaffordable housing is to create a new city that people would want to live in.
@MrAwesomeSaucem23 күн бұрын
Why bother? Phoenix already exists!
@theexcaliburone5933Ай бұрын
Except for the height limit I agree
@daffysamlake3 күн бұрын
I too concur, though agree with a designated height limit. The cityscape of old London saddens me. Anyways, hello! Funny seeing you here.
@theexcaliburone59333 күн бұрын
@ yeah height limits in older historic cities should probably be preserved. Hi!
@AloddffАй бұрын
personally I don't think boulevards are well explained in this video. Many 'aesthetic city' KZbinrs have this problem, wherein they describe architectural features they like , say it should be replicated elsewhere but don't justify why sufficiently. This is only a failure in communication, not politics. I really mean this. I agree with the vibes of this video (its really impressive), whilst holding this critique only in the substance and style of a video essay and yet... appeals to tradition, history, order, homogeneity without reason, or logic at the behest of appeals to aesthetic value are tenants of fascism. this is a gripe I have with a big part of aesthetic KZbin not just this video. If a video essay exists to convince people to change their minds or create an alternative view, many people left of the conservative right are hesitant to adopt these views without well reasoned arguments with evidence attached. my critique is not, city planning according to tradition is fascism, but appeals to tradition without reason sounds sufficiently like the aesthetic of fascism to make an essay less trustworthy for many. The better essay always provides and examples and evaluates them in the positive and negative, but if the video essay serves to convince the audience the least it can do is give reasons why, that aren't the appeal to tradition fallacy. also I recommend to everyone to educate yourself on the architecture of fascist Italy and Germany and the aestheticization of politics. the history of architecture is interesting and the conflict and hypocrisy within populism echoed simultaneous neoclassical and brutalism styles. though I fully agree with the notion we should create transport infrastructure that displaces vehicles from walkable and functional city centres, My brain just fills with counterexamples for boulevards. principally it distills to ring roads like in London are terrible (that necessitates a web of traffic) , Paris's wheel and spokes make for terrible traffic (essentially all the problems of rings with added issues of bottlenecks and constant tailbacks then shift into high speed lanes) and grids systems like Barcelona produce the problem of the net inside London (over connectivity creates disordered traffic, its spralls and slows) but also the long lanes don't better transport, Barcelona is notoriously difficult to cross. in a way the best form of boulevard may not yet exist, but the solutions to transport are many, and often the solutions are the problem. but I will say they all have their place, ring roads move traffic away from city centres and are great for towns and villages, long boulevards make Paris navigable and are beautiful and grids (like manhattan) can create superdense interesting walkable spaces (and there antithesis) within blocks and along grids and streets. cities like London, Paris, Barcelona and New York have loads of issues surrounding roads and the ordering of streets, and trying to distill their best features is really interesting. Personally I've found that looking at planned cities like the video touches on in Brasilia is the next step in explaining this topic well. and even better looking at the designs of planned cities that never existed like Frank Lloyd Wright's city for cars, Hitlers Welthauptstadt Germania or the garden city movement. also just personally, I really like the philosophy of the boulevard applied to green spaces as green corridors, or as sponge cities, though I think we are waiting on the science. often we rush to rectify problems without knowing if the solution is a solution. the problem: asphalt roads heat cities, and don't allow normal passage of rain causing either droughts or floods, answer: plant trees is a great example of something that is easy to agree when appealing to common taste, and tradition but might require time to prove.
@AloddffАй бұрын
if my critiques of boulevards are critiques of cars I fully admit the argument containing its own redundancy. But I will add that if poorly designed modern roads are the thing ruining cities, then the dressing of those roads can fix them only if we are prepared to tear down the old ones. I still believe we are yet to find a perfect transport and in a way, society is too much in flux to have a perfect transport, a perfect boulevard or a perfect city and needs change over time. our current situation is pretty bad though
@steffen6987Ай бұрын
Begynner å bli lei av at alt bilrelatert skal fjernes fra Oslo. Jeg begynner også å bli lei av disse anti modernistisk arkitektur kanalene, begynner å bli nok av dem nå.
@royd.4629Ай бұрын
Utility tunnels, round abouts, and lots of cathedrals... That makes a good city, a great city
@Romanoi-i1oАй бұрын
Pretty perfect. Another one would be the expansion of Venice throughout the lagoon through replication
@jonathannetherton6727Ай бұрын
The simple fact that you started with some background on the beliefs you're coming in with and simply stated that it should help the viewer get an understanding of potential blind spots without any defense gives me hope for the world. Thank you.
@stripping_architectureАй бұрын
Hey personal opinion. What you said in the beginning about the attractivity of the historical part of the town. Many things you said are true, we are not counter arguing that. However, historical towns are now predominantly interesting because we are now hitting a moment of appreciating walking again and simply because we are back in the cycle of appreciating what is usual to be scarce. In the time of modernism, scarce was modernity and since everyone was living in the historical part, people didn’t really deeply appreciate it. In addition to this the most financial means are being poured in the downtown of the city which unavoidably makes it most attractive since there is concertation of activity, transport. So I wouldn’t jump immediately to the aesthetics of the “traditional builder and sporadically element “as key driver for attractivity. The final points are great.
@JONAS-gt5nbАй бұрын
Thanks for sharing. This is valuable... someday, I'll build a small town, im still studying all the correct possibilities 😊
@moyojenrola7585Ай бұрын
watched all your videos, its time to make moreee
@kevind4061Ай бұрын
Ty!
@AbuTahirIzlamАй бұрын
A good city design put impact on mental health of citizens.
@rishithakur71862 ай бұрын
15:50 That’s true and important for the even development of the city. However it is more of a policy issue than urban planning one. They have the planning in place just need to address the particular issue with policy like mixed plan purpose development and so on and so forth. However, they have the feature just need a software update.. .
@perlefisker2 ай бұрын
Didn't catch it because of the stupid music over the distorted voice, but was it said that a pedestrian bridge was denied...in the 19th century...due to aesthetic concerns?
@joaodecarvalho70122 ай бұрын
Meanwhile, in the Arab kingdoms...
@milotanga2 ай бұрын
Happy to see so many polish cities in your video :)
@thecrimsonfire49212 ай бұрын
More more more
@kevindanielpg2 ай бұрын
This is a great video, I'll do this when I'm president of the world
@Indivenant2 ай бұрын
I don’t mean to be rude when I say this, but is this voiced over by AI? because there are just a couple inconsistencies with pronunciation like Boulevard gets pronounced like four different ways throughout the video
@aeterna16022 ай бұрын
Thank u
@AlienNation_02 ай бұрын
unwatchable garbage
@horatiohuskisson54712 ай бұрын
Your nose is garbage
@Dev1nci2 ай бұрын
Why should we substantiate what we say when we can simply state our opinion as fact? All the famous architects live in houses that they’ve designed themselves and they look exactly like the type of architecture that they create for others.
@flam3butt2 ай бұрын
using your insight for my fantasy universe :D amazing video and well structured
@davel47082 ай бұрын
Pretty much any city that grew to a decent size before the invention of the automobile is usually going to be pretty decent by default.
@abialo20102 ай бұрын
where do they put their garbage cans?
@mdhazeldine3 ай бұрын
Maybe I'm weird, but I actually quite like the design of most of the buildings you pointed out as ugly or hideous. I like IKEAs, that building in Oslo and I can't quite believe you called the Pompidou Centre "hideous". It's a design classic. I don't believe beauty is completely in the eye of the beholder, but there clearly is a certain amount of that. I kind of agree about your point near the end that there should be a generally harmonious "background" architecture, punctured by the occasional standout building. I think maybe we just differ on what is beautiful or ugly.
@tinayoga88442 ай бұрын
The problem is when the majority is forced to live with what they consider to be ugly buildings. Like someone with a boombox blasting out wrap music for everyone whether they like it or not. (while I appreciate wrap music as an artform I don't particularly like it)
@wiskdee3 ай бұрын
Art deco is the best style I will die on this hill. All of you are wrong.
@Zenas5213 ай бұрын
I would like to point out, ornamentation on buildings is good for peoples mental health, and that is a practical purpose. To make the best city, you need to make the best neighborhoods. Then put the neighborhoods next to each other. This should be easy enough, but reality says otherwise. Their is too much spiteful ego in the way.
@gm24073 ай бұрын
Give it 100 years they will get it back as the bridge will be seen as a piece of the citie's heritage. Since it is an important artery and actually pleasant to look at.
@RuneDyrstad-w9g3 ай бұрын
The cities are already buildt!
@phibbr3 ай бұрын
godzamit your videos are criminally underrated, keep it up
@Kbarboza943 ай бұрын
I love modern architecture. My dream is so have a small concrete house and then have my beautifully artistic partner paint on the blank walls. He loves the color pink and I love the color yellow. That blank slate has so much potential.
@dusantravica67373 ай бұрын
how tf does that relate to the video
@Kbarboza943 ай бұрын
@@dusantravica6737 how tf can’t you mind your own business
@mpetersen63 ай бұрын
I'd say the one crucial thing it lacks is a soul. Far too much belongs to the Blah House School. As to some of the organic structures. Most of which seem to be museums. I don't think they will age well.
@buckodonnghaile43093 ай бұрын
0:55 does anyone know what and where that building is?
@resurgamarch87473 ай бұрын
It may be missing points (I wouldn't know) but you broke down Kant much better than I could trying to get through those readings in architecture school haha
@gm24073 ай бұрын
So 3km diameter polycentric cities.
@justnice47013 ай бұрын
Glad you're back!!
@notsuperboy32143 ай бұрын
I don't like the message here that grid cities aren't good we all should make every city in the world look like europe Not every place in the world has architecture to the extent Europe has
@eingrobernerzustand37412 ай бұрын
What do you mean by that?
@jimjimgl33 ай бұрын
"The replacement is certainly preferable..." Completely subjective analysis.
@dumbguy1007Ай бұрын
Yeah not really anything wrong with that first building, uninspiring, yes, but the replacement was more or less the same and not worth the costs, particularly environmentally, of demolishment. I think these tastes vary through generations, what is classic to one generation who see a style being forgotten is old fashioned to the ones before who became accustomed to it as they grew up. Maybe someone will one day even feel nostalgic for brutalism.
@kovko693 ай бұрын
17:13 False--the exact opposite is true here. All else constant, that's not how housing supply and demand works. If you increase the supply of housing by manufacturing more residential units, that doesn't add more people who want housing. It creates housing units to satisfy the housing demand that's already there. If housing developers build homes in the hopes of bringing more people to live somewhere that has little to no housing demand, then that's nonsensical and is a very foolish waste of money with many millions of dollars on the line (and it may cost billions when we're talking about large development projects taken up by the government to erect entire cities or neighborhoods). You then followed that up by saying that cities should reduce demand by building more attractive neighborhoods. No, that would INCREASE housing demand, because more people would want to live there. It's essentially the same concept as "curb appeal" in that it increases property values by increasing the attractiveness to potential buyers, but on a much grander level. In terms of housing costs, at the very least, one must not manufacture housing shocks via socioeconomic policies. There's enough of an issue with housing costs due to the ebb and flow of the economy as a whole (i.e. the business cycle), as well as housing demand from those wanting to live in a certain place due to aesthetic, social, and other reasons of appeal (i.e. location, location, location). Some of those policies that cause massive housing shortages and increased housing costs are: - 1 mass immigration--just allowing anyone into your country will cause housing demand to skyrocket. Often times, immigrants will take over entire communities and not assimilate. There are other ramifications to consider, but for the point here, home prices will surge. - 2 focus away from the family--with no fault divorces, single parenthood, and emphasis away from keeping families together, housing demand surges. When married couples separate, they tend to live separately. Whether or not they have children, one of the parents almost always lives elsewhere, and it's usually by themselves at a new place.