daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > Skyscrapers

Skyscrapers Discussions of projects under construction between 200-299m/650-999ft tall.
ģ Proposed Skyscrapers



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old September 23rd, 2012, 08:32 PM   #1
Momo1435
-----アンジュルム-----
 
Momo1435's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: アルフェナンデンライン
Posts: 34,531
Likes (Received): 60990

TOKYO | Hamamatsucho Station West Entrance District Development | 200m x 2 | 39 fl x 2 | 190m | 47 fl | 156m | 29 fl | U/C

The area right next to Hamamatsucho Station on the Yamanote Line and the Tokyo Monorail Terminal will be redeveloped over the next 12 years. It will see the demolition of the Tokyo World Trade Center Building, with 162.59m it was for 1 year the tallest building in Tokyo after it's completion in March 1970.

The new development will include a 200m twin tower development right next to a new terminal building for the Tokyo Monorail line to Haneda Airport. A third tower, 160m high will be constructed on the block right next to the twin towers. This means that 3 new office towers with a total floorspace of 390,000㎡ will be constructed to replace the old WTC.

The current status is that the project is up for an environmental assessment before it will get it's final planning approval. Construction should start in 2013, but that could just be the demolition. The whole project should be completed in 2024, I assume that the construction will take place in several phases.

I haven't seen any renders for the new towers yet.


Area map:


http://urbanreallife.blog52.fc2.com/


http://building-pc.cocolog-nifty.com/helicopter/


details:
Block A-1
height: 200m (approximately)
floors: 42 + 1 (rooftop structure)
use: office

Block A-3
height: 200m (approximately)
floors: 42 + 1 (rooftop structure)
use: office

Block B
height: 160m (approximately)
floors: 26 + 2 (rooftop structure)
use: office

Developers:
Block A - World Trade Center Building, Tokyo Monorail, JR East
Block B - Kokusai Kogyo 国際興業

Start: 2013
Complete: 2024

Location:
Hamamatsucho 2-chome, Minato-ku
http://goo.gl/maps/8AQGx

sources:
http://building-pc.cocolog-nifty.com...post-afcb.html
http://urbanreallife.blog52.fc2.com/blog-entry-951.html
http://www.kentsu.co.jp/webnews/html...921500044.html


The current WTC Building.


http://www.blue-style.com/photo/todohuken/view-695.html
__________________
Support your Idols
キタ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ฅ(๑⊙д⊙๑)ฅ!! ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━!!!
Japan Projects & Construction

Highcliff liked this post
Momo1435 no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old September 23rd, 2012, 08:39 PM   #2
ThatOneGuy
Psst! Check my signature!
 
ThatOneGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Toronto - Bucharest - Freeport
Posts: 21,479

That's an awesome building Why does it have to be demolished?! It is a fine example of the International Style.
__________________

Highcliff liked this post
ThatOneGuy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 23rd, 2012, 09:08 PM   #3
Momo1435
-----アンジュルム-----
 
Momo1435's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: アルフェナンデンライン
Posts: 34,531
Likes (Received): 60990

It's one the earliest Skyscrapers in Tokyo, the office space and the earthquake resistance measures are not up to the current standards anymore. That makes it more difficult to keep it's place in the current office market. Just doing a major renovation won't change this, it's simply more profitable to built a completely new tower, or several in this case.

It's not the 1st old tower that will be demolished and it won't be the last, that's Tokyo, always changing.
__________________
Support your Idols
キタ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ฅ(๑⊙д⊙๑)ฅ!! ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━!!!
Japan Projects & Construction

Highcliff, DarkLite liked this post
Momo1435 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 23rd, 2012, 10:08 PM   #4
Jim856796
Registered User
 
Jim856796's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Citizen of the World
Posts: 8,942
Likes (Received): 843

Must every skyscraper in Tokyo be a "throwaway building", especially the new ones that are being constructed now? I do not think the new skyscraper in Tokyo should be "throwaway buildings".
__________________
I honestly think all development projects must be sustainable and futureproof.

You support the good projects... and oppose the bad.

Last edited by Jim856796; September 23rd, 2012 at 10:19 PM.
Jim856796 está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old September 23rd, 2012, 11:52 PM   #5
Momo1435
-----アンジュルム-----
 
Momo1435's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: アルフェナンデンライン
Posts: 34,531
Likes (Received): 60990

I wouldn't call the new buildings throwaway buildings, since these new buildings are high quality buildings. But that doesn't they are built for eternity, simply put they last as long as the owners wants to keep the tower and are replaced when a new building can make them more money.

I don't expect it to go as fast as the last 60 years. Almost none of the buildings that were built directly after the war survived. 1st they were replaced by better buildings and more recently by taller buildings as building restrictions where lifted and the earthquake resistance measures became better and better. I doubt that the next 60 years the development goes as fast as it did after the war, unless some truly revolutionary inventions turn Tokyo in a real futuristic city. But that probably remains just sci-fi for quite some time.
__________________
Support your Idols
キタ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ฅ(๑⊙д⊙๑)ฅ!! ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━!!!
Japan Projects & Construction
Momo1435 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 24th, 2012, 08:22 AM   #6
RegentHouse
City Development Shitlord
 
RegentHouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,213
Likes (Received): 769

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThatOneGuy View Post
That's an awesome building Why does it have to be demolished?! It is a fine example of the International Style.
They're many others like it in Tokyo. Too many...


Quote:
Originally Posted by Momo1435 View Post
I wouldn't call the new buildings throwaway buildings, since these new buildings are high quality buildings. But that doesn't they are built for eternity, simply put they last as long as the owners wants to keep the tower and are replaced when a new building can make them more money.

I don't expect it to go as fast as the last 60 years. Almost none of the buildings that were built directly after the war survived. 1st they were replaced by better buildings and more recently by taller buildings as building restrictions where lifted and the earthquake resistance measures became better and better. I doubt that the next 60 years the development goes as fast as it did after the war, unless some truly revolutionary inventions turn Tokyo in a real futuristic city. But that probably remains just sci-fi for quite some time.
Almost none? Better buildings? Yes, most wooden structures were destroyed, but most if not all pre-war steel and/or brick buildings survived only for many to be replaced by the ugly boxes which you call "better buildings." Isn't the government mandating owners to disclose earthquake data so they will renovate buildings up to code? Either that is an incentive to build new, or it's still economically feasible to renovate.

Also, regarding the life of a building, you do have some structures like Tokyo Station, the Mori developments, Tokyo Tower, and Skytree which are unlikely to be demolished.
RegentHouse no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 24th, 2012, 11:12 AM   #7
Momo1435
-----アンジュルム-----
 
Momo1435's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: アルフェナンデンライン
Posts: 34,531
Likes (Received): 60990


Many pre-war steel and brick buildings where destroyed either by direct hits or the fires that not just destroyed the wooden buildings but left many brick buildings as empty shells. Just like the great Kanto earthquake in 1923 that also destroyed many brick and steel buildings.

Most of the buildings that did survive where small 3 to 4 stories tall nondescript buildings without any earthquake resistance measures that might have survived the war and the 1950s but simply didn't have any chance in the post war economic boom of the late 1960s, 70, & 80s. The era that completely changed Japan and also the face of the city. It was only from the 1990s that a high rise boom again changed the face and especially the skyline of the city for a 2nd time after the war.

And of course there are several towers that will most likely stand here for a longer period of time. But for every 5 of those towers there are 20 that could be redeveloped. Even Mori have already demolished several of their earlier developments. I don't see no reason why they would never do the same with some of the newer "Hills" developments.
__________________
Support your Idols
キタ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ฅ(๑⊙д⊙๑)ฅ!! ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━!!!
Japan Projects & Construction
Momo1435 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 24th, 2012, 08:33 PM   #8
RegentHouse
City Development Shitlord
 
RegentHouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,213
Likes (Received): 769

^From what I've saw from old pictures dated right after the war, there were a lot of pre-war mid-rise structures still existing, akin maybe to a medium-sized U. S. city downtown of the same time.

As for Mori redevelopments, the earlier developments you're talking about were before the split, whereas the late Minoru Mori wasn't able to build many of his "visions."
RegentHouse no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 25th, 2012, 01:38 AM   #9
Momo1435
-----アンジュルム-----
 
Momo1435's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: アルフェナンデンライン
Posts: 34,531
Likes (Received): 60990

Tokyo was not a medium-sized U. S. city, it was one of the biggest cities in the world before the war and became the biggest city in the world after the war.

You might have like that all of those western style buildings would have been preserved. But do you really expect that a booming city that doesn't have many true Japanese historic buildings left would care about several western style brick buildings from the 1920s and 1930s that were not yet historic in 1960? They basically did the same thing as they do now by demolishing the WTC.

Let's face it, if you only like western style historic buildings then Tokyo is not the place for you.


And as for Mori Building, Roppongi Hills will most not likely not be demolished in the next 100 years, but do you really think that for example Ark Hills or even Holland Hills will never be redeveloped? I very much doubt that Minoru Mori would have thought everything he created was destined for eternity.
__________________
Support your Idols
キタ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ฅ(๑⊙д⊙๑)ฅ!! ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━!!!
Japan Projects & Construction
Momo1435 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 25th, 2012, 03:04 AM   #10
ukiyo
スーパーモデレーターSuper Moderator
 
ukiyo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: 大阪府 Ōsaka
Posts: 7,204
Likes (Received): 10395

I really see no problem with this...as for preservation there's only a few buildings I like to see preserved...such as historic temple and shrines, ones with actual history (for example built by shoguns)..and most of them are. A good amount of them were never rebuilt after the war or torn down in the 50s-70s but since then for the most part the real historic buildings are preserved. I don't really consider much of the Taisho and Showa era buildings to be anything preserved (except for station designs). If they will be replaced with something greener, safer and more economical than I basically support it..unless the design is absolutely atrocious.

If Tokyo were for example, to "re-develop" this: http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%9D%...9D%BE%E5%AF%BA than maybe I'd shed a tear.

Remember that the next Kanto Earthquake could hit any time within the next hundred years, earthquake resistance codes were strengthened in 1981. Here is some history from the Great Hanshin Earthquake:

Quote:
One in five of the buildings in the worst-hit area were completely destroyed (or rendered uninhabitable). About 22% of the offices in the central business district were rendered unusable, and over half of the houses in that area were deemed unfit to live in. High rise buildings that were built after the modern 1981 building code suffered little; however, those that were not constructed to these standards suffered serious structural damage.
So I wouldn't mind at all for any midrise to skyscraper built before 1981 to be taken down and rebuilt with something safer.
__________________
🌸My Pictures: Tokyo, Tokyo 2, Kobe, Kamakura, Osaka, Kyoto, Nara, Himeji, Atlanta, China
🌸Japan Forum 日本フォーラム please stop by!
🌸浮世🌸

Last edited by ukiyo; September 25th, 2012 at 03:10 AM.
ukiyo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 25th, 2012, 07:27 AM   #11
RegentHouse
City Development Shitlord
 
RegentHouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,213
Likes (Received): 769

Quote:
Originally Posted by Momo1435 View Post
Tokyo was not a medium-sized U. S. city, it was one of the biggest cities in the world before the war and became the biggest city in the world after the war.
I understand, but that was just an analogy.

Quote:
You might have like that all of those western style buildings would have been preserved. But do you really expect that a booming city that doesn't have many true Japanese historic buildings left would care about several western style brick buildings from the 1920s and 1930s that were not yet historic in 1960? They basically did the same thing as they do now by demolishing the WTC.
Yes demolition was inevitable, and the same logic applies everywhere. I mean, before WWII, Japan was already booming and those buildings are sentiments of its rise to superpower status. I certainly consider them "true Japanese historic buildings," along with the surviving wooden castles, etc. Nevertheless, my western bias doubts that the latter will last much longer as seen from how many times other wooden structures were rebuilt.

Quote:
Let's face it, if you only like western style historic buildings then Tokyo is not the place for you.
I prefer Yokohama anyway. Also Kobe, whereas after the earthquake so many buildings survived while post-war ones literally collapsed right into the streets. Yes, some historic ones were destroyed but I don't think anything was deliberately demolished since 1995. If you don't think Japan is the place for me in general, then how about China? The Bund in Shanghai is preserved beautifully, even after decades of actual communist rule followed by an economic boom.

Quote:
And as for Mori Building, Roppongi Hills will most not likely not be demolished in the next 100 years, but do you really think that for example Ark Hills or even Holland Hills will never be redeveloped? I very much doubt that Minoru Mori would have thought everything he created was destined for eternity.
Ark Hills, maybe. But Mori's most recent vertical garden city, the Sengokuyama Mori Tower, is an extension of it and was always planned to be since 1988. While the project changed over the years, it ultimately looks much better than what was likely first proposed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ukiyo View Post
I really see no problem with this...as for preservation there's only a few buildings I like to see preserved...such as historic temple and shrines, ones with actual history (for example built by shoguns)..and most of them are. A good amount of them were never rebuilt after the war or torn down in the 50s-70s but since then for the most part the real historic buildings are preserved. I don't really consider much of the Taisho and Showa era buildings to be anything preserved (except for station designs).
Again, what I said to Momo.

Quote:
If they will be replaced with something greener, safer and more economical than I basically support it..unless the design is absolutely atrocious.
Studies have recently shown that old buildings are actually greener, and renovating them instead of starting from a clean slate is quite "sustainable."

Quote:
Remember that the next Kanto Earthquake could hit any time within the next hundred years, earthquake resistance codes were strengthened in 1981. Here is some history from the Great Hanshin Earthquake:
Was there supposed to be a link or something?

Quote:
If Tokyo were for example, to "re-develop" this: http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%9D%...9D%BE%E5%AF%BA than maybe I'd shed a tear.
Well, that was basically integrated into the design of Atago Green Hills, which was the point I was making about Mori Building's Hills projects.
RegentHouse no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 25th, 2012, 09:33 AM   #12
dnrwow
Registered User
 
dnrwow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: IASI
Posts: 88
Likes (Received): 1

tokyo is an incredibly beautiful city
dnrwow no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 25th, 2012, 12:25 PM   #13
Momo1435
-----アンジュルム-----
 
Momo1435's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: アルフェナンデンライン
Posts: 34,531
Likes (Received): 60990

Quote:
Originally Posted by RegentHouse View Post
Yes demolition was inevitable, and the same logic applies everywhere. I mean, before WWII, Japan was already booming and those buildings are sentiments of its rise to superpower status. I certainly consider them "true Japanese historic buildings," along with the surviving wooden castles, etc. Nevertheless, my western bias doubts that the latter will last much longer as seen from how many times other wooden structures were rebuilt.
That can only be said in retrospect. There's no way that the 1950s~1960s Japan or especially Tokyo thought about those buildings in this way. Japan was moving forward becoming much less nationalistic and these buildings were the symbols of the pre-war nationalist movement. There was also a strong modernist movement in society, which can be seen in the new architecture of that time.

There's no way that all the 30~40 year old, post Kanto Earthquake buildings were considered part of history by then.



Quote:
Originally Posted by RegentHouse View Post
If you don't think Japan is the place for me in general, then how about China? The Bund in Shanghai is preserved beautifully, even after decades of actual communist rule followed by an economic boom.
The Bund might have been preserved, but if you look behind the Bund you will see that large parts of the old city have been destroyed for new developments, especially in the last 2 decades.


Quote:
Originally Posted by RegentHouse View Post
Ark Hills, maybe. But Mori's most recent vertical garden city, the Sengokuyama Mori Tower, is an extension of it and was always planned to be since 1988. While the project changed over the years, it ultimately looks much better than what was likely first proposed.
See, times change. Ark Hills was on completion one of the best office towers in the city. And I don't mean just the way it looks because that's always a matter of opinion. So if that tower become outdated even the most recent Mori Building redevelopments can become outdated at some point. This means that there is always a possibility that the new towers will be demolished at some point in time.

I don't necessarily say it will happen, but that in Tokyo there's always the chance that towers will be demolished and redeveloped. And that this has nothing to do with the structural or architectural quality on completion.
__________________
Support your Idols
キタ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ฅ(๑⊙д⊙๑)ฅ!! ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━!!!
Japan Projects & Construction
Momo1435 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 25th, 2012, 12:30 PM   #14
Momo1435
-----アンジュルム-----
 
Momo1435's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: アルフェナンデンライン
Posts: 34,531
Likes (Received): 60990

Anyway, back to business.


The 1st small image of the new towers has surfaced on the internet.


http://www.kentsu.co.jp/
__________________
Support your Idols
キタ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ฅ(๑⊙д⊙๑)ฅ!! ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━!!!
Japan Projects & Construction
Momo1435 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 25th, 2012, 02:57 PM   #15
skanny
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,123
Likes (Received): 1048

It will surely not be a landmark for the area nor the city , they should build an unique thing to replace the legendary WTC , not Three glassy boxes like this , ( I don't mean that Boxy buildings couldn't be breathtaking )
skanny no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 25th, 2012, 09:59 PM   #16
RegentHouse
City Development Shitlord
 
RegentHouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,213
Likes (Received): 769

Quote:
Originally Posted by Momo1435 View Post
There was also a strong modernist movement in society, which can be seen in the new architecture of that time.
Unfortunately, because it was too strong. I'm not denouncing modernism, but I just believe there should be a stable mix of different styles instead of destroying everything and/or starting new to the point where it all looks like Brasilia circa early-1960s.

Quote:
There's no way that all the 30~40 year old, post Kanto Earthquake buildings were considered part of history by then.
Quote:
The Bund might have been preserved, but if you look behind the Bund you will see that large parts of the old city have been destroyed for new developments, especially in the last 2 decades.
Again, I didn't say ALL, but my point is Shanghai actually saved many more buildings, and the city looks sophisticated with new and old development.

Quote:
See, times change. Ark Hills was on completion one of the best office towers in the city. And I don't mean just the way it looks because that's always a matter of opinion. So if that tower become outdated even the most recent Mori Building redevelopments can become outdated at some point. This means that there is always a possibility that the new towers will be demolished at some point in time.
I was referring to more of the fact that it was the only mega-project ever built before the split, so it may not have been as visionary as the new Mori Building Company wanted it to be.

Quote:
Anyway, back to business.


The 1st small image of the new towers has surfaced on the internet.


http://www.kentsu.co.jp/
Que the height reductions before the existing tower is even demolished!
RegentHouse no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 25th, 2012, 11:42 PM   #17
Momo1435
-----アンジュルム-----
 
Momo1435's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: アルフェナンデンライン
Posts: 34,531
Likes (Received): 60990

It's a bit of a pointless discussion since most of the pre war building have been demolished and won't come back. Although it does show that there still a same attitude towards demolishing buildings that are not that old. And even though there has been opposition against some demolition plans that had some effect, it's still not going to change that much. We just see too many demolitions, and I don't mean just high rises, it's like it's has become a natural part of Tokyo's urban development.

And height reductions can always happen, that just the way it goes. Since I've seen too many reductions I can't worry about those anymore.
__________________
Support your Idols
キタ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ฅ(๑⊙д⊙๑)ฅ!! ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━!!!
Japan Projects & Construction
Momo1435 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 26th, 2012, 01:14 AM   #18
ukiyo
スーパーモデレーターSuper Moderator
 
ukiyo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: 大阪府 Ōsaka
Posts: 7,204
Likes (Received): 10395

Quote:
Originally Posted by RegentHouse View Post
If you don't think Japan is the place for me in general, then how about China? The Bund in Shanghai is preserved beautifully, even after decades of actual communist rule followed by an economic boom.
I would say european countries would be the best for you. Japan doesn't have much of that attitude due to typhoons, earthquakes (which also cause fires) tsunamis...the only buidlings that tend to be built to last long are temples and shrines (and some noble residences). But to give you my take: the bund has actual history behind it as a part of the Shanghai International settlement and is a part of Shanghai's international history...while the "western" buildings built in Showa Tokyo are simply western styled buildings built by japanese...no amazing history or anything interesting behind them (most of them anyway). The bund is more akin to the foreign settlements in Yokohama or Kobe.

Quote:
Studies have recently shown that old buildings are actually greener, and renovating them instead of starting from a clean slate is quite "sustainable."
I am talking in the literal sense, as in trees. A lot of the old buildings use the entire base with little greenery while most of the new redevelopments have a significant amount of greenery at the base, partly due to new laws. Of course, the newer buildings won't need to be taken down in the next earthquake which will happen and are more energy efficient in the long run. In a way I kind of agree with you, but if the skyscraper is before 1981-1984 (some buildings were u/c when codes were strengthened) and it will be replaced with a greener and taller building I support it. But I honestly don't see many skyscrapers built post mid 1980s being demolished and rebuilt in a long time, they are more expensive and last longer and meet building codes (while most of the ones being demolished do not meet current building codes).
__________________
🌸My Pictures: Tokyo, Tokyo 2, Kobe, Kamakura, Osaka, Kyoto, Nara, Himeji, Atlanta, China
🌸Japan Forum 日本フォーラム please stop by!
🌸浮世🌸
ukiyo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 26th, 2012, 07:10 AM   #19
RegentHouse
City Development Shitlord
 
RegentHouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,213
Likes (Received): 769

Quote:
Originally Posted by Momo1435 View Post
It's a bit of a pointless discussion since most of the pre war building have been demolished and won't come back. Although it does show that there still a same attitude towards demolishing buildings that are not that old. And even though there has been opposition against some demolition plans that had some effect, it's still not going to change that much. We just see too many demolitions, and I don't mean just high rises, it's like it's has become a natural part of Tokyo's urban development.
Won't come back? May I remind you about the Shimbashi Teishajō and Mitsubishi Ichigōkan? You can even argue the Tokyo Station was rebuilt, and from what I've seen, people really like it. Private companies rebuilt and incorporated buildings into new developments by choice and Mitsubishi especially, has preserved some buildings. Yes they wanted to demolish the Central Post Office, but I never found that to be historic in the first place (maybe if it was built four years earlier). I didn't like that they demolished the original Marunouchi Building, but they also demolished the old Shin-Marunouchi one and replaced it with something excellent. I didn't mind the Yusen building being demolished because the Marunouchi Park Tower is a beautiful tower on its own right.

You are correct that the attitude hasn't changed about demolition mainly because so much is gone so quickly, but people were even vocal about the proposal to demolish Tokyo Station twenty-something years ago. People were even vocal about restoring it and rebuilding historic structures because of the Disney World factor. Regardless, Disney > Brasilia.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ukiyo View Post
I would say european countries would be the best for you.
Umm, referring to what I said in post #16...
Quote:
Unfortunately, because it was too strong. I'm not denouncing modernism, but I just believe there should be a stable mix of different styles instead of destroying everything and/or starting new to the point where it all looks like Brasilia circa early-1960s.
Europe actually has plenty of classical architecture to the point that if something gets destroyed (as long as it's not very significant) for something modern, I wouldn't mind.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ukiyo View Post
Japan doesn't have much of that attitude due to typhoons, earthquakes (which also cause fires) tsunamis...the only buidlings that tend to be built to last long are temples and shrines (and some noble residences).
What? It's the temples and shrines that get destroyed from disasters first because they're made of wood. If not by disaster, they're continually rebuilt anyway. I could understand if you are talking about buildings with the latest earthquake engineering, but the reason this whole discussion started was because I said it was the western buildings that generally survived the 1923 Kanto Earthquake and Allied bombing raids with repairable damage. Should I even bring up the A-Bomb dome in Hiroshima? That's preserved as it was from the attack, while the rest the memorial buildings are hideous. While I do admire Kenzo Tange's masterplan for the city, the architecture is... well I believe perhaps that's where this whole "strong modernist movement" came from that Momo mentioned.

Quote:
But to give you my take: the bund has actual history behind it as a part of the Shanghai International settlement and is a part of Shanghai's international history...while the "western" buildings built in Showa Tokyo are simply western styled buildings built by japanese...no amazing history or anything interesting behind them (most of them anyway). The bund is more akin to the foreign settlements in Yokohama or Kobe.
Japan even had properties on The Bund that still exist. I find it surprising China didn't have had them all demolished (ā la what the Koreans did with the Japanese General Government Building) because they may have felt as if they were being imperialized upon. The foreign settlements in Japan are pretty much gone and were replaced by some of Kobe and Yokohama's best buildings.

Conversely, as Momo said, classical western buildings in Japan represented a nationalist attitude. Also, from what I've said, they represent the westernization of a country that ultimately became a world superpower. I believe both are good contentions on what they're historical and what remains should be preserved or even reconstructed.
RegentHouse no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 27th, 2012, 05:08 AM   #20
ukiyo
スーパーモデレーターSuper Moderator
 
ukiyo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: 大阪府 Ōsaka
Posts: 7,204
Likes (Received): 10395

Quote:
Originally Posted by RegentHouse View Post
What? It's the temples and shrines that get destroyed from disasters first because they're made of wood. If not by disaster, they're continually rebuilt anyway. I could understand if you are talking about buildings with the latest earthquake engineering, but the reason this whole discussion started was because I said it was the western buildings that generally survived the 1923 Kanto Earthquake and Allied bombing raids with repairable damage. Should I even bring up the A-Bomb dome in Hiroshima? That's preserved as it was from the attack, while the rest the memorial buildings are hideous. While I do admire Kenzo Tange's masterplan for the city, the architecture is... well I believe perhaps that's where this whole "strong modernist movement" came from that Momo mentioned.
Well I was talking about traditionally, pre Meiji era it is the japanese residences that are the first to be destroyed. Traditional japanese temples/shrines were the sturdiest buildings many with anti earthquake technology for the time. But yes many temples burnt down and are rebuilt but they have been designed to last while the houses and business districts (traditional) were throw away buildings with no real value. It's only the temples, shrines and some noble residence that last the "test of time" and have some "sentimental" value so they're rebuilt. Nowadays this mentality still has carried over except for many station buildings.

This how Japan always has been mostly due to cities constantly being destroyed and rebuilt. If this is too annoying (which I can understand your point of view) I think you should just ignore it because it will keep happening whether we like it or not I don't think this mentality will ever change so we will be making the same comments for decades. What will change though is that the post 1981 buildings are quite sturdy, expensive and meet codes so I think the "pace" of demolishing and rebuilding these buildings will slow down simply due to economic reasons.
__________________
🌸My Pictures: Tokyo, Tokyo 2, Kobe, Kamakura, Osaka, Kyoto, Nara, Himeji, Atlanta, China
🌸Japan Forum 日本フォーラム please stop by!
🌸浮世🌸

Last edited by ukiyo; September 27th, 2012 at 05:14 AM.
ukiyo no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 08:17 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu