SkyscraperCity banner

41 - 60 of 813 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,250 Posts
^^ I love how they cut him off at the end... bastards.

[Another RANT]

Nationalstadsparken must be the biggest joke of them all. As if we didn't have ENOUGH bullshit in this city (all the naysayers, nimbys, gärdet, skönhetsrådet... the list goes on) we have this "park" (IT'S A FUCKING FOREST THAT SHOULD'VE BEEN CUT DOWN LONG AGO!!!!!!!!) that is so holy to these hypocritical fucktards that we can't even build tall buildings next to it??? Isn't it enough that it's been holding back the construction and development of this city for generations? I mean, this is so so so pathetic that I'm seriously embarrassed and ashamed to be a part of the same

[/Another RANT]

I disagree with the part..... Should have been cut down long time ago. The park itself is very nice and it is an very historic area with the castle ruin, Haga castle (even though the spoilt girl Viktoria will soon move in there) and much more.

What is wrong is how the park can hold back projects outside the park. And also how the park borders to the city. Its mostly surrounded by a noisy highway. Its nice inside the park but to get there is depressive. Also the noise from E4 highway disturb the park more than any "skyscraper/highrise would ever do. In fact a "wall" of buildings blocking E4 away from the park would make it much more calm and quiet.
 

·
Original Yimby
Joined
·
1,055 Posts
Discussion Starter #43
^^ I love how they cut him off at the end... bastards.

[Another RANT]

Nationalstadsparken must be the biggest joke of them all. As if we didn't have ENOUGH bullshit in this city (all the naysayers, nimbys, gärdet, skönhetsrådet... the list goes on) we have this "park" (IT'S A FUCKING FOREST THAT SHOULD'VE BEEN CUT DOWN LONG AGO!!!!!!!!) that is so holy to these hypocritical fucktards that we can't even build tall buildings next to it??? Isn't it enough that it's been holding back the construction and development of this city for generations? I mean, this is so so so pathetic that I'm seriously embarrassed and ashamed to be a part of the same country.

I'm with you completely Chilenofuturista... history certainly repeats itself in this city.

[/Another RANT]
I disagree with you. Nationalstadsparken is an enormous asset for Stockholm. It is our Central Park. The problem is the way the park is handled and first and foremost I here mean how the areas close to it is handlet. The city should lead up to the very edge of the park and frankly even step up in density when bordering the park. Today we instead have desolate wastelands and traffic routes surrounding the park.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,163 Posts
Well, then we'll have to agree to disagree. I hate that thing and wouldn't mind it being reduced by at least 3/4. Stockholm does not need a central park of that size.

And exactly how is it an "enormous asset"? It's not nicer than any other park IMO, it's holding back construction and gives the weak-minded nimbys verbal ammunition against every project in the northern parts of the city. The way I see it it's only been causing the city a lot of problems.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts
It may be regarded as an established fact that the Nationalstadsparken should preserve its borders, but I consider it can be questioned on grounds of fact.

The quality and use of the Nationalstadsparken varies from area to area. Part of park (Södra Djurgården or south of Gärdet, Hagaparken and Ulriksdal) is well used and of the very best quality. Other parts (like most of the Norra Djurgården, around the university) is slightly used and mostly forest.

The later one doesn't need to be that big and there's plenty of room for various types of improvements. Small parts of Norra Djurgården can become developed to high-density urban araes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
The northern edge is just an unkept forest with no recreational value and no particular buildings of interest except early 20th century architect Ferdinand Boberg's summer retreat. Nobody I know has ever set foot in that area. Good thing it's being kept as a land reserve though.

Back to topic. The current standings: Nimbys 519, Yimbys 355, expexted to catch up around midnight at the current rate. The City Council will decide the future of Tor's Towers tomorrow.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,036 Posts
So decision tome today then! Let's hope no one gets cold feat!

It will of course get appealed to Länstyrelsen and if they don't accept the appeal it will of course again get appealed to the government.
So how long might it get delayed? A year? Or is that too long?
Or could the appeal time be included in the construction time figures?
Because the appealing must be expected!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,250 Posts
Well, then we'll have to agree to disagree. I hate that thing and wouldn't mind it being reduced by at least 3/4. Stockholm does not need a central park of that size.

And exactly how is it an "enormous asset"? It's not nicer than any other park IMO, it's holding back construction and gives the weak-minded nimbys verbal ammunition against every project in the northern parts of the city. The way I see it it's only been causing the city a lot of problems.

I see your point here. Gärdet is a part that is such a vaste of land today. It would do the city more good if it was built urban with a big "real park" in the middle. Since the whole Nationalstadsparken is divided with värtahamnen and other areas in Stockholm. I still cant see the point of treating it like one big park. It should be 2 parks insted. Haga parken and Djurgårdsparken.

Oh and I hate the NYMBY´s Nationaldagsparks arguments just as much as you do. :eek:hno:
 

·
Original Yimby
Joined
·
1,055 Posts
Discussion Starter #52
I see your point here. Gärdet is a part that is such a vaste of land today. It would do the city more good if it was built urban with a big "real park" in the middle. Since the whole Nationalstadsparken is divided with värtahamnen and other areas in Stockholm. I still cant see the point of treating it like one big park. It should be 2 parks insted. Haga parken and Djurgårdsparken.

Oh and I hate the NYMBY´s Nationaldagsparks arguments just as much as you do. :eek:hno:
Oh yes. Gärdet should be excluded from the park I think. I live closeby and except for a few people walking their dogs there seem to be little point to it. Parts of gärdet could be "saved" and changed into park, and then build around it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,250 Posts
I don't think these parts that I've oulined should be included but instead it should be built upon!

I dont know about the qualities around the upper marked area, so I cant really say if I agree there or not. The area nearest south of värta hamnen would be better of with some buildings facing the park insted. But maybe that is planned already?...


Back to Tors Torn again. The more I see the renders the more I like these two buildings. Build it now !!!! :cheers:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,036 Posts
So decision tome today then! Let's hope no one gets cold feat!

It will of course get appealed to Länstyrelsen and if they don't accept the appeal it will of course again get appealed to the government.
So how long might it get delayed? A year? Or is that too long?
Or could the appeal time be included in the construction time figures?
Because the appealing must be expected!
It's a bit confusing but when I looked at the next Kommunfullmäktige meeting I realised that it isn't today.
Yet in all media it says that the decision will be today.
But now I saw this:

ärendet tas upp i Stadsbyggandsnämnden den l0 december 2009 för
godkännande inför antagande i kommunfullmäktige.
I am not familiar with the way of the decision making, can someone explain this?
What weight does stadsbyggnadsnämnden have?

If it goes through in stadsbyggnadsnämnden it's more or less a done deal in the city hall decision making or what?

http://planer.sbk.stockholm.se/SBKPlanTemplates/SBKPlanDocuments____6361.aspx#bookmarkC10
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,036 Posts
^^

I'm going to answer my own question here:

Efter utställningsskedet görs eventuellt mindre revideringar av planförslaget. Därefter går det till stadsbyggnadsnämnden för antagande. Större planer eller planer av principiell betydelse godkänns av nämnden och går till kommunfullmäktige för antagande.
It is as I said before up at Stadsbyggnadsnämnden today and not Kommunfullmäktige.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,036 Posts
^^

Don't know about Stadsbyggnadsnämnden but Kommunfullmäktige can sometimes end late at night around 22.00 to 23.00, but i don't think that is the case with Stadsbyggnadsnämnden.
Maybe the decision is taken don't know?
 

·
Original Yimby
Joined
·
1,055 Posts
Discussion Starter #59
This was just approved (minutes ago). I cannot provide a link since I think the meeting is still in progress but I expect a press release or something once they are done with the meeting.
 
41 - 60 of 813 Posts
Top