If you go 50 kilomerters west of helsingør, you find hundested, that tried the same as the other cities. It is smaller, so instead of museums and other big buildings, it made the water area to have stuff like an area where kids can catch and see different sea animals in basins, mostly crabs and other harmless ones.
Having been born in Copenhagen in 1963, growing up in Copenhagen, it can be weird for people to imagine Copenhagen harbor to be a place of mostly industry and pretty dirty. This was Copenhagen harbor when I was a child and it is true that there was a period in the 1980s where people simply did not know what to do with the harbor or where to begin. Tourists today flock to places like Nyhavn, but Nyhavn was definitely not a place you wanted to go in the 1970s unless you were looking for smoked up bars etc. The old meat packing district today has been reinvented with fantastic restaurants etc, but the whole are was crawling with drug addicts and prostitutes back in the 1970s and 1980s. Copenhagen today has changed/improved a lot from the Copenhagen I grew up in. While Copenhagen can become a bit overcrowded in the summertime, I much prefer Copenhagen today from the Copenhagen I grew up in.
I agree it are great buildings and an improved waterfront but the issue I have are that they could have planted tree´s along the entire waterfront area as a strategy to create room that people would ENJOY to walk and bicycle at. It would have created some shade and related to the fact that humans like green living things. It are proven to bring down stress levels and lover heart rate. Where do people flock today? In front of the old buildings at Islands Brygge where there are grass and tree´s and harbour bath/easy access to swim. Had all these new buildings either been pushed just 2-3 metres back or harbour front extended same length a green path with tree´s and grass could have been established and the attraction level would have been completely different. If you on top had demanded that ground floor of new buildings, off course not Library and opera, were set aside for cheaper rent smaller shops and crafts you would have seen a living waterfront year round. Copenhagen HAVE improved a lot in many ways over last 40 years and the strategy to open up the city even more for bikes clearly are a success so too the Metro BUT it are still in the inner part of the old city you will find people and only in peak summer there will be life around most of the waterfronts. I am old enough to remember seeing the plans and drawings when they were up politically and investment wise and I predicted precisely the result we have gotten. If you do not provide green spaces you will not get life. The main channel still are wide enough to make a "poles in the water" based extension along the canal to make room for this green tree´s row and walk/bicycle patch throughout. There still are a number of the buildings that could have designated small shops if politicians and developers(property owners sat down and worked it out. Despite good intentions nurses and policemen, normal people, no longer can afford to live IN Copenhagen and thus the possibility to have a living buzzling city at the waterfronts are missed out on. No doubt Copenhagen are superior in relation to most capitals around the world in many ways but the trademark we should keep striving to live up to are a city for people to enjoy to live in all year round and the combination of green and water are unbeatable if you can make it happen. Now it are happening in the Islands Brygge front and not many places else and that´s a damn shame. Personally I think that only long term solution are that Copenhagen put aside a sum every year to buy and build property where rent are based on income. Unless you inherit your parents property most are forced out to the suburbs and that are slowly making the city life die out outside summer. People are coming into Copenhagen but fewer and fewer LIVES there.
I just visited Copenhagen and the single most important thing to me about the waterfront is that you can bathe in it. Achieving that was quite an investment and locals, as well as tourists, really seem to enjoy it 🙌🏽
As a Copenhagener, I’m amazed at what we are doing so effectively in our branding to receive this embarrasing praise. The waterfront has loads of errors and everybody knows it; entire neighbourhoods, very ugly buildings and outright dangerous infrastructure (inner harbour bridge, anyone?). Archtects should come out of their weird echo chambers and talk to ordinary people. 😂
Well designed one-of big modern public buildings are fine and give the city memorable landmarks, but when everything looks like a boring variation of another blocky building it gets boring very fast. The opera house and black diamond are fine, but we need to stop the spread of glass and concrete buildings, especially for apartments. The paper houses are horrible and destroy the vibe around both nyhavn and christianshavn. You could not pay me enough to live in them.
As someone who lives in this area (Malmö) I can say that you miss the draw of Malmös west harbour if you go during the winter. You might think that the area is "built for the people living there" but during the summer it is absolutely packed with people coming from all over the city. While the are people swimming in the winter they are rather few. In the summer it is one the biggest destinations for people in the city. A mot more people go to the waterfront to swim, have a picknic or hang out that go to the opera or a museum. (Which all exist in Malmö as well, but in the city center.) There is a hood point being made about investing in buildings which are bith landmarks and public. In Malmö this was done better with eg Malmö Live which is a conference / koncert / hotel in the ciry center. Parts of it are always accessible to the public.
"Landmark buildings" is nothing but a shallow buzzword for a range of absurdly mediocre and ugly structures that exudes scorn and arrogance towards the city's fine historical architecture and unique character. Buildings don´t become "landmarks" by merely sticking out in their ugliness from older traditional structures. They are especially not landmarks if they just as well could have been placed anywhere in the world as opposed to being a unique improvement interacting well with the already well-approved and uniquely local surroundings. Lever House in New York may be a landmark, but copies of it - build in Copenhagen or China is just ridiculous. Which is why a unique Danish version of neo-traditionalism or the so called "new urbanism" inspired by Copenhagen´s already fine traditional architecture would have been a more genius and much healthier basis for city´s waterfront development rather than the ignorant and super cringe jumping the uniformist "international trend"-train.
These landmarks, especially the opera and teater house, are mostly targeted towards and used by the economic and/or cultural upper classes, which is perfectly in line with the whole "raising property prices" that is repeatedly mentioned as their main goal in the video. At the same time, the muncipal employment section is notorious for treating the disabled and/or socially excluded like crap, often making our situations much worse in the name of "quickly getting people in employment" when stated employment is often not sustainable (physically and/or mentally) at all for everyone involved. One social worker once disclosed to me (privately) what I was already suspecting, that they are more or less actively working towards attracting high tax payers while pushing those of us who are "burdens" out of the muncipality. Then there's much more money and attention for all the high prestige "progressive city profile" stuff that the city is marketed for. An alternative title would be "Copenhagen's Genius Gentrification". The new developments often do look very nice though.
During the 90s and 2000s, the city paid to renovate apartments in the outer districts of Copenhagen, and that let to gentrification. The waterfront is nice though.
The opera house wasn´t build by Copenhagen, is was a gift from the richest man in Denmark, Mærsk Mc-kinney Møller, the then owner of the shipping company Mærsk (Or Maersk)
All these places in CPH are almost always empty, especially around Sydhavn, Sluseholmen, Ørestad and much of northern Amager (excepting of course Islands Brygge, in the old part of Amager). The new ones are lifeless. People don't like them. Oh, hey, and actually the footage in the video reflects this! Not sure that the theory of why this kind of place-making works, is aligned with what happens in contemporary reality.
This video feels like it was sponsored by the city planners... to us residents, the new copenhagen waterfront is a soulless blemish on our city, it's buildings hideous, its infrastructure dysfunctional. The entire project was done over our heads, and the only people who use it are tourists and wealthy suburban people with too much time and money to spend. Copenhageners ourselves don't go there, and wish it had never been changed.
"It's the capital where the economic headquarters are located. So, for obvious reasons, it's not a green area. It's like two things that don't really go together."
Living in Jutland, Mainland Denmark, we the 3.5 million people, the main part of the danes, are all impressed how Copenhagen are spending the billions of Dollars every year, coming from agriculture and industrial production far, far away from the Copenhagen Island. Every factory in Copenhagen closed down in the 19 eighties , because the lazy working force, were not competitive enough. Now everyone there is living of subsidies from the state, and having “jobs” in the administration, without any productive content at all. Follow the money. 😎🇩🇰
Danish agriculture makes up 1.1 percent of Danish gdp, while filling up the entire country and surroundings with crap. The taxpayers of Copenhagen municipality pay 0.5 billion kr. to poorer municipalities incl. Jutland yearly in "udligning". I followed the money, forgot about stereotypes and outdated information, and got here.
If you go 50 kilomerters west of helsingør, you find hundested, that tried the same as the other cities. It is smaller, so instead of museums and other big buildings, it made the water area to have stuff like an area where kids can catch and see different sea animals in basins, mostly crabs and other harmless ones.
Having been born in Copenhagen in 1963, growing up in Copenhagen, it can be weird for people to imagine Copenhagen harbor to be a place of mostly industry and pretty dirty. This was Copenhagen harbor when I was a child and it is true that there was a period in the 1980s where people simply did not know what to do with the harbor or where to begin.
Tourists today flock to places like Nyhavn, but Nyhavn was definitely not a place you wanted to go in the 1970s unless you were looking for smoked up bars etc.
The old meat packing district today has been reinvented with fantastic restaurants etc, but the whole are was crawling with drug addicts and prostitutes back in the 1970s and 1980s.
Copenhagen today has changed/improved a lot from the Copenhagen I grew up in.
While Copenhagen can become a bit overcrowded in the summertime, I much prefer Copenhagen today from the Copenhagen I grew up in.
To be fair, there are still addicts in Kødbyen haha
@@unturned6066yeah, one alley over from the restaurants 😂
wow, if our waterfront is saved, i dread to think what unsaved ones are like
I agree it are great buildings and an improved waterfront but the issue I have are that they could have planted tree´s along the entire waterfront area as a strategy to create room that people would ENJOY to walk and bicycle at. It would have created some shade and related to the fact that humans like green living things. It are proven to bring down stress levels and lover heart rate. Where do people flock today? In front of the old buildings at Islands Brygge where there are grass and tree´s and harbour bath/easy access to swim. Had all these new buildings either been pushed just 2-3 metres back or harbour front extended same length a green path with tree´s and grass could have been established and the attraction level would have been completely different. If you on top had demanded that ground floor of new buildings, off course not Library and opera, were set aside for cheaper rent smaller shops and crafts you would have seen a living waterfront year round.
Copenhagen HAVE improved a lot in many ways over last 40 years and the strategy to open up the city even more for bikes clearly are a success so too the Metro BUT it are still in the inner part of the old city you will find people and only in peak summer there will be life around most of the waterfronts. I am old enough to remember seeing the plans and drawings when they were up politically and investment wise and I predicted precisely the result we have gotten. If you do not provide green spaces you will not get life. The main channel still are wide enough to make a "poles in the water" based extension along the canal to make room for this green tree´s row and walk/bicycle patch throughout. There still are a number of the buildings that could have designated small shops if politicians and developers(property owners sat down and worked it out. Despite good intentions nurses and policemen, normal people, no longer can afford to live IN Copenhagen and thus the possibility to have a living buzzling city at the waterfronts are missed out on. No doubt Copenhagen are superior in relation to most capitals around the world in many ways but the trademark we should keep striving to live up to are a city for people to enjoy to live in all year round and the combination of green and water are unbeatable if you can make it happen. Now it are happening in the Islands Brygge front and not many places else and that´s a damn shame. Personally I think that only long term solution are that Copenhagen put aside a sum every year to buy and build property where rent are based on income. Unless you inherit your parents property most are forced out to the suburbs and that are slowly making the city life die out outside summer. People are coming into Copenhagen but fewer and fewer LIVES there.
I just visited Copenhagen and the single most important thing to me about the waterfront is that you can bathe in it. Achieving that was quite an investment and locals, as well as tourists, really seem to enjoy it 🙌🏽
GREAT! If only anyone could afford any of the new housing they built.
As a Copenhagener, I’m amazed at what we are doing so effectively in our branding to receive this embarrasing praise. The waterfront has loads of errors and everybody knows it; entire neighbourhoods, very ugly buildings and outright dangerous infrastructure (inner harbour bridge, anyone?). Archtects should come out of their weird echo chambers and talk to ordinary people. 😂
preach. architects again and again demonstrate how they are the most arrogant and out-of-touch profession in the universe
The kissing bridge is such a huge joke for us that live near it. God what an embarrassment.
The most horrible bridge design ever conseived is a special kind of genius 😂
Well designed one-of big modern public buildings are fine and give the city memorable landmarks, but when everything looks like a boring variation of another blocky building it gets boring very fast. The opera house and black diamond are fine, but we need to stop the spread of glass and concrete buildings, especially for apartments. The paper houses are horrible and destroy the vibe around both nyhavn and christianshavn. You could not pay me enough to live in them.
Thank You Sir for your Honesty 🎉😂
As someone who lives in this area (Malmö) I can say that you miss the draw of Malmös west harbour if you go during the winter.
You might think that the area is "built for the people living there" but during the summer it is absolutely packed with people coming from all over the city. While the are people swimming in the winter they are rather few. In the summer it is one the biggest destinations for people in the city.
A mot more people go to the waterfront to swim, have a picknic or hang out that go to the opera or a museum. (Which all exist in Malmö as well, but in the city center.)
There is a hood point being made about investing in buildings which are bith landmarks and public. In Malmö this was done better with eg Malmö Live which is a conference / koncert / hotel in the ciry center. Parts of it are always accessible to the public.
I cant imagine people going for picnics etc in Swedistan, Malmø with all those immigrants
@@stalinzd2580What. Malmö is like the most chill and calm swedish cities.
It’s very nice.
amazing mini doc!!!
"Landmark buildings" is nothing but a shallow buzzword for a range of absurdly mediocre and ugly structures that exudes scorn and arrogance towards the city's fine historical architecture and unique character. Buildings don´t become "landmarks" by merely sticking out in their ugliness from older traditional structures. They are especially not landmarks if they just as well could have been placed anywhere in the world as opposed to being a unique improvement interacting well with the already well-approved and uniquely local surroundings.
Lever House in New York may be a landmark, but copies of it - build in Copenhagen or China is just ridiculous. Which is why a unique Danish version of neo-traditionalism or the so called "new urbanism" inspired by Copenhagen´s already fine traditional architecture would have been a more genius and much healthier basis for city´s waterfront development rather than the ignorant and super cringe jumping the uniformist "international trend"-train.
These landmarks, especially the opera and teater house, are mostly targeted towards and used by the economic and/or cultural upper classes, which is perfectly in line with the whole "raising property prices" that is repeatedly mentioned as their main goal in the video.
At the same time, the muncipal employment section is notorious for treating the disabled and/or socially excluded like crap, often making our situations much worse in the name of "quickly getting people in employment" when stated employment is often not sustainable (physically and/or mentally) at all for everyone involved. One social worker once disclosed to me (privately) what I was already suspecting, that they are more or less actively working towards attracting high tax payers while pushing those of us who are "burdens" out of the muncipality. Then there's much more money and attention for all the high prestige "progressive city profile" stuff that the city is marketed for.
An alternative title would be "Copenhagen's Genius Gentrification". The new developments often do look very nice though.
During the 90s and 2000s, the city paid to renovate apartments in the outer districts of Copenhagen, and that let to gentrification.
The waterfront is nice though.
The opera house wasn´t build by Copenhagen, is was a gift from the richest man in Denmark, Mærsk Mc-kinney Møller, the then owner of the shipping company Mærsk (Or Maersk)
Helsingør has an English name - Elsinore! Where Hamlet takes place 😊
Great short documentary - thank you! Copenhagen feels like a city of the future - idyllic!
All these places in CPH are almost always empty, especially around Sydhavn, Sluseholmen, Ørestad and much of northern Amager (excepting of course Islands Brygge, in the old part of Amager). The new ones are lifeless. People don't like them. Oh, hey, and actually the footage in the video reflects this! Not sure that the theory of why this kind of place-making works, is aligned with what happens in contemporary reality.
Why is this mostly about Malmo, Sweden?
The harbour is getting smaller and smaller as more and more development is being build in previous areas that were once the canals
Opera is just a lazy copy of Jean Nouvel`s work, thats a bit of a bummer, but it looks phantastic within the surroundings.
Opera, colloquially known as 'the toaster'
Never heard that ever, and I live here
@@Vfulncchl maybe you want to google something like this:
copenhagen opera colloquially known as the toaster
@@VfulncchlDet har ellers været et ofte gentaget øgenavn i alle årene siden bygningens opførsel. Søg på 'operaen brødrister'.
Caution! Loud music ahead!
Not only that but it's your typical pretentious pseudo-hip crap you hear everywhere
This video feels like it was sponsored by the city planners... to us residents, the new copenhagen waterfront is a soulless blemish on our city, it's buildings hideous, its infrastructure dysfunctional. The entire project was done over our heads, and the only people who use it are tourists and wealthy suburban people with too much time and money to spend.
Copenhageners ourselves don't go there, and wish it had never been changed.
Its a no good , ugly and shity place...way too much concrete , iron and glass...not at all enough greenery...
"It's the capital where the economic headquarters are located. So, for obvious reasons, it's not a green area. It's like two things that don't really go together."
I dont like they make the river smaller. The river is the lifeblood.
Copenhagen doesn't have a river
You should list your sources and link some footage files (Google Drive maybe?) in the description :)
Do other youtubers often link sources?
Why?
I'm sorry, but these new Copenhagen "landmarks" look horrible. Salient they are, but not beautiful
come visit in person
Just wait. Before 2060 the water will have risen enough to make living or working impossible in the harbor area. Have fun!
It has been taken care of.. dont worry 🙂
anything meeds to be done taking into account global warming and the subsequent excess of rain
Living in Jutland, Mainland Denmark, we the 3.5 million people, the main part of the danes, are all impressed how Copenhagen are spending the billions of Dollars every year, coming from agriculture and industrial production far, far away from the Copenhagen Island. Every factory in Copenhagen closed down in the 19 eighties , because the lazy working force, were not competitive enough. Now everyone there is living of subsidies from the state, and having “jobs” in the administration, without any productive content at all. Follow the money. 😎🇩🇰
Danish agriculture makes up 1.1 percent of Danish gdp, while filling up the entire country and surroundings with crap. The taxpayers of Copenhagen municipality pay 0.5 billion kr. to poorer municipalities incl. Jutland yearly in "udligning". I followed the money, forgot about stereotypes and outdated information, and got here.
Coming from Jutland I whole heartally disagree on just about everything you just said
Where did you get those unemployment numbers from? Unemployment was 5,3% tops in the 1970s according to Danish Statistics.