Great video as always Michael. Anyone here in Copenhagen engaged in the battle against Lynetteholm needs to watch this for some healthy perspective and a bit of hope.
I honestly don't see why the Lynetteholm is such a bad thing. Sure, the environmental consequences evaluation absolutely NEEDS to be done in a proper way and not in the half-assed way they've done it so far, and it also needs to have better public transport links than the ones that are currently proposed. But if they can make a proper consequence evaluation AND if it turns out that it doesn't ruin the environment, then go ahead and build it. The core concept of building a new island to house people is not a bad idea, but the execution certainly can be. EDIT: Just finished watching the entire video. I'm... honestly a bit curious as to why there's such an opposition against megaprojects in general. The megaprojects of the 60's and 70's were bad because they would ruin the places where people lived. The current megaprojects are all concentrated in places where people, well, don't live. The Kattegat connection would provide a 1 hour journey time by train between Copenhagen and Aarhus, much much faster than the equivalent trip by car, and would thus make it EASIER to live a car-free life. Megaprojects can absolutely be of benefit to urbanism and urban living, but especially so when they aren't located in the city itself. I personally don't own a car and never plan on getting one, living in Copenhagen.
@@wasmic5z Lynetteholmen is loathed and hated because it has been sold on lies and illusions. - Protecting against flooding? Probably not. Its is the wrong part of the harbor first and foremost, because the southern part of the harbor is in a different municipality. Also there are no plans to "protect" the rest of Amager and Køge Bugt...Instead a ring road and a tunnel underneath the harbor are the plans currently. Nothing else. - providing housing? Likely. But the same expensive housing that have brought the demand up to the hysterical level it is at today. Also the the population projection that should justify the demand for housing come 2050. Only problem that the population projection have been falling over the past couple of years. In fact a fall so big that the proposed amount of people that should live on Lynetteholmen have vanished. - the finanicial aspect? Lynetteholmen is built on debt from the metro construction. The metro company/city and harbor are descendents from the Ørestad Company. The metro debt is more than 30 billion dkr. City and Harbor are tied down to 1/3 of that debt, on top of that there is the debt from constructing Lynetteholm (they have already set a new record for exceeding their budgets, even before they were 1/4 into the construction). Add to that the Metro M5 (at least 35 billions added to the existing debt) You know the tale of the emperors new clothing? Lynetteholm is that...
I've never been to Copenhagen. I've never been interested in city planning/urban development. Yet here I am frantically clicking on your new upload. I love how tangible you present these topics and how it prompts me to think of the area I live in - I started to look at Budapest in a different manner due to your videos.
Thanks for this video. Here in Houston (Texas) there is a massive $9 Billion highway expansion project on the drawing boards. I'm getting some great arguments and ideas to oppose it from your videos. BTW I have been to Copenhagen one time and enjoyed it.
Great video, as per usual! As an American living in Copenhagen for the past 6 years, I've really come to appreciate the cycling infrastructure and public transport here. While it's not perfect, it puts pretty much every major city in the US to shame. I hope we can continue, as a society, to move away from the idealization of the car, or at the very least the personal car, and stop scarring our cities with huge roadways.
Automated shared cars won't solve much either. Car sharing systems help, but automated robotaxis would only make things worse, since there'd have to be a ton of them circulating all the time to work, and they'd never come close to the capacity simple public transport has without needing the same massive comprehensive road systems private cars use today. Only viable solution is less cars, and more public transport and people cycling. And car sharing systems can be a part of that as they allow multiple people to share the same car.
Great video, in Antwerp, Belgium we are unfortunately stuck with a ringway that runs straight through the city. Popular protest against an extra tunnel and even more infrastructure was bought of with the fake promise of putting a roof over the existing ringway. Because once the tunnel is complete, the government will be out of money and there will be no roof.
TBF, the ring road of Antwerp was built when most of the city was still inside said ring road. Antwerp just grew so massively from the 50s and 60s on, after the ring road was started and built, that now it's "inside" or running "through" the city. But it really isn't. It's running between the greater city center and it's suburbs, which have grown so much they're now virtually part of the city. But when the ring road was planned and first built, these outer areas were still villages on their own, and definitely not part of the city not in a legal sense and not in an urban planning sense. Borgerhout, Deurne, Berchem, etc etc all are now part of the city of Antwerp, but in the 1950s and 60s were still very much outlying villages in their own right. It isn't until the ring road was built that these outlying villages exploded into the suburbs they are today. On top of that, the Antwerp ring road was built on a strip of land that used to be part of the outer defensive belt around the city, that was kept clear of buildings, and was in government hands. So it was easy to build the ring road here in the 50s and 60s and it made sense as it connected both to the inner city, and the outlying suburban villages. But the city and these suburbs have grown immensely since then, and have now grown into one massive city, leading to the situation now where the ring road seems to run through the city. www.geopunt.be/?service=https%3A%2F%2Fgeo.api.vlaanderen.be%2FHISTCART%2Fwmts%3Flayers%3Dvandermaelen Don't get me wrong. I also think it's a pity and a major pain that the Antwerp ring road runs where it does. All I'm saying is there are very sensible historical reasons for this. And unfortunately, due to the absolute lack of urban planning in the 20th century here in Belgium, and the extremely high population density here, it also means the area surrounding Antwerp is now all dense wealthy suburb, and there's no room at all to move the ring road further away from the city without destroying tons of wealthy people's houses, and without creating a ton of protest that would kill off such a project the moment it would be proposed. Unfortunately we're stuck with the ring road of Antwerp as is. Only solution is to get as many people as possible out of their cars and on to public transport and bikes...
I don’t know what you did to piss TH-cam off, but they haven’t recommended any of your videos in over a year. I had to go look for your channel, which I am subscribed to, and couldn’t remember the name. “Biking Copenhagen” got me there.
3:02 one little correction the Weimar Republic started the Autobahn's, Hitler and the Nazi's actually wanted to stop building them as it was big government spending which was antithetical to their interest (ironic when they wanted a huge armed forces but hay), however they were so popular they kept on building them just at a slower rate, but used them as a propaganda tool having a lot of photos taken with them, which is why they are associated with them to this day.
Where I live major freeways were destroyed in an earthquake. After that they weren’t rebuilt. Entire parts of town have come out from the shadows and have become desirable place to live. The process has been slow and is still underway. It’s possible to reverse some of the negative impact of freeways if a community doesn’t give up
In Silkeborg a few years ago they finished the motorway, I have come to hate it. On mornings when traffic is more busy than normal and the air is cold the sound travels much further and it's impossibly to not hear it let alone enjoy being outdoors. Yes sound travels further in cold air which also means traffic noise is also surprisingly loud and annoying at night. It took many years for it to be built because they didn't want to destroy our nature, well now they sure did. The other day I was out by a beautiful little lake in the forest that is close to the motorway, noise there too, can't escape the stupid thing. They destroyed my city, and they are still doing it, these damn politicians deserve nothing but torture for tormenting others with their shit. As the guy from Not Just Bikes says, cities aren't loud cars are loud.
Yup! I can't stand how the right wing is constantly pushing for motorways here there and everywhere, and how the Social Democrats are just so lenient with them about it! And even more annoying is how it diverts funding away from public transit, which in many parts of Denmark have been reduced to absolute shambles! Like people always complain that the buses and trains are slow and rarely run but whenever someone suggest investing the funds into it, they scream "THE PUBLIC TRANSIT IS HORRIBLE, SLOW, AND IMPRACTICAL, ITS USELESS, I WON'T SUPPORT SOMETHING THIS USELESS, YOU TRY LIVING MY LIFE WITH IT AND I'LL BE WAITING FOR YOU TO SWITCH SIDES" all while trying to be funny with 6th grade bully language. Like bruh do these people hear themselves!
Really interesting video , great historical context. one of your best. “Everything comes in circles. [...] The old wheel turns, and the same spoke comes up. It's all been done before, and will be again.” We visited Copenhagen with the kids last month and had a lovely walk by the lakes and stayed in Vesterbro - thank Oden😂 the mega project died. Keep up the struggle against these bad ideas
Damn, every single megaproject is a crime against citizens in every city. They were intending to create so many freeways, but where the hell are those people were supposed to go anyways if good half of Copenhagen would be razed, considering that remaining buildings next to these freeways die in no time, because nobody wants to live there and businesses are gone, coz nobody walks in? Look up Prague Magistrala. A 4-lane each way monstrosity cutting through 2 most vibrant historical districts of Prague peaking with all these lanes chocked with traffic right in front the main national museum, which is cut away from people on both sides. They literally prevented people from entering the national museum, because there are 4 lanes of cars flying 70 right at the entrance. This thing still lives and poisons life here to this day and I have no idea how anyone in sound mind could think that this is a good idea. Such atrocities alongside brutalist architecture are absolute maniac statements of hatred addressed to cities and people living in them.
First video I have seen from this channel and I’m blown away. I really liked your presenting style and this just shows how we always need to think carefully before we do something stupid we will regret.
Many ? You mean Utrecht, rebuilt a canal from an inner city motorway... And I know Almelo brought back a small piece of inner city harbour .. But otherwise ?
Yeah, I just don't get the people who are in support of it staying around, like some Nørrebro guy did in a newspaper months ago. Then again that guys also said the smell of urine on the buildings around Nørrebro added to the neighborhood character so I have no idea how his head is put together
In the spring of 2023 it was decided by the two city council s and the state to tear down one of the two bridges (the most southern), that forms Bispeengbuen. Instead, the traffic will be lead into the remaining bridge, with a lower speed limit. The small brook will again be brought back to the surface and a park established. This project is expected to be finished around 2028-2029. Not the full solution, but better than nothing.
This happened in Reykjavik, where large motorways were built according to the so called "Danish Plan" which was a cityplan that made by Danish planning consultants. Luckily not all of it came to fruition but it lead to Reykjavik being the car-centric city it is today.
Amazing video, and fascinating for anybody knowing Copenhagen. They were litteraly planning to obliterate the best neighborhoods of the city ! Copenhagen would be a hellhole, a car and concrete inferno today.
Wish my city's municipal council saw this. We are building a highway along our downtown seaface in the name of coastal rd here in Mumbai which is outrageously stupid.
@@LifeSizedCity especially in the developing world where people generally see infrastructure development as a postive gain failing to distinguish between the projects making the city inhabitable and the ones actually making a change
@@sarthsingh3271, I agree, a lot of it stems from urban planners looking towards the USA for inspiration, sadly it's an outdated mindset, but emerging countries like India can overcome this through future Indian homegrown city planners that can find inspiration within the country.
@@socialistsolidarity thankfully the trend has set foot in India. Apparently a lot of people are being vocal about walkable and pedestrian friendly cities in the country which will only gain more momentum in future. Also we are at a plus point rn due to low car ownership rate
Very interesting topic. I am from Kharkiv, Ukraine. Due to war, many historical buildings were destroyed, but I hope all these buildings will be renovated. However, our municipality wants to remove tram from the city centre, let developers build high-rise buildings instead of old historical buildings. I hope we will save our city.
No, this is wrong and a misunderstanding. Firstly, Copenhagen must be protected against the raising ocean levels from all sides, and it is clearly documented, that the threat against the city is largest from the south. Not from the north where Lynetteholm is situated. Secondly, Lynetteholm itself actually makes the threat against Copenhagen larger, because it includes the closing og the deep undersea channel Kongedybet, which leads salty water to the Baltic Sea. The waters between Malmø (Sweden) and Copenhagen (DK) is actually not very deep, apart from three undersea channels. Therefore, closing one of them will not only disturb the Baltic Sea. It will also mean that when a storm from the north pushes down through Öresound, the water will stem up directly north of Copenhagen and flood the northern municipalities and the Inner Harbour. The better solution is to build dykes all the way around (south, east, north), possibly combined with smaller coastal islands behind Trekroner Island. Without blocking Kongedybet. A couple of concrete proposals for this has been presented.
Hey Michael! It’s awesome to see someone who also has an interest in these old projects - I’ve been studying and cataloging them myself for several years now However with that being said, I am afraid I have found a fair share of the facts (ranging from minor to major) you present in this video to be incorrect
I think the good people fighting against it in the Kattegatforbindelsen - nej tak! FB group can answer that best. If it was a rail link, that would be modern. More motorway means more cars.
@@LifeSizedCity And yet many residents in DK today do complain about the light rail lines being built in Aarhus, Odense, and around Copenhagen (Lyngby-Ishøj), mainly because it will hinder car traffic.
@@nicolasgeiger2012 Yeah, heck in the 90's one of the main reasosn the automated light metro solution was chosen over the alternatives of a tramway, and a German style "Stadtbahn" light rail for the Copenhagen metro was that it "Wouldn't distrupt drivers". Just jesus christ man, Danes are carbrained to heck and back
@@drdewott9154 Automated light metro is SO, SO much better than a tramway. It's so much faster than a tram! And because there's no drivers that need to be paid, they can run trains as frequently as they want with very little increased operational costs, rather than having frequency be reliant on the number of passengers. Isn't it nice to never have to wait for a train on the metro??
Tusind tak for denne video! elsker dine videoer om københavn. Du er den primære grund til jeg har fået øjnene op for hvor sindsygt dårlig en idé biler er i byen.
It's the first video of this channel I've watched, and You've definitely gained a new subscriber ! Just one thought: I currently study in Milan and, although the picture you showed is an actual canal that runs in the southern part of Milan city centre (the Naviglio Grande, if I recall correctly), I am not aware of a succesful project that removed a street for a canal; there are proposals here and there and even some serious projects, but nothing actually done, as far as I know :( Unfortunately, the opposite happened on a massive scale during the late 1800s and for most of the 1900s, with several dozens of canal (I learnt the city used to be criss-crossed by them) removed or covered in asphalt... some of this was necessary, but today there are so few of them that seeing the before and after photos can be so sad, thinking that so much work was put in only to be buried under over-sized intersection in many otherwise potentially-picturesque neighnourhoods
Gosh, happy that these "megaprogects" didn't go in real life. I visited Copenhagen 3 years ago and my 6 km morning run experience around the lakes still warms me. Greetings from Ukraine!
Great video. I think that such mega projects only benefit a few, mega developers, mega shareholders who intend to make mega profits. The bottom line for a few at the expense of many.
I just can’t understand why they build highways through the cities… I am from Milan and we have a nice ring around the city, sure it’s often full of traffic during rush hours but I can’t imagine how bad it would be if they try to build it inside the city!
As an Amsterdammer in Copenhagen, i have to say this city has actually devolved back into a car loving city. I live along Sydhavnegade, and there will be many many more coming to live there. And what did they do? Degraded the whole intersection to accomodate more cars and no way to safely walk or bike anymore. And that is just one fact. Its terrible to walk or bike in Copenhagen, compared to Amsterdam and the rest of NL, and now they have degraded and missed chances with mixing up busroutes, leading to more buses stuck in traffic, and more walking to connect to trains and buses. I bike everywhere normally, but sometimes i need to take trains and buses. And its not always working very well. But the worst is that the buses still load out straight on the bike lanes... No chances have been grabbed to make these streets nicer to walk and bike...
My perhaps garbled understanding of Heliopolis at Cap d'Agde is that it has a reasonably good urbanist design. Hotels, restaurants, shops, and a camp ground are all within easy walking distance. It used to be the capital of nudism, but I understand in recent decades it has become somewhat dilapidated and less family friendly.
Well, the motorways luckily weren't built, but the "undesired low-income residents" mentioned several times eventually had to leave because of the rising housing costs...
Here in Lima, Peru, our mayor promotes a huge and 2 Km flyover as the only solution to traffic jams in a really afluent neighborhood... $25 M...from us taxpayers.😢
great overview of the collosal failure of the motorways programme that almost detsoryed so many historic cites, we had some in london too that thankfully never happened, but this video feels like it's leveraging some bad megaprojects to smear the idea of megaprojects as a whole. the haussmann redesign of paris was a megaproject, cerda's barcelona block design was a megaproject, both of which i think are enormous successes, whereas corbusier style tower in thepark urban housing have been another big failure. the problem is not megaprojects but just good and bad design. i dont know what the problem with building an artifical island is, seems like a good idea to me, more space, nothing historic is getting cleared away, netherlands ahve been creating artifical islands for centuries. just make sure that what goes on it is good design. the history of megaprojects should be a learning process, a refinement of urban planning philosophy, to make sure future megaprojects have a better success rate, not a complete rejection of the megaproject.
The pushback in this region against an artificial island that serves the interests of developers but that doesn't address the needs of Copenhageners is pretty solid. The same "but we have reclaimed land for centuries" argument is heard in Copenhagen, too, but there were no environmental concerns back then, were there? And no island that effectively chokes the entire Baltic Sea by cutting off one of the primary underwater channels. Hausmann is not a great example, when you're an urbanist. "Cleansing" the poor, undesirable neighbourhoods to serve the middle class is not an example you want to use. And the military application of the wide boulevards that the French wanted in order to move troops around the city to fight revolutions is not exactly a plus. Cerdá is a better example, but look at how his vision has been hijacked by car culture. Bent Flyvberg is the go-to resource for why megaprojects should be a thing of the past.
Ok say that to everyone in the apartments nearby who have to deal with the traffic noise every day, or every other person passing through outside of a car
Det var imponerende at høre dig udtale Lynetteholm. Det var dansk som en dansker ville sige det. Det er ligesom når du siger Nørrebrogade. Du er nået langt med at blive ægte bilingual: Engelsk og dansk. Jeg er nysgerrig efter at høre dig deltage i en dansk samtale, så jeg ska' lige surfe You Tube
I don't like the mentality of this video. It equates large projects with "bad". And if every large project belongs in the "megaproject not good", then what is left is not touching the city centers and just urban sprawl without urban planning. Don't get me wrong, many of this projects sound like shit, but what I'm not for is this conservative view of the video that tells that everything should be left like it is. But when populations change and grow, there has to be change, that might have to me a "mega" change, and instead of blanketly marking it as bad we should instead propose a GOOD megaproject. PS: Just because you don't like a certain architectural style it doesn't mean that everyone should hate it (in this case Brutalist buildings).
There is more than enough evidence that megaprojects are detrimental to urban life. Professor Bent Flyvberg is your go-to resource if you want to learn more. There is no example in the urban context of mega-change being beneficial to urban life and development. So "good" megaprojects are unlikely to even exist. So we've learned that lesson. We also know now that with dwindling building resources (we're running out of sand for concrete, etc), the trend is tipping towards reusing existing buildings instead of tearing them down.
Great video as always Michael. Anyone here in Copenhagen engaged in the battle against Lynetteholm needs to watch this for some healthy perspective and a bit of hope.
Thanks!
I honestly don't see why the Lynetteholm is such a bad thing. Sure, the environmental consequences evaluation absolutely NEEDS to be done in a proper way and not in the half-assed way they've done it so far, and it also needs to have better public transport links than the ones that are currently proposed. But if they can make a proper consequence evaluation AND if it turns out that it doesn't ruin the environment, then go ahead and build it. The core concept of building a new island to house people is not a bad idea, but the execution certainly can be.
EDIT: Just finished watching the entire video. I'm... honestly a bit curious as to why there's such an opposition against megaprojects in general. The megaprojects of the 60's and 70's were bad because they would ruin the places where people lived. The current megaprojects are all concentrated in places where people, well, don't live. The Kattegat connection would provide a 1 hour journey time by train between Copenhagen and Aarhus, much much faster than the equivalent trip by car, and would thus make it EASIER to live a car-free life. Megaprojects can absolutely be of benefit to urbanism and urban living, but especially so when they aren't located in the city itself. I personally don't own a car and never plan on getting one, living in Copenhagen.
@@wasmic5zI abselutly agree with you ON EVERYTHING!
@@wasmic5z Lynetteholmen is loathed and hated because it has been sold on lies and illusions.
- Protecting against flooding? Probably not. Its is the wrong part of the harbor first and foremost, because the southern part of the harbor is in a different municipality. Also there are no plans to "protect" the rest of Amager and Køge Bugt...Instead a ring road and a tunnel underneath the harbor are the plans currently. Nothing else.
- providing housing? Likely. But the same expensive housing that have brought the demand up to the hysterical level it is at today. Also the the population projection that should justify the demand for housing come 2050. Only problem that the population projection have been falling over the past couple of years. In fact a fall so big that the proposed amount of people that should live on Lynetteholmen have vanished.
- the finanicial aspect? Lynetteholmen is built on debt from the metro construction. The metro company/city and harbor are descendents from the Ørestad Company. The metro debt is more than 30 billion dkr. City and Harbor are tied down to 1/3 of that debt, on top of that there is the debt from constructing Lynetteholm (they have already set a new record for exceeding their budgets, even before they were 1/4 into the construction). Add to that the Metro M5 (at least 35 billions added to the existing debt)
You know the tale of the emperors new clothing? Lynetteholm is that...
I've never been to Copenhagen. I've never been interested in city planning/urban development. Yet here I am frantically clicking on your new upload. I love how tangible you present these topics and how it prompts me to think of the area I live in - I started to look at Budapest in a different manner due to your videos.
^^ this is the internet at its best, you suddenly get catapulted into a different reality
Thanks for this video. Here in Houston (Texas) there is a massive $9 Billion highway expansion project on the drawing boards. I'm getting some great arguments and ideas to oppose it from your videos. BTW I have been to Copenhagen one time and enjoyed it.
Great video, as per usual! As an American living in Copenhagen for the past 6 years, I've really come to appreciate the cycling infrastructure and public transport here. While it's not perfect, it puts pretty much every major city in the US to shame. I hope we can continue, as a society, to move away from the idealization of the car, or at the very least the personal car, and stop scarring our cities with huge roadways.
Well said!
Agree! In europe you have the freedom to choose a car or no not. In north America you are obliged to
Automated shared cars won't solve much either. Car sharing systems help, but automated robotaxis would only make things worse, since there'd have to be a ton of them circulating all the time to work, and they'd never come close to the capacity simple public transport has without needing the same massive comprehensive road systems private cars use today.
Only viable solution is less cars, and more public transport and people cycling. And car sharing systems can be a part of that as they allow multiple people to share the same car.
loved it, Michael! Brilliant video and lots of great useful historical information. It must've taken quite a bit of research
Thanks! Indeed. Lots of historical documents to read.
As a HUGE danish infrastrukture nerd, I love this video!
Great video, in Antwerp, Belgium we are unfortunately stuck with a ringway that runs straight through the city. Popular protest against an extra tunnel and even more infrastructure was bought of with the fake promise of putting a roof over the existing ringway. Because once the tunnel is complete, the government will be out of money and there will be no roof.
TBF, the ring road of Antwerp was built when most of the city was still inside said ring road. Antwerp just grew so massively from the 50s and 60s on, after the ring road was started and built, that now it's "inside" or running "through" the city.
But it really isn't. It's running between the greater city center and it's suburbs, which have grown so much they're now virtually part of the city. But when the ring road was planned and first built, these outer areas were still villages on their own, and definitely not part of the city not in a legal sense and not in an urban planning sense. Borgerhout, Deurne, Berchem, etc etc all are now part of the city of Antwerp, but in the 1950s and 60s were still very much outlying villages in their own right. It isn't until the ring road was built that these outlying villages exploded into the suburbs they are today.
On top of that, the Antwerp ring road was built on a strip of land that used to be part of the outer defensive belt around the city, that was kept clear of buildings, and was in government hands. So it was easy to build the ring road here in the 50s and 60s and it made sense as it connected both to the inner city, and the outlying suburban villages. But the city and these suburbs have grown immensely since then, and have now grown into one massive city, leading to the situation now where the ring road seems to run through the city.
www.geopunt.be/?service=https%3A%2F%2Fgeo.api.vlaanderen.be%2FHISTCART%2Fwmts%3Flayers%3Dvandermaelen
Don't get me wrong. I also think it's a pity and a major pain that the Antwerp ring road runs where it does. All I'm saying is there are very sensible historical reasons for this.
And unfortunately, due to the absolute lack of urban planning in the 20th century here in Belgium, and the extremely high population density here, it also means the area surrounding Antwerp is now all dense wealthy suburb, and there's no room at all to move the ring road further away from the city without destroying tons of wealthy people's houses, and without creating a ton of protest that would kill off such a project the moment it would be proposed.
Unfortunately we're stuck with the ring road of Antwerp as is. Only solution is to get as many people as possible out of their cars and on to public transport and bikes...
I don’t know what you did to piss TH-cam off, but they haven’t recommended any of your videos in over a year. I had to go look for your channel, which I am subscribed to, and couldn’t remember the name. “Biking Copenhagen” got me there.
3:02 one little correction the Weimar Republic started the Autobahn's, Hitler and the Nazi's actually wanted to stop building them as it was big government spending which was antithetical to their interest (ironic when they wanted a huge armed forces but hay), however they were so popular they kept on building them just at a slower rate, but used them as a propaganda tool having a lot of photos taken with them, which is why they are associated with them to this day.
Interesting! The Americans mention Hitler/Nazis in their documents after the war and their planning of the US Highway network, as do Danish documents.
Helt rigtigt, også ifølge min historie & denne: da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichsautobahn
Glad that a lot of these projects don't get built...Keep up the brilliant videos and keep fighting!
They did this in my city in the 70s the suburb never recovered from the destruction, RIP High st , St Kilda.
Where I live major freeways were destroyed in an earthquake. After that they weren’t rebuilt. Entire parts of town have come out from the shadows and have become desirable place to live. The process has been slow and is still underway. It’s possible to reverse some of the negative impact of freeways if a community doesn’t give up
In Silkeborg a few years ago they finished the motorway, I have come to hate it. On mornings when traffic is more busy than normal and the air is cold the sound travels much further and it's impossibly to not hear it let alone enjoy being outdoors. Yes sound travels further in cold air which also means traffic noise is also surprisingly loud and annoying at night. It took many years for it to be built because they didn't want to destroy our nature, well now they sure did. The other day I was out by a beautiful little lake in the forest that is close to the motorway, noise there too, can't escape the stupid thing. They destroyed my city, and they are still doing it, these damn politicians deserve nothing but torture for tormenting others with their shit.
As the guy from Not Just Bikes says, cities aren't loud cars are loud.
Yup! I can't stand how the right wing is constantly pushing for motorways here there and everywhere, and how the Social Democrats are just so lenient with them about it! And even more annoying is how it diverts funding away from public transit, which in many parts of Denmark have been reduced to absolute shambles! Like people always complain that the buses and trains are slow and rarely run but whenever someone suggest investing the funds into it, they scream "THE PUBLIC TRANSIT IS HORRIBLE, SLOW, AND IMPRACTICAL, ITS USELESS, I WON'T SUPPORT SOMETHING THIS USELESS, YOU TRY LIVING MY LIFE WITH IT AND I'LL BE WAITING FOR YOU TO SWITCH SIDES" all while trying to be funny with 6th grade bully language. Like bruh do these people hear themselves!
Really interesting video , great historical context. one of your best.
“Everything comes in circles. [...] The old wheel turns, and the same spoke comes up. It's all been done before, and will be again.”
We visited Copenhagen with the kids last month and had a lovely walk by the lakes and stayed in Vesterbro - thank Oden😂 the mega project died. Keep up the struggle against these bad ideas
Damn, every single megaproject is a crime against citizens in every city. They were intending to create so many freeways, but where the hell are those people were supposed to go anyways if good half of Copenhagen would be razed, considering that remaining buildings next to these freeways die in no time, because nobody wants to live there and businesses are gone, coz nobody walks in?
Look up Prague Magistrala. A 4-lane each way monstrosity cutting through 2 most vibrant historical districts of Prague peaking with all these lanes chocked with traffic right in front the main national museum, which is cut away from people on both sides. They literally prevented people from entering the national museum, because there are 4 lanes of cars flying 70 right at the entrance. This thing still lives and poisons life here to this day and I have no idea how anyone in sound mind could think that this is a good idea.
Such atrocities alongside brutalist architecture are absolute maniac statements of hatred addressed to cities and people living in them.
Woww great video!! Amazing to see how different the city would have looked!
Your best video yet. Great job mikael (and team?)
Thanks so much!
Thanks!!!
First video I have seen from this channel and I’m blown away. I really liked your presenting style and this just shows how we always need to think carefully before we do something stupid we will regret.
Great film :) Many Dutch city's took down motor ways to rebuild the original canals. Keep up the fight
Thanks. Indeed. Except there is still Rotterdam and now there is Amsterdam Zuid... :-)
Many ? You mean Utrecht, rebuilt a canal from an inner city motorway... And I know Almelo brought back a small piece of inner city harbour .. But otherwise ?
Tak for den gode begrundet historie, der viser bevaringsværdigheden af lokale milijøer👍❤
Really hope they do get rid of Bispeengbuen. It is such a barrier and dead area as you say. Great channel btw.
No it is not, it is a great area for sports when it rains!
Yeah, I just don't get the people who are in support of it staying around, like some Nørrebro guy did in a newspaper months ago. Then again that guys also said the smell of urine on the buildings around Nørrebro added to the neighborhood character so I have no idea how his head is put together
In the spring of 2023 it was decided by the two city council s and the state to tear down one of the two bridges (the most southern), that forms Bispeengbuen. Instead, the traffic will be lead into the remaining bridge, with a lower speed limit.
The small brook will again be brought back to the surface and a park established. This project is expected to be finished around 2028-2029.
Not the full solution, but better than nothing.
This happened in Reykjavik, where large motorways were built according to the so called "Danish Plan" which was a cityplan that made by Danish planning consultants. Luckily not all of it came to fruition but it lead to Reykjavik being the car-centric city it is today.
Amazing video, and fascinating for anybody knowing Copenhagen. They were litteraly planning to obliterate the best neighborhoods of the city ! Copenhagen would be a hellhole, a car and concrete inferno today.
Virkelig god video Mikael 👌👌👌! Tak.
I thoroughly enjoyed this video.
Wish my city's municipal council saw this. We are building a highway along our downtown seaface in the name of coastal rd here in Mumbai which is outrageously stupid.
It is endlessly bizarre that so many cities haven't learned from recent history, don't you think?
@@LifeSizedCity especially in the developing world where people generally see infrastructure development as a postive gain failing to distinguish between the projects making the city inhabitable and the ones actually making a change
@@sarthsingh3271, I agree, a lot of it stems from urban planners looking towards the USA for inspiration, sadly it's an outdated mindset, but emerging countries like India can overcome this through future Indian homegrown city planners that can find inspiration within the country.
@@socialistsolidarity thankfully the trend has set foot in India. Apparently a lot of people are being vocal about walkable and pedestrian friendly cities in the country which will only gain more momentum in future.
Also we are at a plus point rn due to low car ownership rate
Very interesting topic. I am from Kharkiv, Ukraine. Due to war, many historical buildings were destroyed, but I hope all these buildings will be renovated. However, our municipality wants to remove tram from the city centre, let developers build high-rise buildings instead of old historical buildings. I hope we will save our city.
Really interesting piece, thanks Mikael. THis piece really resonates as here in Ireland, similiar projects are still touted.
Lynetteholmen is the only project that can protect Copenhagen against raising sea waters and devolop the town. Mikael is living in the past
No, this is wrong and a misunderstanding. Firstly, Copenhagen must be protected against the raising ocean levels from all sides, and it is clearly documented, that the threat against the city is largest from the south. Not from the north where Lynetteholm is situated.
Secondly, Lynetteholm itself actually makes the threat against Copenhagen larger, because it includes the closing og the deep undersea channel Kongedybet, which leads salty water to the Baltic Sea. The waters between Malmø (Sweden) and Copenhagen (DK) is actually not very deep, apart from three undersea channels. Therefore, closing one of them will not only disturb the Baltic Sea. It will also mean that when a storm from the north pushes down through Öresound, the water will stem up directly north of Copenhagen and flood the northern municipalities and the Inner Harbour.
The better solution is to build dykes all the way around (south, east, north), possibly combined with smaller coastal islands behind Trekroner Island. Without blocking Kongedybet. A couple of concrete proposals for this has been presented.
that is a load of bull, and you should know that
Hey Michael!
It’s awesome to see someone who also has an interest in these old projects - I’ve been studying and cataloging them myself for several years now
However with that being said, I am afraid I have found a fair share of the facts (ranging from minor to major) you present in this video to be incorrect
Well, which are the incorrect major facts?
But whats the issue with connecting sjælland to jylladn with a moterway over kattegat?
I think the good people fighting against it in the Kattegatforbindelsen - nej tak! FB group can answer that best. If it was a rail link, that would be modern. More motorway means more cars.
@@LifeSizedCity And yet many residents in DK today do complain about the light rail lines being built in Aarhus, Odense, and around Copenhagen (Lyngby-Ishøj), mainly because it will hinder car traffic.
@@nicolasgeiger2012 Yeah, heck in the 90's one of the main reasosn the automated light metro solution was chosen over the alternatives of a tramway, and a German style "Stadtbahn" light rail for the Copenhagen metro was that it "Wouldn't distrupt drivers". Just jesus christ man, Danes are carbrained to heck and back
@@drdewott9154 Automated light metro is SO, SO much better than a tramway.
It's so much faster than a tram!
And because there's no drivers that need to be paid, they can run trains as frequently as they want with very little increased operational costs, rather than having frequency be reliant on the number of passengers. Isn't it nice to never have to wait for a train on the metro??
Un análisis maravilloso. Gracias.
As always Spot On! Hope you will make a video about the Kattegatforbindelse as well - Denmarks biggest megaproject - ever....
Brilliant Video
Tusind tak for denne video! elsker dine videoer om københavn. Du er den primære grund til jeg har fået øjnene op for hvor sindsygt dårlig en idé biler er i byen.
Tak skal du have!
It's the first video of this channel I've watched, and You've definitely gained a new subscriber !
Just one thought: I currently study in Milan and, although the picture you showed is an actual canal that runs in the southern part of Milan city centre (the Naviglio Grande, if I recall correctly), I am not aware of a succesful project that removed a street for a canal; there are proposals here and there and even some serious projects, but nothing actually done, as far as I know :(
Unfortunately, the opposite happened on a massive scale during the late 1800s and for most of the 1900s, with several dozens of canal (I learnt the city used to be criss-crossed by them) removed or covered in asphalt... some of this was necessary, but today there are so few of them that seeing the before and after photos can be so sad, thinking that so much work was put in only to be buried under over-sized intersection in many otherwise potentially-picturesque neighnourhoods
Gosh, happy that these "megaprogects" didn't go in real life. I visited Copenhagen 3 years ago and my 6 km morning run experience around the lakes still warms me. Greetings from Ukraine!
The failure of the Westway in London and the m32 in Bristol would make fantastic videos.
Great video. I think that such mega projects only benefit a few, mega developers, mega shareholders who intend to make mega profits. The bottom line for a few at the expense of many.
I just can’t understand why they build highways through the cities… I am from Milan and we have a nice ring around the city, sure it’s often full of traffic during rush hours but I can’t imagine how bad it would be if they try to build it inside the city!
As an Amsterdammer in Copenhagen, i have to say this city has actually devolved back into a car loving city. I live along Sydhavnegade, and there will be many many more coming to live there. And what did they do? Degraded the whole intersection to accomodate more cars and no way to safely walk or bike anymore. And that is just one fact. Its terrible to walk or bike in Copenhagen, compared to Amsterdam and the rest of NL, and now they have degraded and missed chances with mixing up busroutes, leading to more buses stuck in traffic, and more walking to connect to trains and buses. I bike everywhere normally, but sometimes i need to take trains and buses. And its not always working very well. But the worst is that the buses still load out straight on the bike lanes... No chances have been grabbed to make these streets nicer to walk and bike...
Thank you for addressing Lynetteholm. Its an absolute abomination!
My perhaps garbled understanding of Heliopolis at Cap d'Agde is that it has a reasonably good urbanist design. Hotels, restaurants, shops, and a camp ground are all within easy walking distance. It used to be the capital of nudism, but I understand in recent decades it has become somewhat dilapidated and less family friendly.
Great video. Thank you so much for the encouragement. By&Havn is turning out to be the bad guy in this movie.
Cool video!
Thanks!
Now do a show on how the historic Stockholm 1700 century downtown was destroyed for cars, offices and shopping
Stockholm is mentioned in the video
Does the likes of the Metro Cityringen not count as a mega project? As that is pretty awesome imo.
They should bring back the trams to Copenhagen I think 😀🇩🇰
They are bringing them back, though this is a completely new network meant to connect suburbs more to S-trains.
Well, the motorways luckily weren't built, but the "undesired low-income residents" mentioned several times eventually had to leave because of the rising housing costs...
Here in Lima, Peru, our mayor promotes a huge and 2 Km flyover as the only solution to traffic jams in a really afluent neighborhood... $25 M...from us taxpayers.😢
Insane
great overview of the collosal failure of the motorways programme that almost detsoryed so many historic cites, we had some in london too that thankfully never happened, but this video feels like it's leveraging some bad megaprojects to smear the idea of megaprojects as a whole. the haussmann redesign of paris was a megaproject, cerda's barcelona block design was a megaproject, both of which i think are enormous successes, whereas corbusier style tower in thepark urban housing have been another big failure. the problem is not megaprojects but just good and bad design.
i dont know what the problem with building an artifical island is, seems like a good idea to me, more space, nothing historic is getting cleared away, netherlands ahve been creating artifical islands for centuries. just make sure that what goes on it is good design. the history of megaprojects should be a learning process, a refinement of urban planning philosophy, to make sure future megaprojects have a better success rate, not a complete rejection of the megaproject.
The pushback in this region against an artificial island that serves the interests of developers but that doesn't address the needs of Copenhageners is pretty solid. The same "but we have reclaimed land for centuries" argument is heard in Copenhagen, too, but there were no environmental concerns back then, were there? And no island that effectively chokes the entire Baltic Sea by cutting off one of the primary underwater channels. Hausmann is not a great example, when you're an urbanist. "Cleansing" the poor, undesirable neighbourhoods to serve the middle class is not an example you want to use. And the military application of the wide boulevards that the French wanted in order to move troops around the city to fight revolutions is not exactly a plus. Cerdá is a better example, but look at how his vision has been hijacked by car culture. Bent Flyvberg is the go-to resource for why megaprojects should be a thing of the past.
6:14 so he is the bastard that kill tram
beautiful romantic place to be 😍🥰😘 new sub and bell ❤
This is still happening in Mumbai, its not a joke!: th-cam.com/video/VYm_RAq77kw/w-d-xo.html
Shit, you spent 2 weeks in Cap d'Agde ? lol
NOOO we love Bispeengbuen, because it is one of the very few places in copenhagen, where there is free shelter for rain. Great area for sports!
Ok say that to everyone in the apartments nearby who have to deal with the traffic noise every day, or every other person passing through outside of a car
Ugliest building in Copenhagen?
I see your Panum Institute and raise you Bryggergården at Kongens Enghave.:)
Berlin is still buldozing for the Autobahn
Det var imponerende at høre dig udtale Lynetteholm. Det var dansk som en dansker ville sige det. Det er ligesom når du siger Nørrebrogade. Du er nået langt med at blive ægte bilingual: Engelsk og dansk. Jeg er nysgerrig efter at høre dig deltage i en dansk samtale, så jeg ska' lige surfe You Tube
Me getting a girlfriend was a megaproject that died.
So many anti car on yt makes me want to see European cities have American style highways because it would be funny
Luckily we're not that stupid anymore.
.
Europeans stop blindly following crappy American trends challenge (near impossible)
Looking at a road and saying “it serves no purpose”.
Do you even know what a car or truck does?
Trucks serve a purpose, cars are the most ridiculously inefficient way of moving people.
Traumatic video, Is Urban Hansen still alive ? What a bunch of clusterfuck ideas ! This guy is evil !
Bispengbuen is an abomination.
I don't like the mentality of this video. It equates large projects with "bad". And if every large project belongs in the "megaproject not good", then what is left is not touching the city centers and just urban sprawl without urban planning.
Don't get me wrong, many of this projects sound like shit, but what I'm not for is this conservative view of the video that tells that everything should be left like it is. But when populations change and grow, there has to be change, that might have to me a "mega" change, and instead of blanketly marking it as bad we should instead propose a GOOD megaproject.
PS: Just because you don't like a certain architectural style it doesn't mean that everyone should hate it (in this case Brutalist buildings).
There is more than enough evidence that megaprojects are detrimental to urban life. Professor Bent Flyvberg is your go-to resource if you want to learn more. There is no example in the urban context of mega-change being beneficial to urban life and development. So "good" megaprojects are unlikely to even exist. So we've learned that lesson. We also know now that with dwindling building resources (we're running out of sand for concrete, etc), the trend is tipping towards reusing existing buildings instead of tearing them down.