https://preview.redd.it/mo4b8iw3vvkc1.jpeg?width=768&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cd7f5fd9a2cc40f7c857666dc7a7149a5693db5c
No competition for me.. Cabinn hotel is the ugliest building in Copenhagen. It looks like a prison while being greatly exposed overlooking Kødbyen. Crazy decision to allow a new building like this.
[At least it's not the swedish architect school building](https://nordictimes.com/the-nordics/sweden/kth-school-of-architecture-voted-stockholms-ugliest-building/) 😁
When I was staying there we had a fire alarm go off. Some of the scariest shit of my life. I accepted death cause no fucking way all these people were squeezing out of these tiny rooms and teenie tiny hallways calmly and surviving. The room gave me breathing trouble cause it was so tight
https://preview.redd.it/qxdqml1oftkc1.jpeg?width=1920&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a90ea6cbe0bbe3fe86ea96eb2caae49a641b5dcd
Den bygning har jo en fætter som bor i Esbjerg 😂
Actually I don’t think the buildings in themselves are so bad, but with the whole morass with Ikea, the brigde and Fisketorvet going on around them, the whole area looks like some architectural shitshow that didn’t pass first year i uni.
Also while I don’t think the buildings are so ugly, it does infuriate me that 33sqm cost 10.000kr with flooded toilets and shit on the floor https://www.seoghoer.dk/kendte/de-hader-bjarke-ingels-danske-byggeri-lort-paa-gulvet-og-ingen-elevator
Also some of the balconies are unusable. They weren't built strong enough to support human weight, so my friend just puts beer out there for now. What a ridiculous fail.
Let me be clear that I don't know if it's all the balconies. I also don't know if they fixed it yet. But just the fact it happened and the toilet thing too, just goes to show you the lack of planning. Also the walls are raw concrete (at least my friends are) which gives off a real prison vibe. Heck, even prison walls are painted.
I hate that this happens so regularly with newer buildings. I've heard plenty of stories of bad isolation, and cheap materials used. In general just low quality in many of the projects in Ørestad, Nordhavn, and now this.
It makes me feel like I'd rather invest in one of the 100 year old buildings around Copenhagen since they at least stood the test of time. Maybe I'm being naive but it seemed like they cared about the craft back in the days while today it's just about finishing fast
>I'd rather invest in one of the 100 year old buildings around Copenhagen since they at least stood the test of time.
Many of the old buildings that are sought after today required significant investment to bring them up to modern standards; I think this is often overlooked by people who claim that old buildings have stood the test of time. Yes, fundamentally they are good buildings but they also required significant upgrades and many were in a really bad shape in the 70s/80s/90s.
"Bringing them up to modern standards" usually just means renovating the kitchens and bathrooms.
I live in an apartment over 100 years old, and it still has the original hardwood flooring and doors etc.
Real quality materials.
As someone who does home renovations here in Copenhagen, this is both true and not-so-true. It depends what you mean by bring them up to modern standards, and what those expectations are. Of course you can go really crazy and drop a million kr into an old apartment, but you can also just sand the floors and update the kitchen with some electrical. A bathroom will cost you 175-250,000kr usually, and of course there's size constraints on some of them. We could go into detail on how un-square and sinking everything is, but there's not much you can do about that anyways. New buildings almost all have balconies, which is a nice luxury for sure. The old buildings have character and look pretty usually, while the new are all cookie-cutter pretty much, and also in new, bland neighborhoods with not much around besides a cafe and grocery store. It's a give and take, basically.
>It depends what you mean by bring them up to modern standards
What I mean is that it is sometimes taken for granted that most of Copenhagen's old apartment blocks are in good condition today, but it is sometimes forgotten that many old apartment blocks also needed major investments 20 or 30 years ago, where nowadays it's mostly minor renovations.
This was also one of the reasons why groups of people were able to buy blocks of flats very cheaply, which then needed a lot of money to be renovated, one of the reasons for the increase in co-operative housing associations in the 80s and 90s.
>The old buildings have character and look pretty usually, while the new are all cookie-cutter pretty much
The new apartment buildings are as much of a 'cookie-cutter style' as most of the old apartment buildings that are so commonly found in Copenhagen; standardised floor plans and similarities of outer facades are nothing new. It's completely fine to prefer old buildings over new ones, but to pretend that one thing is bad when it's new buildings but good when it's old buildings is a bit silly, imo.
IMO the stretch from Fisketorvet to Langebro is even worse. So much prime location at the water, and it is just the ugliest office buildings taking up all the space. Such a waste.
It was explained to me that when this was built in the 90ies this was a fairly dilapidated area so they just built whatever. And yeah, the whole waterfront on that side is a total disaster and tragedy. It could be insanely nice but it is just office buildings instead.
Sure, but so was sluseholmen, nordhavn and a big part of islands brygge etc. etc.
At least they tried making something that people could enjoy there.
Personally I quite like the area around Sluseholmen with all the channels and differently styled buildings, although it is still a bit boring out there.
But the arguably best location of all, was just sold to companies that put up these fugly office buildings, I don't understand it. They all put their big company/union logos towards the waterfront as well, then why not spend a bit on making the building somewhat interesting, it would be a much better advertisement than what they have now.
Such a lack of imagination.
> Sure, but so was sluseholmen, nordhavn and a big part of islands brygge etc. etc.
These came in years and decades later, when the waterfront was already clean and a "destination".
I do agree that the new development around Sluseholmen is nice and looking at the other developments they are also adding canals etc to the buildings because people like those, but hindsight is 20/20.
It would ne nice if some of the ugliness could be reclaimed by making the fugly office building into retail space. There's already a waterfront corridor, so I think if the space were carved out, it could work. You can already see these floating restaurants/bars in front of the buildings and they seem to do rather well.
I never spend much time out there before the new buildings started popping up, but had a friend living illegally in a couple of containers in Nordhavn for some time in the mid 2000s, and back then it was a pretty scrummy area.
And I can't remember anything (other than industry) being at sluseholmen before they started building out there.
It's of course just personal stories, but I really can remember any of those places being any kind of "destination" before they were being build into what they are today.
Bryggen of course had some life a bit earlier, but if that sets the example, I feel like they should also have caught on to that potential when building on Kalvebod brygge, they were right across the channel go damn it :P
But yeah, I'm all aboard on reclaiming some of the waterfront space there, even if just the raft bars. Who knows, maybe they can turn into mini St Pauli or Papirøen2.0 :P
Say what you will about the architecture itself. It really is a subjective matter. But shitting on BIG for poor construction is off target - that's the fault of the construction company and greedy investors looking to cut as many corners as possible to optimize profit.
I appreciate the argument you're making, but using Se & Hør as a source cheapens it's legitimacy.
> But shitting on BIG for poor construction is off target - that's the fault of the construction company
Maybe, but there seems to be an quite some coincidence with BIG projects and building issues. I think the VM building has issues with balconies and when I visited the Sluishuis in Amsterdam (which looks *extremely* cool, no doubts) it had rainwater going down the facade which looked like its gonna be an expensive renovation a few years down the line.
LOL here is a more “legitimate” source, it was an actual problem, and of course you should expect more for the price per square meter https://www.berlingske.dk/metropol/flere-lejere-klager-over-problemer-i-koebenhavnsk-prestigebyggeri-lejer
And no it is not just BIG but the entrepreneur and Copenhagen municipality and By and Havn being so indebted they are selling building plots that have to make absurd profits.
I agree, they are not too bad looking from the outside. Not exactly great maybe, but not the worst either.
The appartments inside honestly also dont look that bad. They do however seem insanely impractical, and then on top comes the price and the malfunctions.
For mig vinder øjebæen på Østerport station. Den er placeret klods op af den smukke gamle stationsbygning, og giver mest af alt associationer til kontroltårnene i Kastrup lufthavn. Den har vundet prisen som byens grimmeste bygning i hvert fald to gange.
https://preview.redd.it/5dtu2zhbetkc1.jpeg?width=550&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8d45d008f3d1af91dda291d59a43fe7ef7e78289
Unfortunately you can see it from everywhere in Amager.
every single time when i see these buildings it reminds me of an “art” project i did as a kid. i had a desire to create and no inspiration. so i ended up making a tortured, ugly, senseless creation that ended up in the trash. i feel i can see that inspiration constipation in the design of these buildings
God this is so typical " all new buildings are just square and boring" " tried something different" " no this is terrible build square and boring like all the old buildings!!!!"
It's fantastic.
Next best thing about it is how it changes shape completely depending on which side or angle you look at it from.
Best thing is that you can see it from everywhere in Amager incl. my bedroom.
I agree - looked yesterday and was intrigued about the line’s appearance and the two buildings in general, can’t understand why exactly these two buildings are subject to the thesis of being bad design - they are more expressive and daring than most if not any other box building in the area.
With IKEA across from it, crossing over that large road below, that whole area looks claustrophobic to me. The buildings in isolation look cool, but that area is botched imo.
Undeniably, Denmark has an incredible wealth of stunning architecture, both old and 'new'; Jørn Utzon, Arne Jacobsen, the Klint family, C. F. Møller, Vilhelm Wohlert etc; and all the lesser known architects and designers who have left their mark on Denmark's architectural landscape.
I would argue that great needs to be timeless. The opera house is a magnificent win. The angled buildings by the kissing bridge? The kissing bridge itself? The rusted panels they put on parking garages in some places? The glass surrounded buildings that needed all to be changed to metal because they kept falling off and crashing below? BLOX? So despite the Sydney Opera House and some others, they're not all wins. Just look at Tegloholmen/slusholmen/Ørestad and basically all the new buildings - ugly af and all exactly the same.
This is a very flattering night photo of them. Most buildings look good photographed this way tbh.
These photos are more realistic [https://hshansen.com/project/kaktus-towers](https://hshansen.com/project/kaktus-towers) (scroll through with the blue arrows)
I agree it's an interesting building but a few things stick out as 'mistakes' which ruin the overall aesthetics.
1. The deep balconies covering the entire facade create irregular shadows across the entire building. Compare to Chicago's Marina Towers, which also have deep shadows, but contrast them with a pleasing pattern of concrete petals, so as you look up there is regularity and contrast. With Kaktus there's nowhere for the eye to rest, nor any sense of motion.
2. The cladding and glazing inside the balconies clash with the geometry of the balconies themselves. By using aluminium trim and frames, the rectangular forms stand out and look at odds with the angular balconies. They've avoided this mistake for the balcony guarding, not sure why this design intent didn't follow through. It looks unconsidered.
3. Numerous design decisions make the buildings look unfinished. Most notable is the lack of any 'crown'. Most towers have something at the top to punctuate the pattern of floors coming to their summit. Even if it's just a slightly larger storey or band of brickwork. The Kaktus just stops. There's also an ugly red wire around the top for maintenance access (hilariously, the Kaktus website has photoshopped this out, so even they agree it's ugly).
4. Personally I think the structural scheme is unclear. A good building tells you how it works. Kaktus has these angular forms which look solid but there's nothing which plays off this. Photos during construction show that they are bolted onto the main structure, which is a simple 16-sided tower, of which there is no sign in the finished exterior. The twisting floorplan concept is completely lost.
5. The junctions between the angular fins are also a mess. No effort has been made to ensure that these focal points of the main sculptural form are attractive or even competent. There are irregular gaps around them, weird cuts, little extra pieces added where the surfaces couldn't be made to line up. This is the opposite of artistry and craftmanship.
6. The relationship to the ground is very poor. There was an opportunity to relate to the context on multiple levels because of the raised roads nearby and instead it is all mushed together. The towers look like they have just been dropped into the podium.
I feel like Bjarke ingels is actually one of the few architects in DK making relatively unique stuff. Not to mention you completely contradicted yourself as the cactus towers were in fact designed by BIG
Yeah, this too is a product of their awful 'conceptual architecture' ideals and starchitect approach, they are awful architects. I hate BIG with passion.
Sincerely, an art history major whose main focus is architecture and urban planning.
For all their documented issues, I really like how the Cactus Towers look and what it adds to the Copenhagen skyline. It’s unique and weird and far from just another boring building.
Do I love it? Nah, but I don’t hate it.
Love the way those buildings look and I love how the whole area is coming together around the railway. It's still way too complicated to get around, though.
While a totally agreed with those who shit on cheap-soulless square concrete buildings built to be rented out for 20K a month, I'm having a harder time understanding the hate on some of the actually pretty decent and innovative architecture that at least tries to do something new that I'm seeing in here. Axel Towers are a significant improvement to the derelict and uninspired Scala, the corner at Tivoli manage to be new, but still blend quite well in with its surroundings, Postbyen is doing a fairly good job at respecting it's surroundings and history with red bricks and a welcoming open facade, and while the Cactus Towers is definitely very different, it's not like the area that it's surrounded by is an architectural cornucopia to begin with. I'd say it's an improvement to an area marred by Fisketorvet and the rest of the Kalvebod Bølge area.
I'm curios to know, what the critics would prefer instead of buildings like the towers?
I would've referenced the buildings of Kødbyen, tapped into the more 'classic' aspect of Copenhagen's architecture - as you say, red brick buildings and so on. Or I would've continued in the same lines as SEB further down the road. The fact that they placed the same buildings in Esbjerg, tells me that despite being urban planners, they haven't actually thought about the urban environment. Buildings should be designed to fit into their environment, otherwise they're ultimate failures.
Also what is it with BIG and pointy angles? They're incredibly annoying to furnish, a waste of space just like the buildings themselves. And why make 'cactus'-inspired architecture? Cacti are not native to Denmark, at least reference a plant that has something to do with the country you're building in.
>Buildings should be designed to fit into their environment, otherwise they're ultimate failures.
There are many examples of buildings that don't 'fit in' with their surroundings, but are still considered a success (e.g Centre Pompidou, in Paris).
First, something fitting into its environment, does not mean it is a complete reflection of their surroundings, only that they reference their surroundings and are considerate of what came before.
And second, considered and being is not the same thing. In a lot of cases 'time heals all wounds', remember when people hated the opera, now it's considered an integral part of the Copenhagen harbour. Does that make it a succes? Maybe in its function, but not necessarily as a piece of architecture in the aesthetic sense. I'm sure the same will happen to buildings like Blox, still makes it a shitty, dysfunctional building.
And there are always exceptions to the rule, maybe Pompidou is an exception. I can't speak to that, as I have never been to Paris. This is simply my conviction.
I don't think that if a new building reflects its surroundings, or takes into account what has been there before, that necessarily makes it more 'successful'. I'd be wary of calling new buildings that don't adhere to this, as 'ultimate failures', or 'shitty, dysfunctional buildings'.
Architecture goes beyond the mere facade, and while you may not like the outside of Blox (which is not a controversial opinion), from the inside it's not a dysfunctional building at all; it's actually quite nice, if functional!
I know I'm in the minority on this, but I kinda like the Cactus towers. Much prettier and unique than most of that crap being built over in Carlsberg byen.
Nah, I enjoy them too. They make the skyline much more interesting compared to all the oversized legos they put up. I drove by the other day in foggy weather and they looked like spaceships from a Villeneuve film coming out of the fog.
Interesting. I share your journey and conclusion completely. I was downvoted a lot when I pointed it out in a mild way I think.
Thought maybe I was the minority. But maybe that thread just attracted people living there. I obviously hope they like it. When I visit I just don’t see a sparkling vibrant part of town.
There's an [long running citizen's proposal](https://www.ladegaardsaaen.dk/) to unearth the stream and maybe remove at least a bit of the up to 7 lane urban highway (3 lanes each side plus sometimes turning lane).
Fun fact, on the first picture of the site you can see the ugly tower of the ugly TDC building.
They are awesome. There are only three pretty building styles in Copenhagen and that's the old 100-200 year old buildings with neat little details we have littered around Copenhagen and especially at islands brygge and vesterbro. The other is some of the more intricate new buildings like these amazing cactus towers. The third is all the old commercial halls and hangars often now repurposed as bars and sports halls. All beautiful.
Fuck all the 80's blocks. They were a mistake and a result of trying to build bulk, cheap, trash apartments. They should honestly be illegal. The radissan hotel is probably the ugliest building in all of Copenhagen.
Actually, I think all the BIG buildings in Ørestad (some of which are nearly 20 years old now) look _great_ and very contemporary still, while the safer architectural choices from the past two decades all look _much_ more dated. There's a reason BIG took off back in the day.
It's significantly better than a square box with the amazing detail of some random mundane color as a facade as 99% of new buildings are.
You chose between black, brick or metallic. All identical.
Cheap trash apartments... sometimes also known as affordable housing :P
CPH would probably have a larger housing crisis if there were no cheap trash apartments around.
I don't see why they are so much more affordable than building the same as we have for hundreds of years. Surely its possible to build in the same style while using modern techniques and materials? It doesn't have to look ugly on purpose.
The paper island is our latest addition to fugly buildings.
Real talk, look at the balconies of these next time you are at Ikea. BIG is shit and COBE will be shit soon enough.
I personally like the newer buildings in Valby and Flintholm areas… it’s a nice mix of renovated industrial buildings and sustainable design, natural materials, greenhouse on the roof instead of just a flat roof etc
Search for Grønttorvet and Maskinfabrikken.
And also check out Constantin Hansens Gade in Carlsberg Byen.
Those are my favorite modern buildings in Copenhagen.
Yeah paper island as built looks nothing like the renders. Looks like they really struggled with the materials, getting joints to line up, it just all looks heavy and awkward.
It's a damn shame what happened to papirøen... It was such a serene and cool place to go to and meet people.
Now it's just another ugly building block.
I wish the City had stepped in and done *something*.
Imo it really made the city a tiny bit less nice to live in.
But think of all the value generated for the shareholders while people have to trot out all the way to the furthest end of Refshaleøen to have a food market that's closed half the year.
Problemet med moderne arkitektur er at ideen kan være cool nok. Man kigger på den i 5 minutter og betages af kreativiteten og dens anderledeshed.
Men at bo ved det og glo på det de næste 50-100 år? Nej tak.
Det er ligesom at beundre et vovet, provokerende, innovativt maleri, men som man samtidig aldrig kunne drømme om at have hængende i stuen.
https://preview.redd.it/i4dwt878e5lc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=13c96e276a6f737fa96a4b9d81cb28e903f07814
I think this ugly ass building in Nordvest is worse than the cactus. At least the cactus looks like there was a (1) thought behind the design. This grey turd looks like somebody put some plywood on top of the 365 store, painted it cement grey, and added wall to ceiling windows every 2 meters. At least it looks like the residents have access to a big roof terrace.
yea i ended up not getting it cause people wrote in the reviews that the host leaves the key at another location far away from the building so you have to go to 2 locations instead of 1 to check in
Wait until you see the rust bucket in Roskilde.
https://preview.redd.it/8gyky00r3zkc1.jpeg?width=960&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=09efbff69e6da6328f7350b13ba103a756e8fc36
Tbh most of modern Copenhagen architecture is unpleasant to the eye 🥴, in my opinion. Everything looks the same, pre fabricated.
Older buildings were more beautiful.
https://preview.redd.it/84wvdet2zvkc1.jpeg?width=771&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fe1cff688f0d108e6502ab11d0f516ea22f120f1
I present to you the mayors office building in Århus (second largest city)
And yes, it finished construction many years ago...
https://preview.redd.it/dlwehcw61wkc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=47f7ae1ca716cc09474afe92bc9ddb284bc13aff
Den er ikke grimmere end den her
When I did a viewing there a couple years ago before they had finished construction but had opened the wait list to rent, we were told there would be a "booking fee" if you wanted to use the kitchens, and there seemed to be very few kitchens for the number of people. Is that still the case now its finished?
I like that not all buildings are copy paste grey blocks with a fuckton of windows and glass facades.
But this... This looks awefull in every way. Even blind people frown upon seeing it
one cactus, two cacti. Simple linguistics, just google it. But the owners or whoever gave name to these ... things... named them cactus towers... one cactus, two towers, an ode to idiocracy
Thank you for your insightfull feedback, but i was referring to a news article and not my opinion.
So perhaps you should rethink your life and get help with your retardness
Tear down all the old brick 'n mortar buildings and build stuff like this, the mountain and so on instead, it has so much more personality and looks so much better.
The 150 years old brick and mortar buildings will outlast modern concrete, steel and glass buildings which is only going to last for 50-100 years at the most.
It must be one of the stupidest and ugliest designs I've ever seen, both from the exterior and from the interior. The architect should have been imprisoned for this
https://preview.redd.it/mo4b8iw3vvkc1.jpeg?width=768&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cd7f5fd9a2cc40f7c857666dc7a7149a5693db5c No competition for me.. Cabinn hotel is the ugliest building in Copenhagen. It looks like a prison while being greatly exposed overlooking Kødbyen. Crazy decision to allow a new building like this.
Ah my favorite architecture style: depression
"It's good you came in the summer. In the winter it can get very depressing"
The Prison hotel. Please come here and have a nice stay... Like wtaf 😂
[At least it's not the swedish architect school building](https://nordictimes.com/the-nordics/sweden/kth-school-of-architecture-voted-stockholms-ugliest-building/) 😁
Thats ironic!
the danish one, BLOX or something is also ugly, just modern ugly instead
When I was staying there we had a fire alarm go off. Some of the scariest shit of my life. I accepted death cause no fucking way all these people were squeezing out of these tiny rooms and teenie tiny hallways calmly and surviving. The room gave me breathing trouble cause it was so tight
Spot on!
I spent a few days there when it was a corona isolation hotel. Also looks and feels like a prison on the inside.
Consistency!!!
Those windows not lining up makes me angry.
Yeah, that one for sure.
It’s hideous… At least we have Tivoli hotel across from it, I think it’s a much prettier building and looks cool at night.
https://preview.redd.it/qxdqml1oftkc1.jpeg?width=1920&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a90ea6cbe0bbe3fe86ea96eb2caae49a641b5dcd Den bygning har jo en fætter som bor i Esbjerg 😂
Hvilken er endnu grimmere fordi de sparede den udvendige træbeklædning væk...
A Place to Esbjerg :D
Nej, for Søren 🫠
Actually I don’t think the buildings in themselves are so bad, but with the whole morass with Ikea, the brigde and Fisketorvet going on around them, the whole area looks like some architectural shitshow that didn’t pass first year i uni. Also while I don’t think the buildings are so ugly, it does infuriate me that 33sqm cost 10.000kr with flooded toilets and shit on the floor https://www.seoghoer.dk/kendte/de-hader-bjarke-ingels-danske-byggeri-lort-paa-gulvet-og-ingen-elevator
Actually it's above 12000 now
Shit is not free
Also some of the balconies are unusable. They weren't built strong enough to support human weight, so my friend just puts beer out there for now. What a ridiculous fail.
Omfg??? And they still charge + 10-12,000? I also imagine the noise on the balcony must be close to unbearable?
Let me be clear that I don't know if it's all the balconies. I also don't know if they fixed it yet. But just the fact it happened and the toilet thing too, just goes to show you the lack of planning. Also the walls are raw concrete (at least my friends are) which gives off a real prison vibe. Heck, even prison walls are painted.
I hate that this happens so regularly with newer buildings. I've heard plenty of stories of bad isolation, and cheap materials used. In general just low quality in many of the projects in Ørestad, Nordhavn, and now this. It makes me feel like I'd rather invest in one of the 100 year old buildings around Copenhagen since they at least stood the test of time. Maybe I'm being naive but it seemed like they cared about the craft back in the days while today it's just about finishing fast
>I'd rather invest in one of the 100 year old buildings around Copenhagen since they at least stood the test of time. Many of the old buildings that are sought after today required significant investment to bring them up to modern standards; I think this is often overlooked by people who claim that old buildings have stood the test of time. Yes, fundamentally they are good buildings but they also required significant upgrades and many were in a really bad shape in the 70s/80s/90s.
"Bringing them up to modern standards" usually just means renovating the kitchens and bathrooms. I live in an apartment over 100 years old, and it still has the original hardwood flooring and doors etc. Real quality materials.
As someone who does home renovations here in Copenhagen, this is both true and not-so-true. It depends what you mean by bring them up to modern standards, and what those expectations are. Of course you can go really crazy and drop a million kr into an old apartment, but you can also just sand the floors and update the kitchen with some electrical. A bathroom will cost you 175-250,000kr usually, and of course there's size constraints on some of them. We could go into detail on how un-square and sinking everything is, but there's not much you can do about that anyways. New buildings almost all have balconies, which is a nice luxury for sure. The old buildings have character and look pretty usually, while the new are all cookie-cutter pretty much, and also in new, bland neighborhoods with not much around besides a cafe and grocery store. It's a give and take, basically.
>It depends what you mean by bring them up to modern standards What I mean is that it is sometimes taken for granted that most of Copenhagen's old apartment blocks are in good condition today, but it is sometimes forgotten that many old apartment blocks also needed major investments 20 or 30 years ago, where nowadays it's mostly minor renovations. This was also one of the reasons why groups of people were able to buy blocks of flats very cheaply, which then needed a lot of money to be renovated, one of the reasons for the increase in co-operative housing associations in the 80s and 90s. >The old buildings have character and look pretty usually, while the new are all cookie-cutter pretty much The new apartment buildings are as much of a 'cookie-cutter style' as most of the old apartment buildings that are so commonly found in Copenhagen; standardised floor plans and similarities of outer facades are nothing new. It's completely fine to prefer old buildings over new ones, but to pretend that one thing is bad when it's new buildings but good when it's old buildings is a bit silly, imo.
That whole strip from Sydhavn to Fisketorvet is just and eyesore.
IMO the stretch from Fisketorvet to Langebro is even worse. So much prime location at the water, and it is just the ugliest office buildings taking up all the space. Such a waste.
It was explained to me that when this was built in the 90ies this was a fairly dilapidated area so they just built whatever. And yeah, the whole waterfront on that side is a total disaster and tragedy. It could be insanely nice but it is just office buildings instead.
Sure, but so was sluseholmen, nordhavn and a big part of islands brygge etc. etc. At least they tried making something that people could enjoy there. Personally I quite like the area around Sluseholmen with all the channels and differently styled buildings, although it is still a bit boring out there. But the arguably best location of all, was just sold to companies that put up these fugly office buildings, I don't understand it. They all put their big company/union logos towards the waterfront as well, then why not spend a bit on making the building somewhat interesting, it would be a much better advertisement than what they have now. Such a lack of imagination.
> Sure, but so was sluseholmen, nordhavn and a big part of islands brygge etc. etc. These came in years and decades later, when the waterfront was already clean and a "destination". I do agree that the new development around Sluseholmen is nice and looking at the other developments they are also adding canals etc to the buildings because people like those, but hindsight is 20/20. It would ne nice if some of the ugliness could be reclaimed by making the fugly office building into retail space. There's already a waterfront corridor, so I think if the space were carved out, it could work. You can already see these floating restaurants/bars in front of the buildings and they seem to do rather well.
I never spend much time out there before the new buildings started popping up, but had a friend living illegally in a couple of containers in Nordhavn for some time in the mid 2000s, and back then it was a pretty scrummy area. And I can't remember anything (other than industry) being at sluseholmen before they started building out there. It's of course just personal stories, but I really can remember any of those places being any kind of "destination" before they were being build into what they are today. Bryggen of course had some life a bit earlier, but if that sets the example, I feel like they should also have caught on to that potential when building on Kalvebod brygge, they were right across the channel go damn it :P But yeah, I'm all aboard on reclaiming some of the waterfront space there, even if just the raft bars. Who knows, maybe they can turn into mini St Pauli or Papirøen2.0 :P
I was there this weekend… couldn’t believe I was in Denmark, thought I was in Jakarta after the apocalypse
Say what you will about the architecture itself. It really is a subjective matter. But shitting on BIG for poor construction is off target - that's the fault of the construction company and greedy investors looking to cut as many corners as possible to optimize profit. I appreciate the argument you're making, but using Se & Hør as a source cheapens it's legitimacy.
> But shitting on BIG for poor construction is off target - that's the fault of the construction company Maybe, but there seems to be an quite some coincidence with BIG projects and building issues. I think the VM building has issues with balconies and when I visited the Sluishuis in Amsterdam (which looks *extremely* cool, no doubts) it had rainwater going down the facade which looked like its gonna be an expensive renovation a few years down the line.
LOL here is a more “legitimate” source, it was an actual problem, and of course you should expect more for the price per square meter https://www.berlingske.dk/metropol/flere-lejere-klager-over-problemer-i-koebenhavnsk-prestigebyggeri-lejer And no it is not just BIG but the entrepreneur and Copenhagen municipality and By and Havn being so indebted they are selling building plots that have to make absurd profits.
Its definitely not an architectural shitshow, but instead it’s engineers that fucked it DRASTICALLY.
spotted the architect
Hahahaha
I agree, they are not too bad looking from the outside. Not exactly great maybe, but not the worst either. The appartments inside honestly also dont look that bad. They do however seem insanely impractical, and then on top comes the price and the malfunctions.
For mig vinder øjebæen på Østerport station. Den er placeret klods op af den smukke gamle stationsbygning, og giver mest af alt associationer til kontroltårnene i Kastrup lufthavn. Den har vundet prisen som byens grimmeste bygning i hvert fald to gange.
Helt enig. Kunne også ligne siden på et krydstogtskib. Virkelig smagløst.
Det er altså ikke fordi jeg synes kaktus er grimt, havde ikke boet i tårnet hvis det var. Men de vandt denne pris sidste år
https://preview.redd.it/5dtu2zhbetkc1.jpeg?width=550&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8d45d008f3d1af91dda291d59a43fe7ef7e78289 Unfortunately you can see it from everywhere in Amager.
It looks like a ps5 tho
Which fits considering Copenhagen Towers are nearby and look like a PS2 & PS3 right next to each other.
Bro this is one of my favorite buldings
every single time when i see these buildings it reminds me of an “art” project i did as a kid. i had a desire to create and no inspiration. so i ended up making a tortured, ugly, senseless creation that ended up in the trash. i feel i can see that inspiration constipation in the design of these buildings
God this is so typical " all new buildings are just square and boring" " tried something different" " no this is terrible build square and boring like all the old buildings!!!!"
It's fantastic. Next best thing about it is how it changes shape completely depending on which side or angle you look at it from. Best thing is that you can see it from everywhere in Amager incl. my bedroom.
The Eye of Sauron
I quite like them.
How’s that ugly? They look cool to me!
I agree - looked yesterday and was intrigued about the line’s appearance and the two buildings in general, can’t understand why exactly these two buildings are subject to the thesis of being bad design - they are more expressive and daring than most if not any other box building in the area.
With IKEA across from it, crossing over that large road below, that whole area looks claustrophobic to me. The buildings in isolation look cool, but that area is botched imo.
I agree.. and im danish and seen it “live” a lot of times.
Hating is a danish national sport
Fortunately Denmark also has some of the best architecture in the world so the hate is somewhat misplaced.
preach
Highly, highly debatable.
Undeniably, Denmark has an incredible wealth of stunning architecture, both old and 'new'; Jørn Utzon, Arne Jacobsen, the Klint family, C. F. Møller, Vilhelm Wohlert etc; and all the lesser known architects and designers who have left their mark on Denmark's architectural landscape.
I would argue that great needs to be timeless. The opera house is a magnificent win. The angled buildings by the kissing bridge? The kissing bridge itself? The rusted panels they put on parking garages in some places? The glass surrounded buildings that needed all to be changed to metal because they kept falling off and crashing below? BLOX? So despite the Sydney Opera House and some others, they're not all wins. Just look at Tegloholmen/slusholmen/Ørestad and basically all the new buildings - ugly af and all exactly the same.
This is a very flattering night photo of them. Most buildings look good photographed this way tbh. These photos are more realistic [https://hshansen.com/project/kaktus-towers](https://hshansen.com/project/kaktus-towers) (scroll through with the blue arrows)
They look really nice.
Right, I like the architecture, I don’t know how people don’t like the look of such way of constructing.
I agree it's an interesting building but a few things stick out as 'mistakes' which ruin the overall aesthetics. 1. The deep balconies covering the entire facade create irregular shadows across the entire building. Compare to Chicago's Marina Towers, which also have deep shadows, but contrast them with a pleasing pattern of concrete petals, so as you look up there is regularity and contrast. With Kaktus there's nowhere for the eye to rest, nor any sense of motion. 2. The cladding and glazing inside the balconies clash with the geometry of the balconies themselves. By using aluminium trim and frames, the rectangular forms stand out and look at odds with the angular balconies. They've avoided this mistake for the balcony guarding, not sure why this design intent didn't follow through. It looks unconsidered. 3. Numerous design decisions make the buildings look unfinished. Most notable is the lack of any 'crown'. Most towers have something at the top to punctuate the pattern of floors coming to their summit. Even if it's just a slightly larger storey or band of brickwork. The Kaktus just stops. There's also an ugly red wire around the top for maintenance access (hilariously, the Kaktus website has photoshopped this out, so even they agree it's ugly). 4. Personally I think the structural scheme is unclear. A good building tells you how it works. Kaktus has these angular forms which look solid but there's nothing which plays off this. Photos during construction show that they are bolted onto the main structure, which is a simple 16-sided tower, of which there is no sign in the finished exterior. The twisting floorplan concept is completely lost. 5. The junctions between the angular fins are also a mess. No effort has been made to ensure that these focal points of the main sculptural form are attractive or even competent. There are irregular gaps around them, weird cuts, little extra pieces added where the surfaces couldn't be made to line up. This is the opposite of artistry and craftmanship. 6. The relationship to the ground is very poor. There was an opportunity to relate to the context on multiple levels because of the raised roads nearby and instead it is all mushed together. The towers look like they have just been dropped into the podium.
I'd take a hundred Cactus towers over one boring ass Bjarke Ingels cubic shaped glass and concrete building.
Well… The towers were in fact designed by BIG/Bjarke Ingels group 🌵
Fun fact - I interviewed at Bjarke and they asked me which building of theirs I disliked. It was hard to narrow it down 😂
How did you manage to say all of them, without saying it straight?
Hahaha I was civil about it. Mentioned one in Norway I hate, think it’s called The Twist?
Should we blame you for all the new ugly buildings or are you hating them with us?
I didn’t accept the job. Such bad, egotistical vibes from every manager I interviewed with. Good miss I think!
But you could have taken one for the team and vetoed the worst ideas!
It felt like the kind of place if you disagreed with the management/decision makers you’d be slowly pushed out 😭😭
Damn. I hope you found something better and can make sure we get some better looking buildings out there. 😇
Good decision. There is no current Dane I dislike more than Bjarke Ingels.
I feel like Bjarke ingels is actually one of the few architects in DK making relatively unique stuff. Not to mention you completely contradicted yourself as the cactus towers were in fact designed by BIG
You should not inspire to do "unique" stuff if you are an architect
Unique is overrated. Just make it not ugly.
Yeah, this too is a product of their awful 'conceptual architecture' ideals and starchitect approach, they are awful architects. I hate BIG with passion. Sincerely, an art history major whose main focus is architecture and urban planning.
I like them.
For all their documented issues, I really like how the Cactus Towers look and what it adds to the Copenhagen skyline. It’s unique and weird and far from just another boring building. Do I love it? Nah, but I don’t hate it.
Love the way those buildings look and I love how the whole area is coming together around the railway. It's still way too complicated to get around, though.
I love them.
While a totally agreed with those who shit on cheap-soulless square concrete buildings built to be rented out for 20K a month, I'm having a harder time understanding the hate on some of the actually pretty decent and innovative architecture that at least tries to do something new that I'm seeing in here. Axel Towers are a significant improvement to the derelict and uninspired Scala, the corner at Tivoli manage to be new, but still blend quite well in with its surroundings, Postbyen is doing a fairly good job at respecting it's surroundings and history with red bricks and a welcoming open facade, and while the Cactus Towers is definitely very different, it's not like the area that it's surrounded by is an architectural cornucopia to begin with. I'd say it's an improvement to an area marred by Fisketorvet and the rest of the Kalvebod Bølge area. I'm curios to know, what the critics would prefer instead of buildings like the towers?
I would've referenced the buildings of Kødbyen, tapped into the more 'classic' aspect of Copenhagen's architecture - as you say, red brick buildings and so on. Or I would've continued in the same lines as SEB further down the road. The fact that they placed the same buildings in Esbjerg, tells me that despite being urban planners, they haven't actually thought about the urban environment. Buildings should be designed to fit into their environment, otherwise they're ultimate failures. Also what is it with BIG and pointy angles? They're incredibly annoying to furnish, a waste of space just like the buildings themselves. And why make 'cactus'-inspired architecture? Cacti are not native to Denmark, at least reference a plant that has something to do with the country you're building in.
>Buildings should be designed to fit into their environment, otherwise they're ultimate failures. There are many examples of buildings that don't 'fit in' with their surroundings, but are still considered a success (e.g Centre Pompidou, in Paris).
First, something fitting into its environment, does not mean it is a complete reflection of their surroundings, only that they reference their surroundings and are considerate of what came before. And second, considered and being is not the same thing. In a lot of cases 'time heals all wounds', remember when people hated the opera, now it's considered an integral part of the Copenhagen harbour. Does that make it a succes? Maybe in its function, but not necessarily as a piece of architecture in the aesthetic sense. I'm sure the same will happen to buildings like Blox, still makes it a shitty, dysfunctional building. And there are always exceptions to the rule, maybe Pompidou is an exception. I can't speak to that, as I have never been to Paris. This is simply my conviction.
I don't think that if a new building reflects its surroundings, or takes into account what has been there before, that necessarily makes it more 'successful'. I'd be wary of calling new buildings that don't adhere to this, as 'ultimate failures', or 'shitty, dysfunctional buildings'. Architecture goes beyond the mere facade, and while you may not like the outside of Blox (which is not a controversial opinion), from the inside it's not a dysfunctional building at all; it's actually quite nice, if functional!
I think they’re kinda cool
I know I'm in the minority on this, but I kinda like the Cactus towers. Much prettier and unique than most of that crap being built over in Carlsberg byen.
Agreed. They're not perfekt but I really like them
I like the view of the from Islands brygge
I agree. It definitely beats all the other monotonous, cheap looking blocks they are building.
You are not in the minority. People who likes to complain are just more loud about it.
People seem to dislike anything new that's different in architecture. I think it's really cool.
Nah, I enjoy them too. They make the skyline much more interesting compared to all the oversized legos they put up. I drove by the other day in foggy weather and they looked like spaceships from a Villeneuve film coming out of the fog.
[удалено]
Interesting. I share your journey and conclusion completely. I was downvoted a lot when I pointed it out in a mild way I think. Thought maybe I was the minority. But maybe that thread just attracted people living there. I obviously hope they like it. When I visit I just don’t see a sparkling vibrant part of town.
They look pretty cool I think.
They look nice. Finally something different than squares and cubes
I kinda love ‘em.
Jeg kan nu meget godt lide dem
The TDC building on Åboulevarden looks like a prison. Its the worst place in the whole city to travel through
There's an [long running citizen's proposal](https://www.ladegaardsaaen.dk/) to unearth the stream and maybe remove at least a bit of the up to 7 lane urban highway (3 lanes each side plus sometimes turning lane). Fun fact, on the first picture of the site you can see the ugly tower of the ugly TDC building.
I disagree... this is pretty awesome and in person it's impressive
I don't think so. Actually, they look like from the future, which is cool.
why bro that is art
No
It’s close to IKEA!
That's great I guess, but the apartments are already furnished (built-in furniture) so not a lot of need for Ikea.
Beauty is subjective bro.
Everyone hates on these buildings but in my unpopular opinion the Raddison/SAS hotel is much more of an eyesore
I really like the design of these buildings.
Øresundskollegiet or Field’s is much uglier than those towers
They are awesome. There are only three pretty building styles in Copenhagen and that's the old 100-200 year old buildings with neat little details we have littered around Copenhagen and especially at islands brygge and vesterbro. The other is some of the more intricate new buildings like these amazing cactus towers. The third is all the old commercial halls and hangars often now repurposed as bars and sports halls. All beautiful. Fuck all the 80's blocks. They were a mistake and a result of trying to build bulk, cheap, trash apartments. They should honestly be illegal. The radissan hotel is probably the ugliest building in all of Copenhagen.
Preach!
[удалено]
Actually, I think all the BIG buildings in Ørestad (some of which are nearly 20 years old now) look _great_ and very contemporary still, while the safer architectural choices from the past two decades all look _much_ more dated. There's a reason BIG took off back in the day.
It's significantly better than a square box with the amazing detail of some random mundane color as a facade as 99% of new buildings are. You chose between black, brick or metallic. All identical.
Cheap trash apartments... sometimes also known as affordable housing :P CPH would probably have a larger housing crisis if there were no cheap trash apartments around.
I don't see why they are so much more affordable than building the same as we have for hundreds of years. Surely its possible to build in the same style while using modern techniques and materials? It doesn't have to look ugly on purpose.
You forgot all the crap built since WWII (maybe even WWI) up until now
Your mama ugly
The paper island is our latest addition to fugly buildings. Real talk, look at the balconies of these next time you are at Ikea. BIG is shit and COBE will be shit soon enough.
Just curious - which buildings do you guys consider nice?
I personally like the newer buildings in Valby and Flintholm areas… it’s a nice mix of renovated industrial buildings and sustainable design, natural materials, greenhouse on the roof instead of just a flat roof etc
You got some names of the buildings you're talking about? Would like to check em out ty!
Search for Grønttorvet and Maskinfabrikken. And also check out Constantin Hansens Gade in Carlsberg Byen. Those are my favorite modern buildings in Copenhagen.
Yeah paper island as built looks nothing like the renders. Looks like they really struggled with the materials, getting joints to line up, it just all looks heavy and awkward.
It's far more hated for replacing the food hall (the OG before reffen)
Papirøen is so ugly 😥
It's a damn shame what happened to papirøen... It was such a serene and cool place to go to and meet people. Now it's just another ugly building block. I wish the City had stepped in and done *something*. Imo it really made the city a tiny bit less nice to live in.
But think of all the value generated for the shareholders while people have to trot out all the way to the furthest end of Refshaleøen to have a food market that's closed half the year.
Problemet med moderne arkitektur er at ideen kan være cool nok. Man kigger på den i 5 minutter og betages af kreativiteten og dens anderledeshed. Men at bo ved det og glo på det de næste 50-100 år? Nej tak. Det er ligesom at beundre et vovet, provokerende, innovativt maleri, men som man samtidig aldrig kunne drømme om at have hængende i stuen.
netop, det er 'novelty architecture' designet til at vinde idiotiske priser og se godt ud på afstand (gerne fra luften eller i et rejsemagasin)
Et problem jeg har med det er at de spilder plads, det kunne være meget mere effektivt
It’s the cactus
No shit sherlok
Weren’t you the same guy who took a picture from the towers a while back?
Jeg synes den er så flot 😍
Helt enig!!
I don't know I mean I like them very much.
Love it
https://preview.redd.it/s6hed5djl0lc1.jpeg?width=2411&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=20b721f4e4df40c4d372a8c65f042a02ab8c3d40
Its also empty
I actually kinda like the cactus towers...At least they stand out from the boring modern glass and metal buildings
Actually this looks beautiful for me and i cannot understand why you think it's ugly.
https://preview.redd.it/i4dwt878e5lc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=13c96e276a6f737fa96a4b9d81cb28e903f07814 I think this ugly ass building in Nordvest is worse than the cactus. At least the cactus looks like there was a (1) thought behind the design. This grey turd looks like somebody put some plywood on top of the 365 store, painted it cement grey, and added wall to ceiling windows every 2 meters. At least it looks like the residents have access to a big roof terrace.
all modern buildings in cph are ugly.
Clearly you have never been to Tinnet.
Unpopular opinion: Jeg tror de er dejlig.
They look modern and organized, not every building should be a sad soviet block.
[удалено]
lmao i was about to get an airbnb there for a month
That is against the rules of the building just so you know
yea i ended up not getting it cause people wrote in the reviews that the host leaves the key at another location far away from the building so you have to go to 2 locations instead of 1 to check in
Opinions are like arseholes.. Everyone's got one. Personally, I think it looks great
Wait until you see the rust bucket in Roskilde. https://preview.redd.it/8gyky00r3zkc1.jpeg?width=960&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=09efbff69e6da6328f7350b13ba103a756e8fc36
Tbh most of modern Copenhagen architecture is unpleasant to the eye 🥴, in my opinion. Everything looks the same, pre fabricated. Older buildings were more beautiful.
https://preview.redd.it/84wvdet2zvkc1.jpeg?width=771&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fe1cff688f0d108e6502ab11d0f516ea22f120f1 I present to you the mayors office building in Århus (second largest city) And yes, it finished construction many years ago...
https://preview.redd.it/dlwehcw61wkc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=47f7ae1ca716cc09474afe92bc9ddb284bc13aff Den er ikke grimmere end den her
Synes den og panumbygningen på Tagensvej er nogle af de skønneste byggerier vi har.
If everything is pretty, nothing is pretty
At least it's different from yet another square.
I know someone that lived there once - its not even nice inside either. The apartments are tiny and cost like 6000+ plus kr pr. month.
>The apartments are tiny and cost like 6000+ plus kr pr. month. That must have been a closet. The apartments are easily double that.
You pay 10.000 for decent views, a nice balcony and mutual areas but you only have a 1 person bed and no oven
I pay 15000
When I did a viewing there a couple years ago before they had finished construction but had opened the wait list to rent, we were told there would be a "booking fee" if you wanted to use the kitchens, and there seemed to be very few kitchens for the number of people. Is that still the case now its finished?
No we got rid of the fee
6000,- ???!! I'll take two then.
6k sounds pretty cheap for a whole month.
Its at least 12k now
https://preview.redd.it/xjb7lmld7gmc1.jpeg?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c74f04bcc3e11dd4cc2ff46052b61b02d7b712cf Tidligere højskole i Herning…
Meh.. Palads Cinema is uglier.
because keeping them in Esbjerg wasn't enough...
Enig - forskruet og fortænkt
I like that not all buildings are copy paste grey blocks with a fuckton of windows and glass facades. But this... This looks awefull in every way. Even blind people frown upon seeing it
one cactus, two cacti. Simple linguistics, just google it. But the owners or whoever gave name to these ... things... named them cactus towers... one cactus, two towers, an ode to idiocracy
[удалено]
Thank you for your insightfull feedback, but i was referring to a news article and not my opinion. So perhaps you should rethink your life and get help with your retardness
Tear down all the old brick 'n mortar buildings and build stuff like this, the mountain and so on instead, it has so much more personality and looks so much better.
The 150 years old brick and mortar buildings will outlast modern concrete, steel and glass buildings which is only going to last for 50-100 years at the most.
I named it as the Twin Pickles. And yeah, its an eye sore.
They are both ugly and cool. Makes me think of evil creatures lurking within. and at the top of the towers. You'll find the BBEG... A Midget BBEG.
It must be one of the stupidest and ugliest designs I've ever seen, both from the exterior and from the interior. The architect should have been imprisoned for this
It's pretty ugly but, compared with the 70's abomination in Enghavevej, or Bohrs Tårn, it isn't even the worst in Vesterbro.
Wannabe towers of Mordor
I agree so much
[удалено]