Around the World in 21 weeks

2009-11-08T17:42:00.000-08:00

Hey its been a while, a lot has happened since Sweden, Long story short I'm on coop in Singapore, and really busy, but here's some pics

Stockholm, Sweden

2009-07-20T13:51:00.000-07:00

Stockholm, Sweden
Year Founded: 1252
Population of City proper: 814,418
Population of Metropolitan Area: 1,989,422

I don’t have a ton of time so I won’t be able to write much but from what I saw of Stockholm it is probably the nicest city I have been to so far…. In the summer at least, I have a feeling the winters would be absolutely intolerable. At any rate though Stockholm, like the other Scandinavian cities I have been to has amazing harbors and views across waterways, however Stockholm has something the others haven’t, amazing topography. The views are even more frequent given that the city is actually made up of a number of small islands, and creates a number of unique and interesting urban spaces.
Gamla Stan is the center of the city and is the oldest part. It is full of impossibly narrow and winding streets, nearly all of which seem to dead end into beautiful churches or palaces. The city is extremely walkable and has 3 subway lines which seem to serve the city well enough. One of the cities greatest assets in my estimation is its extensive underground highway system. With the exception of one interchange almost all of the cities highway in the central city is underground, which does wonders for pedestrian traffic in the city.

Helsinki, Finland

2009-07-20T13:48:00.000-07:00

Helsinki, Finland
Year Founded: 1550
Population of City proper: 578,126
Population of Metropolitan Area: 1,299,541

Watercolor Postcards

2009-07-02T13:51:00.000-07:00

So I thought I'd go ahead and put up some of the watercolor's I've made so far. Hope you like them, not the greatest but whatever, a lady from New Jersey bought two of them, thats plus 20 euro for me.

Amsterdam, the Netherlands

2009-07-02T13:38:00.000-07:00

Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Population of City Proper: 762,057
Population of Metropolitan Area: 2,158,372
Year Founded: 1275

Rotterdam, the Netherlands

2009-07-02T13:28:00.000-07:00

Rotterdam, the Netherlands
Population of City Proper: 584,046
Population of Metropolitan Area: 1,200,000
Year Founded: 900 (destroyed 1940)

Rotterdam is probably one of the strangest cities I have ever been to. The city was almost entirely destroyed by bombs during WWII and as such next to none of the old city remains; instead, the city provided a clean slate for modernist architects to test their theories and ideas. Also aside from Singapore, Rotterdam is the only city I have been to so far with significant construction under way. There is a number of building projects as well as an entirely new central train station in the works for the city. Perhaps the city’s economic success is because that despite the cities small population, from 1962-2004 it was the busiest port in the world and is currently second to only Shanghai.

Despite its economic success, the city feels like a city that is less than 100 years old, and is very different from its European neighbors. The city is spread over a great distance and it does not seem to have reached a density to fully fill it, there are plenty of empty spaces. Perhaps it’s the modernist planning ideas, but the city also doesn’t seem to want to reach the density of most other European cities. There does seem to be a decent metro transit system comprised of buses, streetcars, and a subway though which helps make getting around easier, but the city is definitely still very spread out.

Rotterdam has a collection of truly unique and bizarre architecture that helps give the city character, however its lack of cohesiveness makes the city feel jumbled and segregated. Rotterdam is home to some of the most forward thinking architectural design firms, like Rem Koolhaus’s OMA, and it shows. The city feels in many ways like it is from outer space, in fact one subway station is actually a giant flying saucer. As an aspiring architect it is really interesting to see all of these unique types of architecture so close together, but as a city they seem to do little in common to bring it together.

It is hard to imagine what the rebuilding efforts of Rotterdam would have been like in the 1940’s after the city had been wiped clean. It is interesting that unlike some of the French cities in Normandy like St. Lo and Caen, Rotterdam chose to start over fresh as opposed to build things back the way they were. In a sense I think this forward thinking has allowed the city to be relevant in the 21st century and thrive in ways that its European neighbors could not. However I think it greatly sacrificed its European Charm. It is hard to fault the city for this though. What happened during WWII was absolutely crippling, and the fact that any city exists today is testament to the peoples will and character.

Brussels, Belgium

2009-07-02T13:22:00.000-07:00

Brussels, Belgium
Population of City Proper: 1,080,790
Population of Metro Area: 2,676,701
Year Founded: 979

Brussels to me is really interesting because in terms of over all population it is very similar to Cincinnati’s, however its distribution make it a much more vibrant and livable city. Both cities metro areas are roughly 2.5 million, but Brussels has around 1 million in it’s city proper where as Cincinnati only has around 365,000. Because of this Brussels is a city with vibrant night life, an extensive public transit system, and enough stores and shops to rival any city.
Brussels does though have 2 things going for it that will make it viable for the forseeable future and that is that it is not only the capital of Belgium, but also the capital of the entire European Union. In fact an entire quarter of the city, ingeniously named the Europen quarter, has been built new with all of the government buildings to run the young European union. This part of town is pretty awful though by all standards. New faceless glass louvered buildings line streets and make no gesture to the public front. The government complexes feel more like a corporation than a union.

Fortunately though Brussels has been blessed with and amazing old city, full of ornate stone and brick buildings which form a tight nit maze of pedestrian only streets. The main square is spectacular and surrounded by some of the most beautiful buildings I have seen in any city thus far. Brussels is also perhaps one of the most heavily influenced cities by the Art Nouveau style of the 1890’s. Victor Horta did a number of works in the city and many of the cities surrounding neighborhoods have beautiful wrought iron balconies, doors, and stained glass windows in the art nouveau style.

Brussels is the first city I have visited in Europe to have a traditional high rise skyscrapers in its business district. Paris and London both had some but they were far away and much more separate. Though they are still very separate in Brussels, it is impossible to not see them from any point in the city. While there is plenty of old world charm, the fact that the new world exists is by no means hidden in this city as it was in London and Paris.
One interesting thing about the city is that while there is an extensive subway and tram system, they absolutely never check to see if you paid to use it. In fact most stations didn’t even have ticket booths, and only a few even had any markings to let you know you are supposed to pay. I only saw 2 stations with turnstiles, but all of the spokes were sawed off so you could go through. It is almost like they don’t want you to pay. But whatever, there loss I suppose.
In the end though, while Brussels doesn’t have to attractions of other European cities, I think it probably functions better than most of them. The city is monumental like Paris, but not as hectic. I think most anyone would like Brussels, in fact it is one of my favorites so far, but it is not unique in the same way as some of these other cities. But you should still go, eat some waffles.

Paris, France

2009-07-02T13:08:00.000-07:00

Paris, France
Population of City Proper:2,167,994
Population of Metropolian Area: 12,672,000
Year Founded: 508

Mont Saint-Michel, Normandy, France

2009-07-02T12:59:00.000-07:00

Mont Saint-Michel, Normandy, France
Founded 708

Mont Saint Michel is the quintessential fairytale castle, a mix between the land of OZ and the castle the defended in the second lord of the rings. I’m still not fully sure why the monks needed to be so heavily fortified, but it certainly is impressive. Everything right down to the natural landscape is absolutely unique and picturesque. The Abbey sits on top of a natural rock formation with solely rises high above the completely flat surroundings. To make its location more spectacular during certain times of the month, the tide washes in so high that the mountain becomes an island, fully surrounded by water.
Truly I think this is my favorite building complex of anywhere I have seen so far. Aside from its romantic qualities, I am just amazed with the way all of the buildings are both built on top of the mountain and each other. Steps lead up on roofs of buildings, along fortified walls, to hidden paths and spaces. The buildings here are part of a cohesive unit that work and function together to really make something spectacular.
The Abbey on top is also an amazing building. It is a mix of gothic styles dating back to the 13th century and though a number of the details are only a hundred or so years old, the complex and its central tower rise with spectacular effect. Mont Saint Michel had a skyline before modern cities were even thought of, and it’s amazing to consider how spectacular it would have been to see such a structure centuries ago.
Though the complex is fully touristed out, when the sun goes down everyone leaves with it. I was fortunate enough to be able to stay in the building and being able to explore it at night was really amazing. I would highly recommend staying in or close by if you can.

London, England

2009-06-15T17:43:00.001-07:00

London, England
Population of Metro Area: 13,945,000Population of City Proper:7,556,900Year Founded: 43

London is obviously one of those cities I have dreamed of going for a very long time and remarkably, it did not dissapoint. For a person like myself who loves older architecture, particuraly 18th and 19th centuary, there is certainly plenty of it. While the central city is in many ways smaller than I expected, the city is built to a scale I haven't seen since Tokyo and as such I was able to visit mostly only the touristy parts of town. Unfortunately this means I have little useful information on how the city actually functions in terms of day to day city life.
I will say this though, the Underground system works amazingly, the city is very walkable and pedestrian friendly, and the street scapes are absolutely beautiful. The city is also cheaper than I expected. Especially coming from Dublin and considering the pound is stronger than the Euro, I was surprised to find that you can still get a double cheeseburger for around $1.50 USD and a beer in a pub runs about $4.50 USD. I was a little surprised to find all of the romanticised red telephone boxes plastered with numbers and photos of escort services and late night talk lines, but I guess everything is not to be as expected.
London is now the third place in a row I have visited the uses only double decker buses, and I will say that they make so much more sense than the double length trailer style buses you see in the states. The view up top is amazing, and they don't clog the road any more than a regular bus but still offer double the capacity. The only downside is that all of your photo's end up with the top half of a bus in them.
What I never realized about London is that it is actually divided into the city of Westminster and the city of London. The city of Westminster is the historical and cultural heart of the city while the city of London serves as the financial and business center of the city. I think this relationship and segregation of these two cities and functions is perhaps one of the most interesting planning schemes I have seen and it solves for a sense, in London at least, the inherent conflict in how old meets new. Here the solution is clear, the old stays with the old in Westminster, and the new is allowed to come out of the old as it pleases in the city of London. I think this solution works ok in this case as the city has the space more importantly, the population for it and it has the benefit of two millennia of cultural development to uphold and preserve.
It is clear though that this idea of old vs. new is very controversial and a constant argument with in the city. This morning I read an article in the Daily Mail title "How Modernist destroyed our cities." I was surprised to see this argument in a sense, usually I'm the only one who seems to think this way, but the article covered a dispute between Richard Rodgers and the Prince of Wales. Rodgers, the award winning architect of the pompidou in Paris and the wave formed airport in Madrid, is disputing the rejection of his plans for a development on the site of the historic barracks in Chelsea. His designs were approved but upon the influence of the Prince of Wales his designs were scrapped for a more historically sensitive design. Apparently his design was approved only by the developer and the community was appalled by the historically insensitive glass and steel proposal. Rodgers called the princes interference unconstitutional and vows to fight the decision. Where the article really begins to become interesting and perhaps loose credit is in the personal bias of the writer. He spends perhaps 4 paragraphs discrediting rodgers as rich and arrogant, then going on to describe how ugly modern architecture is. My favorite description was the comparison of "glass Detroit-like towers." Haha, while clearly this person has never been to Detroit, the city still carries an awful reputation even in England. Sorry Detroit. Then, hilariously, the author goes on to discredit modern architecture as being invented by the Nazi's and communists. Clearly, everything that is said is not to be taken seriously, but some really important observations I have, were voiced very strongly by the media. That observation is that the general public prefers the texture of stone and carved ornament to the clean and sleek modernist designs. As an architect I think it's easy to get lost in design ideals and theory and forget about what the people want. As designers we see our job as to design what people don't know they want, and convince them to our agenda. But maybe were doing them a disservice, maybe they already know what they want. Of course you would argue that profession wouldn't progress and you could design out of a catalog, but maybe that's not the worst thing, or maybe it is, I'm not sure yet. What I am sure of though, and the article noted this too, is that traditional carved ornament type buildings are extremely easy to copy and reproduce. In a way this is why they work so well. It is possible to have a whole block of the same exact building, but through paint, different stones or brick,and different windows or carved ornament it is possible to make every single building look different. Modernist architecture on the other hand, while undeniably powerful when perfected, leaves little room for error, and imperfections stand out like a sore thumb. Also the style leaves little room for interpretation or variation. Stark white and concrete walls make for a very dull city scape. I guess the point that I am trying to make is that only a very small percentage of buildings can actually have the time and care allocated to them to make well designed buildings. To have a good looking city, I believe a so called "style" (I know architects hate that word) needs to be in place to allow building that look decent to be built efficiently and cheaply. So in the end of this rambling my thought for the day is traditional buildings are easy to copy and make look good, modernist buildings are very difficult to copy and often look really bad.
Sorry guys that was a tangent, but I think it's in line with the challenges of not only London, but all European Cities. London though, while there is so much I did not get to see, of what I did see, the city is truly amazing. It functions at a very high level and has the cultural destinations of first class city. I think most anyone would want to live in London, I'm just not sure too many can pay the rent.

Dublin, Ireland

2009-06-15T17:05:00.000-07:00

Dublin
Population: City: 505,739 Metro: 1,661,185
Founded: 841

Dublin as expected was quite a change from Hong Kong. As my first European city it was sort of both exactly as I expected and yet somewhat suprising. One thing I was suprised about is how small the city actually is. It's possible to walk from one side to the other in about 30 minutes. Being my first European city I have a feeling some of my initial observations will become reocurring themes, but it will be interesting to see how each city responds to these issues.

I guess before I get to the issues I ought to say that Dublin is an amazing city. It's vibrant, the buildings are all well maintained, the entire city is walkable, and infact not only would it be difficult to drive, many streets are pedestrian friendly which I think is a great idea. The city is beautiful, streets lined with ornate stone buildings and authentic pubs and restaurants. There is also a number of public parks and it is very obvious that this is a city built for the human scale.

However dispite this it doesn't feel like a city to me, but more of a neighborhood. It's funny because I have come to realize that I like urban neighborhoods better than downtown areas, however it does seem strange to me to not have much of a cbd, in the sense that I am used to. This to me sort of creates the problem that tokyo has on a much smaller scale and that is that there is no obvious city center. \i guess there is no reason why you need one, I just feel like somethings missing when it's not there. Dublin has tried to solve this problem by putting a tall thin metal spire in its central square. I actually like this alot for a variety of reasons. First I think it does help to sort of place a mark on where the city center really is. Also its modern and interesting, but it doesn't detract from the cities historic qualities or stand out too much. The reason I like it the most though is as a landmark for way finding. In a city of constant cornice heights, no street signs, and a mideval street network, it's hard to really have much sense of direction. The spire does however, provide some point of refernece, so atleast you can always find your way back to the city center.

One part of the city that really bothered me was trinity college. The long room of the library that you always see was amazing, but they wouldnt let you take pictures. I feel like after you pay to see something, you should be able to take pictures.. but what really got me about the college was that it had pristine grass lawns and quads, but they were fenced off and had signs not to use them. Whats the point in green space if it can't be used. The college was also walled off from the rest of the city, which i imagine is more historical than anything, but I really just felf like the college was turning its back on the city.

Dublin does have a light rail system, but it seems fairly limited. The buses are efficient and run often, but are confusing to use.

What I found most interesting about the city, perhaps because it was one of the themes of my immersion library, but never the less I think it's a question with out an answer and that is how does old meet new. With all of these amazing old buildings, how do you incorporate growth and development. I think its clear that the city has zoning laws in place to keep skyscrapers out and also to make new buildings use similar materials. A number of new buildings were clearly modern representations of the neighboring historic facades. While I love the way the older buildings form a streetscape, I have begun to realize that you cannot simply hold on to the past in fear of screwing it up. The world is changing and a viable city needs to be able to as well. The question is though, how will european cities respond to their rich traditions. This is one of those questions with no answer, but personally I think it lies in the massine. If a building is massed the same as those around it, atleast it contributes to the streetscape. A problem though might arise when a form is flawed or no longer viable. This issue will be one which I watch very closely as I travel europe and hopefully I will find some good solutions.

In closing, dublin is an amazing city, but its not very big. Also all of the parts are very similar, so I wonder how long it would be able to hold your interest. At any rate it's hard too find too much fault in much more than the rediculous prices and the city is well worth the visit.

Hong Kong, Hong Kong

2009-06-15T16:26:00.000-07:00

Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Population: 7,008,000
Founded: 1842

hong kong was the city I had looked forward to visiting the most. Perhaps I had expectations that were impossible to fulfill, but my first impression of the city has been hard to shake. However the more time I spent in the city I began to see past my preconceptions to find a city that is full of character and charm. Hong Kong is built on probably the most beautiful natural landscape I have ever seen. As such the scenery complements the cities amazing skyline perfectly and is without a doubt, one of the most impressive skylines in the world. However while the city is a beautiful sight to see from afar, its a much different city up close. Behind the glamor of designer stores like louis vutton and prada lies a city struggleing to survive. This seems to be a theme amoung developing asian cities but there is a very real distinction here between those who have and those who have not. The residential areas of the city seem to be comprised of 10 - 15 story 1950's and 60's era concrete housing projects. These buildings are seemingly all in disrepair and covered in grime. The hostel I am staying in is in a building like this. But to my suprise I began to realize that not only was the building completely safe, the buildings residents seemed to be middle class and definately not impoverished.

What is perhaps most interesting to me is how abruptly sections of the city change. These run down residential areas give way to top design mega malls, or else abruptly stop in favor of highway developments. It's also amazing to consider how polluted and overcrowded the city feels in contrast to the fact that some absurd percentage of the city is undeveloped and natural. I really wonder what kind of zoning laws are present in the city and how they are enforced. Not only is the surrounding countryside preserved but a density is maintained, even in the suburbs, by having high-rise housing complexes almost exclusively.

Hong Kong is not the most walkable city. Often sidewalks dissapear and many times the only way to cross a street is by using a skywalk or subway platform. In the financial district the skywalk system is so expansive that it is the preferred means of travel and in most cases it is actually impossible to walk on the street. In a way the system works because it forces people into buildings and malls past a constant barrage of stores. The subway stations do this as well, almost every mall is linked to the subway station so if you want to use public transportation, you have to enter the mall. However I think it's never a good idea to remove street life, it takes away the cities personal character and charm. Also a system of pedestrian access dependent upon skywalks is not only difficult to navigate, it is inflexible and expensive. The system is nice though when it rains, and by experience, it seems to rain alot in hong kong. Again though with the segrigation of different parts of the city, the skywalk seems to clearly direct visitors away from the living areas and local residents, to the office towers and shopping malls.

Hong Kong is the first city I have ever been to where smog and exhaust fumes are such a noticible problem. During the day the cities street smell of exhaust and garbage. In a number of ways its hard to catch your breath possibly. Also smog is such an issue during the day that it was difficult for me to take a picture of the cities skyline from across the harbor. The city looked like it was behind fog.

Hong Kong like most other asian cities feels very privatized. I think in part it is due to pace in which the city is being developed. I was amazed to see in a book the difference between the cities skyline in 1970 and today, almost none of the taller skyscrapers were built yet. It's absurd to see all of the development that has happened since the 70's and it really seems as if almost all of it until recently were private developments. Private developments are good in a sense because they get done quickly and efficiently, but the public doesn't have a whole lot of say in what is being built. Like Kuala Lumpur, most of the buisness districts of Hong Kong feel like they were built for the international buisness men as opposed the cities actual residents. However it does seem as if there is beginning to be some change. A massive waterfront park scheme is presently under construction and there was also a competition held to design an asthetically pleasing answer to highway sound dampening panels.

The topography of hong kong is more extreme than any city I have seen, even more extreme than san francisco. The city isn't built on a hill side, but rather a mountain side. The twisting turning roads that lead up the mountian away from the city are so steep that nearly everyside walk is instead a stair case. I walked, or hiked more acurately, up to the peak from the city and the pathways were so steep in places that i was actually afraid of sliping in places on my way down. I'm not sure what this city does if it snows, but I can't imagine that any of the hilly roads would be passible. Topography in my mind is one of the things that makes a city most interesting, and though I didn't find them until my last day, there are some amazing neighborhoods build seemingly on cliffs. Its also interesting to see some of the drainage systems built to accomidate such dramatic hardscape. I'm not sure if the systems work, but I'd be really impressed if they did, it doesn't just rain in Hong Kong, it poors.

Hong Kong like tokyo is definately a city that looks better after dark. The smog lifts and the city is bathed in dazeling lights. Every night a lazer light show takes place over victoria harbor and a number of the cities prominent buildings participate. In the residential areas the decrpit buildings escape your view as you are blinded by flashing neon advertisments and the streets are packed with people. Hong Kong is a city that seems like it gets a late start. Most stores don't open till after 11 and in the morning the city feels sort of dead and like it's still waking up. At night though all of the stores stay open and the streets are always packed.

Dispite the decrepit appearence of a number of the cities buildings, the streets all seem relatively safe. I think that because all of the buildings are fully occupied, there's always enough people that petty crime and stuff is kept to a minimum.

In the end, while at first I was dissapointed with the city, by the time I left it became one of my favorite places I have traveled too so far. To me, the sort of chaoticness juxtaposed against the very ordered and layered skyline make such an interesting city. The natural scenery is unlike any other and the cities topography creates amazing spaces and views. While Tokyo might seem to me to be a better city to be in, the fact that it has no view, no waterfront area where you can sort of take it all in at once, make it have less lasting appeal. I could sit and look at victoria harbor all day long, and for that Hong Kong has something thats hard to create, and creates a great lasting impression.

Angkor Wat, Siem Reap, Cambodia

2009-06-04T08:06:00.000-07:00

Siem Reap, Cambodia
Population of Metropolitan Area: 139,458
Year Founded: 1907

I haven’t spent any time in the city yet other than the drive in from the airport but so far I have been really impressed with how nice the city is. The roads are well paved and new sidewalks and businesses line atleast the one street I’ve seen so far. Everything is well signed and the road to Angkor is wide and easy to navigate.

Angkor Wat:

Someday I’d like to put some of the history of the complex in here, that sounds like a lot to look up though. In the mean time just assume what ever you have learned from Tomb Raider, it seems to align pretty well with my experience here so far…. And here’s some pics.

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

2009-06-04T07:27:00.000-07:00

Kuala Lumpur
Population of Metropolitan Area: 7,200,000(though I think this is very generous, city proper is 2 million)
Year Founded: 1857

Kuala Lumpur seems to me like a city of juxtapositions. Most visibly out of a largely impoverished city rises the Petronas Towers, a symbol of wealth seen not only from every point in the city, but recognized world wide. I then wonder is it better to create a few really nice things to stimulate development through out the city or is it better to spread the investments around. There is no denying it though that Petronas Towers, as well as the rapid transit with flat screen monitors to and from the new world class airport are first rate. There’s also no denying that the towers put the city on the map, I will even admit that before I visited Kuala Lumpur, I only recognized the Petonas Towers, I did not know the cities name.

The majority of the city its self feels very chaotic, poorly planned with out basic things like sidewalks and street signs. I walked from KL Sentral where the train from the airport arrives to the area around the Patronas Towers and it very quickly became clear to me that KL is not a walking city. Once I figured out how to get down from the train station (the station is platformed up in the air and accessed by elevated highway ramps) I had quite a time trying to walk on any of the streets. Sidewalks would end, roads would become pseudo highways, and the only way to ever get across was to just run for it. I suppose the residents realize this as I hardly ever saw anyone else walking, everyone seems to drive. The streets are also really hard to navigate as the seldom link up with other streets and tend to go one long winded swoops in the wrong direction.

Haha but enough of this negativity. Once you get from KL Sentral to the newly developed area around the Petronas Towers you begin to see a completely new city, one that is lavish and equipped with all of the modern amenities. Inside the Petronas Towers is a gigantic shopping mall packed with people and designer stores. The mall is linked to the subway as well as a neighboring park and convention center. I think its safe to say that the project was a success. The buildings themselves are clearly inspired by the traditional temples like those found at Angkor Wat and other places surrounding the region. I was surprised in a sense at how Art Deco the design of the building felt, especially the interiors. The main lobby plays contrast between extremely dark stone against a lighter grey, similar in color scheme to the lobby of the Chrysler Building if I recall correctly. The general form of the buildings also reminds me greatly of the Chrysler building, but this new interpretation feels lighter and more molded. I will say though the Chrysler building is one of my favorite buildings, and I think the Petronas Towers come close to achieving the same sense of branding and serve as a similar symbol of the city as a whole.

Singapore, Singapore

2009-06-04T06:32:00.001-07:00

Singapore, Singapore
Population of Metropolitan Area: 4,436,000 World Rank: 62
Population Density: 6,814/km^2
Gross Domestic Product: $129,000,000 USD World Rank: 36
Year Founded: 1819

Singapore is a fine city… I think that about sums it up. That slogan made famous by tourist t-shirts pokes fun at how scrubbed clean the city feels; no litter, no jay walking, nothing out of line. Of course generally speaking its good not to have these problems, you have to hand it to a city where you can walk as far as I did at all times of the day and never come across a shady part of town. I think the issue that most people seem to have with Singapore is just the mundane vibes that are given off by a city actually working to plan. It’s sort of like the balance between setting a trend and having the trend become mainstream, Singapore feels very mainstream.

In fact, Singapore sort of feels like one of those cities that could be located anywhere. The city has a diverse population and 4 official languages. Its prominent central business district make the city feel very similar to the cities we know and love in America, but then again Singapore was another English colony and formed at a similar time.

The central city its self is absolutely beautiful. Fort Canning Park is one of the nicest landscaped urban parks I have ever seen and the city boasts a great skyline with plenty of water front. Also the Singapore River snakes through the city dividing many new modern buildings from the classical government buildings and spacious parks. The waterfront is lined with seemingly endless restaurants and bars.

Singapore is a shopping city. You could also say Singapore is a city of shopping malls, I think there’s one like every other block. Of all the stores though, the biggest shopping destination is the Orchard Road. The Orchard Road reminds me of Michigan Avenue in Chicago, but with even more stores and substantially shorter buildings. I also think it must be a sign of affluence for these stores to blast the side walk with air conditioning at least 20 degrees cooler than the temp outside. The temperature change is so extreme between inside and outside that it’s a wonder people don’t end up sick.

One thing that surprised me was how much is still being built in Singapore despite the economy. A number of new malls and high rises are going up as wall as a DNA inspired pedestrian bridge across the bay and a spiraling green roof park space. I guess something in the city must be working alright, even the ridiculous amount of stores seem to be full.

One of the things that I find most interesting about Singapore is the dominance of the tower in the park housing project-esque city planning that fill the city suburbs. On the way in from the airport there is just a sea of 20 story or so housing complexes with no urban front to be found. In the area I stayed in, just north of little India, these housing towers began to mesh with the older colonial city, comprised of traditional looking 2 and 3 story row homes. To me it’s this tower in the park idea that sort of lend to that idea of Singapore being a “fine” city. I’m sure they are nice places to live, and they are efficient, but they take the city life and confine it in private pockets distributed through out the city. The most urban areas of the city are with out a doubt little India and Chinatown, which I think has a lot to with the fact that they inhabit the older English colonial sections of the city. I think it’s clear that the suburban model work’s, I just think it’s clearly a lame solution.
‘
One thing though I did find interesting about Singapore’s solution to modern highway systems is that they had maybe 6 or 8 lane roads, but in order to speed up traffic the sidewalk was often separated from the street. This sort of diminished the idea of the street front but it was able to keep with the idea of the building front. The only real problem I found with this solution was that in a few instances in order to cross the street you had to go across underground connectors.

So in the end despite its sort of corporate mainstream feel I actually liked Singapore a lot. I was a little surprised when I was actually told to stop sitting on a buildings bench height retaining wall, but what are you going to do. While Singapore feels like a number of different cities, it definitely functions very well and I think it would be a very easy place to live, work, and enjoy.

Not Goodbye, Just Till Later

2009-06-04T06:26:00.001-07:00

Some photo's of our final days, I might add to these later

Puerto Princesa, The Philippines

2009-05-27T00:28:00.000-07:00

Puerto Princesa, The Philippines
Population of Metropolitan Area: 210,508
Year Founded: 1961

Puerto Princesa is unique of the cities I have visited thus far on my trip for its smaller size and is sort of strange in the sense of its city limits. From the center of town, where our hotel is, it takes us close to an hour to drive to our site, which is still in the city limits. While the city center is very densely populated, the surrounding parts of the city are very agrarian and many of the cities residents live out in the country side. To me it would be very hard to imagine what living out in these rural areas, completely on your own would be like. In a number of ways it reminds me of the stories my grandmother tells of growing up in rural Kentucky. What’s amazing about this though is that for the most part this type of lifestyle has been eliminated in America, and it’s all happened in a single life time. It’s hard to get a sense of how quickly the world is changing sometimes, but its very evident here in the Philippines. Along the drive to the site we pass a number of homes made of bamboo with thatched roofs, which to me is very interesting and picturesque to see. But there is also a number of similar homes that have replaced there roofs with corrugated metal, and it’s on this merging of past and present that I find most interesting. To me it’s sad to see a unique indigenous architecture replaced by a faceless interpretation of modern building materials. I know the country wants to progress, and that machine made products would free residents from household tasks to do so called better work in offices and there by progressing the area, or rather the areas economy. But it’s hard to not feel like something would be lost if that happened. In my mind, Sydney Australia might as well have been located in America, it was so similar, but the Philippines are truly unique of anywhere I have been and it seems unfortunate that there is a desire to be like everyone else as opposed to highlighting the areas differences. The tricycles used here in Puerto Princesa are unique to any other part of the world. Not only that, but it is such a charm to see city streets full of 75% tricycles, and since they’re easy to maintain I gather they have a very long life and have a relatively low cost of ownership. Imagine though what would happen if these were replaced with yellow taxis like the rest of the world. I guess that that is my greatest fear for an area like this is that in attempting to improver through standardization and stricter building codes and so on, the city could be come faceless and with out an identity. Hopefully the wall marts of the world will stay away, but I really don’t see how they can hold out.

Manila, The Philippines

2009-05-27T00:02:00.000-07:00

Manila, The Philippines
Population of Metropolitan Area: 20,075,000 World Rank: 5
Population Density: 14,090/km^2
Gross Domestic Product: $108,000,000 USD World Rank: 43
Year Founded: 1574

Manila like the rest of the Philippines has a very layered and storied past. The city was founded as a Jesuit Spanish Mission, and was originally the walled city of intramuros. Giant stone walls and a moat surrounded the city from hostile natives, the likes of which most famously beheaded Ferdinand Magellan. Intramuros is the oldest part of the city, and though it was the second most extensively bombed area during WWII, the area has been largely rebuilt and now is a major tourist destination. This layer of Spanish settlement gives way a city planed as an American territory by renowned city planner Daniel Burnham. While sections of the city were completed the city today is a jumble of changing influences and plans layered over top of pervious and incomplete plans.

It’s hard to describe the chaos of the city that is Manila. My first experience of Filipino culture is that they seem to have no concept of a line. At the airport people would rush, and cut in line, just to get to another line. A similar experience takes place on the streets of Manila every day. Residents self proclaim that the traffic in Manila is so bad that it is the second worst in the world behind only Bangkok. The real problem lies in the lack of public utilities like sidewalks and traffic lights. These problems are being addressed as new highways are being built and an elevated train services a good part of the city, but clearly the city has expanded much faster than its infrastructure. Space in the city has become a real problem. Houses are built touching each other and on interior lots with no real access to the street. On the fringe of town its actually and impressive sight to see shanties line a stream built by salvaged materials and rising three and four stories tall. As is logical in an area so densely populated, pollution has become a real problem. Since the city is hot and humid the effects of smog and exhaust fumes are exacerbated. The problem has become so extreme that there are days of the week where certain numbered license plates cannot drive.

Despite some of these disadvantages, the city operates in a way that is fascinatingly pure and organic. Most everything that is built is done so for a purpose, and as such the architecture is not only logical but responsive to the cities unique environment. Crowded twisting alleys are lined with stores, shops, and restaurants, and despite the location or building design, the businesses are always packed. To me it’s very interesting to compare the strategies employed in American cities to get stores and restaurants to open downtown with the natural occurrence and necessity of such businesses in crowded Asian cities like Manila.

On a fundamental basis Manila functions very well in a number of ways. The city is certainly vibrant and is very walkable for its immense scale. However the cities transportation problems combined with its extreme overcrowding make the city feel chaotic and overwhelming. For the first time I think I can understand the draw of suburban life in comparison to the chaos of this type of city life. I wonder if American cities were in a similar situation at the turn of the century before the flight to the suburbs took place. I also wonder if that indeed was the case, how a city like Manila will respond to the changes growth and development bring, especially in regards to the number of mistakes I believe American cities made during this period of their development.

Pacific Rim Parks

2009-05-15T09:40:00.000-07:00

For those of you who don't know, the reason I'm in the Philippines right now is to build the next Pacific Rim Park. You can check out our progress at the official site:

www.prppearls.blogspot.com

Sydney Opera House

2009-05-15T09:26:00.000-07:00

Sydney Opera House

Designed by Danish architect Jorn Utzon, the Sydney Opera House is one of the most famous and well received buildings in the world. Situated on Bennelong Point, the building is visible across Sydney Harbor on 3 sides. In 2007 the building was designated as a UNESCO world heritage site and is one of only 3 20th century buildings to be given such status.

The building we know today marks over 20 years of design and planning. Utzon’s design was reportedly salvaged after being discarded and was little more than conceptual drawings. If I recall correctly The building was supposed to cost million dollars and take years to build, however it ended up costing 102 million and taking 16 years. Part of the reason for rampant overages was that estimates were done for a building that no one knew how to build. In a time with out computers complex geometries such as the roof structures were extremely hard to calculate. Parts of the building were being built with out knowing how it would be finished. At one point Utzon even accepted defeat, but in the end the solution proved to be surprisingly simple. The concrete ribs to support the roof were all derived as different length pieces from a common sphere. This allowed for only one radius to be calculated, and therefore only one set of formwork. The store however doesn’t end here, as a new government took office in Australia, the project met increasing pressure to finish as quickly and as cheaply as possible. This ultimately lead to disputes between Utzon and government officials and he was asked to step down or leave. Utzon left for denmark never to return to Sydney. He died in 2008 never having stepped inside the building that made him famous.

Few people realize that the Sydney Opera House is actually 5 different theaters and that for 5 months of the year, Opera isn’t even run, but rather ballet. I must also say that besides the two large theaters the other ones are very unimpressive and I would be very upset to shell out $70 for a ticket in one of these back room theaters. Apparently though, that won’t really be an issue as tickets are usually purchased years in advance.

One of the things that you have to keep in mind about this building as that while the design is truly amazing from the distance, up close it really holds a lot of the not so good qualities of buildings designed in the 50’s and 60’s. The entrance for one is really atrocious in my mind, essentially being underground. A driveway leads under something like the largest freely supported concrete span in the world, which sounds pretty cool until you realize it has no point. The entrance sort of gives the vibe of entering old Riverfront Stadium from the parking garage, a feeling that is aided greatly by the stark concrete walls that lift the building up from the harbor walk. Once you find the entrance you are so clearly pushed through the classic compression and release technique designed to make the entrance really powerful. I have to say that it works remarkably well, the entrance leads to a stair of which the low concrete ceiling completely blocks the view beyond. The view is slowly revealed as you ascend the stairs, with great effect, but I have problems looking past how absurdly plain and ugly the entrance is, regardless of its spatial effect. The building is also consistently furnished with absolutely ridiculously awful red and purple carpet. Thankfully though there’s plenty more the building does to perfection.

Sydney, Australia

2009-05-14T06:38:00.000-07:00

Sydney, Australia
Population of Metropolitan Area: 3,715,000 World Rank: 81
Population Density: 2,080/km^2
Gross Domestic Product: $172,000,000 USD World Rank: 26
Year Founded: 1788

Sydney is the largest city in Australia and the site of the first British Colony in the country. The city is the state capital of New South Wales and is located among the natural beauty of Sydney Harbor. Sydney is particularly interesting to me because it’s past so closely mirrors that of the development of cities in the United States. Experientially Sydney is about as different from American Cities as Canadian ones; however it is located on the other side of the world. Sydney is one of the most multicultural cities in the world, and is a major destination for immigrants to Australia. Sydney also ranks among the most expensive and livable cities in the world.

It’s not hard to understand why so many people want to move to Sydney, its one of only a handful of cities that can offer vibrant city life along with unbelievable natural beauty. To me the city feels a lot like San Francisco or Seattle with the climate of San Diego. Sydney is much more manageable in size and as such I feel that it is more distinct in a number of ways. The city has great topography and more water front than any city I’ve seen so far. Like Seattle, everywhere one turns there are amazing views to be had. The famous Sydney Opera House was designed to be viewed from all sides and can be seen from a great distance.

The city does a good job utilizing its water front. Darling Harbor is very similar to Baltimore’s Inner Harbor and is even finished with similar materials. However Sydney doesn’t have just one harbor, but three. Circular Quay is surrounded with museums and shops which lead to the prominent Opera House. To the south a harbor is lined with the Royal Botanical Gardens.

What is most appealing to me about the city is the interaction of the original English buildings with the modern structures the city has become famous for. Sydney has a wealth of ornate buildings left from its early colonial rule. Most of these buildings are detailed in what seems to be a very orange-brown sandstone. The central train station, town hall, and two other prominent structures all have beautifully detailed clock towers along the lines of an English version of Philadelphia City Hall. The Queen Victoria Building is a 4 story shopping mall, beautifully detailed in the Victorian Style. An entire neighborhood called the Rocks is comprised of period buildings beautifully situated between circular quay and the Sydney Harbor Bridge.

I was really surprised with the shopping in Sydney. I felt like there were an absurd amount of stores for a city of its size. Unfortunately though, the prices In Sydney were just as absurd. I ended up not buying a souvenir simply because every time I would find a shirt I liked it’d be at least 50 AUS. It wasn’t uncommon for simple t-shirts to be over 100 AUS. I guess that’s the unfortunate part of living in a highly desired city is that you have to put up with the high living costs.

Coming from Tokyo Sydney really felt like a city in the sense that I have known it. As such Sydney is not able to escape the homelessness, as it is a reasonably visible problem. For the most part it seemed that the CBD has been cleaned up, but on the edge of town by the central train station there were a number of homeless. Also while it would be hard to find much in the way of undesirable property in the CBD, it doesn’t take too long to find some areas that look like the could use some help as you move out of the city. For the first two nights I was in town I stayed out in Collaroy Beach, which is about 6 miles north of the city. I thought it would be good to see some of the beaches as I know that they are such a part of many coastal cities such as those in Southern California. In many ways I think this was a mistake on my part. There wasn’t a whole lot going on at the beach where I was at, it seemed very quiet and while not in disrepair, clearly the area was not thriving. With that said the beach was absolutely beautiful, although it was too cold to swim. An endless beach gave way to tide pools and cliffs, atop which large ranch style homes dominated. I am glad that I saw the beach, I think I had plenty of time to see the city, but I think I saw the wrong beach, it sounds like Bondi Beach south of the city is the place to be. Also the hostel I was at in town was substantially better. I met tons of people from England, and some from Germany, Denmark, and South Korea.
It’s hard not to like Sydney. Like I said before it’s one of those rare places that is able to combine world class city living in a pristine environment. To me I think it has just about everything going for it. The public transit system seems to work pretty well; they have a combination of subways, streetcars, and a monorail. Admittedly the bus system is a little strange. It is required to prepurchase tickets per ride bases on distance, however there is no explanation and I was actually told to wait for the bus and ask the driver. With that said though the system probably makes more sense to locals and the buses run frequently and all night. But with so much within walking distance I don’t see the need to do much else. There is little doubt in my mind that Sydney is one of the most beautiful cities in the world, it’s just a shame it’s so far away.

Tokyo, Japan

2009-05-13T08:39:00.000-07:00

Tokyo, Japan
Population of Metropolitan Area: 34,670,000 World Rank: 1
Population Density: 4,430/km^2
Gross Domestic Product: $1,191,000,000 USD World Rank: 1
Year Founded: 1497

Tokyo serves as the seat of the Japanese Government and is one of the 47 prefectures of Japan. The greater Tokyo Metropolis is divided into 23 special wards, each governed as individual cities. The economy is driven largely by its status as one of the 3 world finance centers of the world, with New York and London being the other two. With over 34 million people living in its metropolitan area, Tokyo is the largest urban area in the world and is significantly larger than any other city. To provide some prospective New York City has just over 21 million people. The city is made up of a number of distinct areas, most notably, Roppongi Hills, Shinjuku, Shibuya, Ginza, and Ueno.

Though Tokyo is clearly a very modern city, its city planning is medieval in nature, comprised of a maze like network of narrow back alley ways and winding streets. This combined with never ending cityscape and flat topography make keeping a bearing very difficult without a map. Fortunately though, Tokyo has one of the world’s largest subway systems which is not only affordable but easy to use and nearly every sign is also in English.

Tokyo looks and feels like a sci-fi movie. From the stereotypical diagonal stair expression to the barrage of neon signs that light up the night sky the city is distinctly futuristic in character. The crowded narrow streets of Shinjuku served as the inspiration for the movie blade runner and hold true to this day. Though Tokyo is very old, almost all of its buildings are relatively new. Around the turn of the century the city was leveled by a massive earthquake and while Tokyo was sparred from the Atomic Bomb during WWII, it’s bombing was so extensive that very little of the old city survived.

Because the area is so heavily populated, land is extremely hard to come by and the city is constantly reinventing itself as old is torn down in favor of new. One of the most successful of these urban renewal projects is the mega development of Roppongi Hills, where a shopping center, hotel, high rise office, museum, and viewing pavilion provide entertainment for everyone.

The Japanese are famous for there work ethic, and the city offers plenty of opportunities for its residents to spend their money. The Ginza district is comparable to 5th Avenue and offers every store imaginable. The residents of Tokyo are with out a doubt the best dressed I have ever seen, most wear suits and dresses to go out in the evening.

Tokyo is also one of the safest cities I have visited, especially considering that dark, narrow, twisting alleys are the norm, and the city is so expansive. However, the city is so vibrant, so full of people, that no street is deserted. I was also surprised to see very few homeless in a city with such a high cost of living. With that said, living in Tokyo would be very cramped, as buildings are often built within inches of each other and with no access to the road. Spaces are so sought after that structures are even built underneath elevated trains and highways.

In all I was exceedingly impressed with how easy it was for me to get around and interact with others in the city. Most things are also written in English and usually some one is around who can speak well enough to be helpful. Its hard not blown away by the barrage of neon. Tokyo is like Times Square, but twice as large and six times throughout the city. I did feel though that the city has something of an identity problem. The city is so large that it largely looks exactly the same, and most of the cities buildings leave much to be desired. Also few of the buildings are much taller than 20 or 30 stories, so there is a constant building height that is never ending and indefinable. There is no real Skyline like there is in New York, but rather more like the pictures I’ve seen of Sao Paolo. I was also surprised to find that it was nearly impossible to find a souvenir that said Tokyo or Japan. Nearly every store sold American eagle-esque shirts of American Places. I guess it’s somewhat a product of the fact that of the 13 or so million in Tokyo proper, only 353,826 are foreign residents.

The extreme lack of diversity in the city is an interesting topic in itself. Most of the American Ghetto’s were formed by the influx of African American’s into the cities and the so called white flight into the suburbs. I do wonder how the Japanese would respond to the influx of other cultures, but for now, its nothing Tokyo has to worry about. In the end though I feel like Tokyo is an amazing city with its own character, but in my mind it’ very comparable to New York, and I feel that New York executes a number of things much better. Tokyo is amazing to visit, but I still feel that if you’re looking to move to the big city, New York’s still got it beat.

2009-04-26T17:29:00.000-07:00

So I've been really busy and today is my last day in Tokyo. I will be leaving today for Sydney Australia, and staying there for 4 days. I don't have a lot of time now so I will get some pictures up when I get to Australia. In the mean time I will leave you with a drawing I found saved to the desktop, I think it sums my experience up pretty well.

Tokyo 1

2009-04-24T06:11:00.000-07:00

So it's my first night in Tokyo and I've actually been suprised at how well I've been able to get around and how little the language barrier has effected me. Sure, I can't understand much, and the computure I'm on right now is in Japanese, but alot of signs are in english and everything makes sense for the most part.

I will undoubtedly say that Tokyo is by far the densest city I have ever seen. Most streets are about the size of alley's and yet they are vibrant with storefronts. Its truely bazaar in alot of senses. I will say that most of the buildings in Tokyo aren't the best looking, but its overshadowed by the cities density and at night everything is hidden in the over powering glow of neon signs that turns the night into day. So far I've only gotten to see 2 parts of town, Asakusa and Ueno, but have been really impressed with both. Asakusa is centered around a sort of complex of traditional Japanese architecture. There is a great open air market where vendors sell food, clothing, and crafts. This old charm quickly turns into a bustleing urban interchange. 3 large avenues terminate at Ueno Station. The intersection is so large and complex that a elevated pedestrian walkway bridges the entire intersection, while and elevated train goes into the station and an even taller elevated highway goes over everything. The highways here seem to all be elevated, which allows for twice the surface area for cars. However I have heard that the elevated system does little to improve traffic flow as it is not large enough for the demand. Aside from the fact that they drive on the wrong side of the road here in Japan, for some reason all of the cabs have mirrors on their hoods insead of on the window where they usually should go, still haven't figure that one out. Space is obviously a big problem in Tokyo. So much so that there is actually buildings under the elevated train tracks. A number of movies have made jokes about living right next to the tracks like that, but imagine how bad it must be to actually live under the tracks. Long story short, the city has too many people. Haha they also have 2016 olympic banners all over the place, which is a total shame because the olympics are difinatly going to be in Chicago, sorry about your luck guys!

Beijing

2009-04-24T06:07:00.000-07:00

So I didn't leave the airport but I was pretty impressed with it. Brand new for the Olympics and they didn't skimp on the materials.

Los Angeles

2009-04-23T15:38:00.000-07:00