Thank you for covering Habitat 67 and it's inspiration to current pixeled buildings. Moshe Safdie's masterpiece was one of my inspirations to become an architect.
@jeffkrupke3810
Жыл бұрын
This is one of my favorite building project.
@jeffkrupke3810
Жыл бұрын
I so want to build more of these buildings maybe with shipping containers
@Jorjgasm
Жыл бұрын
To try to avoid these monstrosities and bring architecture back to human dimensions and pleasing aesthetics?
@jeffkrupke3810
Жыл бұрын
@@Jorjgasm I have seen a colorized version of this build that looks super cool
@Jorjgasm
Жыл бұрын
@@jeffkrupke3810 I am sure and there is something in the aesthetic I like, but what will it look like in 30 years or if it will not be maintained? Nobody has ever passed by a run down modernist building and thought to himself "this is so romantic".
@DCSci11
Жыл бұрын
As someone who has both worked on the design and witnessed the construction of the Toronto Habitat 2 (aka Toronto King West) I feel the need to point out the 2 very large oversight not mentioned here. 1. The building no longer has a circumferencial donut access corridor. There is a gap on the north east corner that transforms the access corridor more in the shape of a U or rotated C depending on how you approach it. 2. The high cost overruns of adapting the atypical pixelated design into the building. The "looks cool and not like other buildings" appearance of the facade has made the owners and contractors pay many times more for the pixelated look than a similar structure would have cost if it was even a little more regularly shaped.
@jeanbolduc5818
Жыл бұрын
Toronto has no creativity ... a city where it takes ages to finish one building or any construction .... The city of Toronto has been drowning in darkness for years and there is no hope for this city anymore
@knarf_on_a_bike
Жыл бұрын
I was 10 years old, living in Montreal in 1967. What an exciting summer! We had "passports" and went to Expo almost every day. Habitat was so futuristic and cool!
@philmulrich
Жыл бұрын
Clever! im glad you interviewed the architect himself, it added a lot
@supertaj1800
Жыл бұрын
I don't know how your videos continue to get better and quality, amazing work as usual
@BacchaeOphanim
Жыл бұрын
The Terry Town houses from Legend of Zelda Breath of the Wild are built kinda like this. Though they're more single family homes with the starting design being based on the families that move into them being more accustomed to living out of single large room houses. But they've got these single block designs that stack on top of each other and open on the connecting inside walls. And the roof tops of the first floor ones that meet up with second floor blocks become balconies. And they're so bright and colorful. I love them so much and would actually love to live in one. Would love to see an architect like this guy analyze them.
@sa3270
Жыл бұрын
The homes of Tarry Town look so much more attractive than these.
@xbvg
Жыл бұрын
Great look and design, horror in maintenance. Habitat 67 costs 1600$/month just in condo fees (add to this your mortgage). A simple rectangle building, the condo fees will go down to 300-400$ a month for a building as old as this one.
@golfball286
Жыл бұрын
I've seen many photos of habitat 67 but never realised that its design is not only beautiful but has major benefits for the people living there as well! Thank you for a great video.
@IL_801
Жыл бұрын
Habitat 2.0 looks cool from the outside, but as a Minecraft girlie myself, I agree that the triangular rooms and long, windowless corridors are NOT IT. Sometimes the design can be mathematically efficient, but that doesn't make it cozy. I wouldn't mind walking through a mock-up of Habitat 2.0 in Minecraft to see how it feels though lol Edit: RIP Nakagin Capsule Tower 😢💔 you were too cool for this world.
@he11ange1
Жыл бұрын
I feel the 60s was a great era of architecture. Architects challenge them selves on designing esthetically beautiful building and yet don't afraid to employ new technology. Instead of simply subcontract the civil engineering part to someone else, the architects of that era participe actively in the engineering process.
@Nostalg1a
Жыл бұрын
Shame 90% of architecture from that era sucked, it’s all falling apart now and has aged poorly in both design and stability
@jeanbolduc5818
Жыл бұрын
@@Nostalg1a your name shows your negativity so is your writing
@Nostalg1a
Жыл бұрын
@@jeanbolduc5818 Not everything you don't agree is negativity, it's simply a factual statement, both neuro-aesthetically and materially.
@ChrisSaddlerSam
Жыл бұрын
I just LOVE the Habitat 67!!!
@theultimatereductionist7592
Жыл бұрын
I so badly want to "flatten" all those voxels into a neat single rectangular building
@alexmedak9808
Жыл бұрын
No mention of Sydney's Sirius, public housing block built in the 70s. Iconic for so many Sydneysiders, being directly next to the harbour Bridge, its teardown plans got turned into a luxury redevelopment.
@alastairbattson5123
Жыл бұрын
An interesting analysis of the pros and cons of this design concept and the different realities of the execution of the principals. Makes me appreciate Moshes design more than I did when i worked at the practice.
@sarahwatts7152
Жыл бұрын
At this point, I'd live in a shack if I could own it
@TheAnthraxBiology
Жыл бұрын
Habitat 67 looks so pleasing to the eye and nice to live in too. I wish we built more things like that.
@TristouMTL
Жыл бұрын
Habitat 67 was one of the reasons I moved to MTL actually, representing how much I like the architecture there. It's not a flashy city, so you have to dig a bit sometimes, but there's tons of stuff to find. For quite some time, its downtown towers were stuck in the 90s, but a recent building boom has given it just enough new stuff for it to not look long in the tooth. And its brutalism, oooooh, its brutalism. MTL seems like Victorian warehouse meets Jetsons meets brutalism on steroids sometimes, and it works very well.
@jeanbolduc5818
Жыл бұрын
Flashy ? you mean bland urban development like Vancouver with all the same architecture and Toronto is the same , all concrete and glass bland towers. Montreal is a UNESCO design city like Berlin with 400 years of rich architecture you will not see in north america ,with magnificent churches and the largest urban park in Canada
@RivkahSong
Жыл бұрын
I know that a Pixel building like H67 is probably a nightmare to waterproof and heat but the human element is being overlooked by its detractors, I think. It was built in 1967 but it's still going strong and looks well cared for. Not a lot of buildings can boast that in this day and age. The beautiful and creative design with its emphasis on the unit and adding outdoor spaces ensured that the people living there were happy and proud of their homes, so they cared for it. I agree that construction likely had a negative environmental impact but the fact that it's still standing strong and in use means it's been better for the environment long term than if it had crumbled, been knocked down, and replaced with a more environmentally friendly building. Focusing on efficiency alone is how we ended up with so many ugly functionalist apartment buildings that crumbled into disrepair. Buildings, especially residential buildings, need to have beauty so we love them enough to put in the time, effort, and money to maintain them. Form and function need to be in balance.
@chongkomainek9213
Жыл бұрын
at 0:10, it is Mahanakorn in Bangkok Thailand not Taiwan
@lupus7297
Жыл бұрын
Grade A video yet again! Great that you have highlighted both pros and cons of this way to design.
@schalkvandermerwe3838
Жыл бұрын
habitat 67 - still my favourite housing unit after all this time. I always hoped to see the formula elsewhere too. I guess costs were the issue.
@shadyshay5340
Жыл бұрын
Amazing video. Have always had a hard time comprehending how Habitat works. Thanks Stewart.
@dougborge2798
Жыл бұрын
I like your content. I saw the piece on Chicago windows before a trip to Chicago. Yup they are everywhere. I now recognize them in Kansas City, MO. My friends are suggesting that I stop pointing them out. They say they "get it."
@vikramadityabhowmick6494
Жыл бұрын
Would be delighted to know how Mr. Safdie or rather the designing team involved in this master piece solved the plumbing puzzle for Habitat 67.....
@SehaChan
Жыл бұрын
How do they stack (pun intended) in geologically active areas? Can they be made to withstand earthquakes just as well as regular towers? Apologies if it's a silly question, I have zero engineering expertise.
@fabrisseterbrugghe8567
Жыл бұрын
I remember reading about Habitat 67 in My Weekly Reader when it was pretty new. I thought it looked cool.
@thomaswallace479
Жыл бұрын
My soon-to-be wife & I visited Expo 67, being careful to get a hotel served by public transportation. Of course, there was a strike when we got there. Anyway, we were enthralled Safdie's Habitat. I hope the problems of that approach are solved as time goes on. In my view, bottom up is the way to go.
@General1Cal
Жыл бұрын
I worked on a tower that had 13 floors and it was redesigned to have 45% more space but then the units got split into duplex apartments, so the inside had a traditional square feel but the outside had the pixel feel 10:57 I was the data guy.
@phoenixyfriend
Жыл бұрын
I've been referring to the Jenga building as "the greebled one" since that's how the effect is achieved in animation lol
@onstructures
Жыл бұрын
The module based designs might have issues with economies of material but the construction time can be greatly shortened and save money in a labor expensive market.
@paulguzyk2978
Жыл бұрын
What blows my mind is Habitat 67 was conceptualized and designed ON PAPER WITH A PENCIL AND RULER, no computers, CAD, 3D modeling software etc. To edit his plans he used an ERASER. Safdie's mind was so far ahead of the time...
@rauschma
Жыл бұрын
The “Stacks” in “Ready Player One” have already been mentioned (columns of camping trailers). I really like that idea: - Upside: They can be rearranged easily. This would help for individual stacks: Children moving out? Remove their stack module! But it would also help in cities: Is the local school growing? Add more modules to it! - Downside: They can feel repetitive and unaesthetic. Maybe the solution here is to vary their shapes, colors, etc. Maybe they could be combined more like Habitat 67. Using tiny house designs for at least some of the modules could also make Stacks more livable.
@Chris.Davies
Жыл бұрын
Shame stacked blocks cause leaks everywhere, which are impossible to trace, or fix. Water can track sideways a very long way, and leaks are NEVER below where the water comes in. Having designed and built a single family home based on a Frank Lloyd Wright home - Jacobs #1 (and it leaked!) I can tell you with some authority that keeping water out of such silly buildings is impossible in the long term.
@AVClarke
Жыл бұрын
I think part of the reason these buildings are more aesthetically pleasing to our eyes is they feel more "organic", like they "grew" out of the landscape, as opposed to a steel and glass block that dominates the surrounding landscape.
@johnransom1146
Жыл бұрын
Popularity perhaps due to location rather than the building?
@drac124
Жыл бұрын
I thought the biggest advantage of this layout would be acoustic as units are more "separate" from each other. But that was not mentioned.
@vivalaleta
Жыл бұрын
Layman here but it seems to me that Habitat 1, and its ilk, gives more of a chance for decks and windows and reduction in sound from shared walls, making it feel more like individual homes. What you criticize in Habitat 2 gives more buyers choices as to size and (one expects) cost. What these buildings also do though is ruin the environmental goodness of sharing the heat. This is an important concept during these times of increased temperatures.
@SuperNicktendo
Жыл бұрын
I feel we're on the verge of divorcing from traditional design mechanics. Stopping and trying these designs and trusting data driven models is going to result in some crazy optimized changes to 100s of years of living
@kittimcconnell2633
Жыл бұрын
How would this apply if one were building with shipping containers? It would seem a natural fit.
@Scott_Stone
Жыл бұрын
The thing that I've recently picked up from looking at my block is that here every unit has its borders outlined in the exterior of the whole building. It feels more like a collective of units than one solid soulless piece. This is the feature of Habitat 67 that I really like. But having a lot of raw concrete exposed doesn't look good overall. Because of it, Habitat 1.0 looks more like a futuristic version of some Latin American slums. Greenery alone can't remove that feeling; you need more work on the surfaces.
@adellis24
Жыл бұрын
This felt like a primer for what could be a much deeper look into the current development spike that has stuck the Greater Toronto Area as it is developing density faster than anywhere else in the western world but the city is struggling to keep pace due to the healthy conflicted nature of the political scene in the city. Thankfully the Provincial Government has been taking the lead when it comes to getting shovels in the ground for mass transit projects but the municipal government has been useless for a while now.
@berkrullah
Жыл бұрын
word pixel is misleading. also voxel is not a volume pixel, it's volume cell, just like pixel is picture cell. so if it doesn't include pictures but living spaces we can call them "cells". see, now it's a darker concept.
@328am
Жыл бұрын
I love me some boxes, just not shipping containers!
@Lucidtundra
Жыл бұрын
so... when i blast eminem and pop music at full volume in my little house stacked upon other houses, that's supposed to be sustainable?
@cousinivoryciv1309
Жыл бұрын
@1:16 it should appropriately be named ”VOXEL” …. As u just stated moments earlier….
@Nostalg1a
Жыл бұрын
It seems a better solution than the typical modernist box, but it’s still a box (in this case a bunch of them) with no identity. They also look like they are extremely expensive to keep up
@drsnooz8112
Жыл бұрын
Corners aren't cheap. Neither are cantilevers or decks, especially when composed of structural elements. Habitat 67 is almost nothing but corners, cantilevers, decks, patios and heavy structural elements. If the bottom-up design ethos of Habitat 67 didn't catch on, I bet I know why.
@Stevedawhoop
Жыл бұрын
0:10 isn't that Mahanakhon tower in Thailand not Taiwan?
@jayce1850
Жыл бұрын
This is pretty cool. How do we make it mixed-use?
@ManBehindTheMask
Жыл бұрын
You should just focus on nice looking mixed-use
@MikeDBloke
Жыл бұрын
I prefer to see buildings of character, where I live (Manchester UK) they seem to only be building boring looking tall things of glass, we still have somethings that look fun (Chips building) but that is slowly getting surrounded by more towers of glass. Old buildings getting torn down for more of the same,
@megaflux7144
Жыл бұрын
i mean.. why wasnt the first person who referred to it as "pixel" corrected? whats more stop disseminating stupidity by calling it "pixel"! furthermore was the person so ignorant they never heard the term "cube" or "box"?
@TanInVan
Жыл бұрын
The issue is habitat 67 is literally too expensive for the problem if would try to solve. It’s literally seen as a art piece living.
@ManBehindTheMask
Жыл бұрын
also it looks dogshit
@glaframb
7 ай бұрын
Another Canado-Israelite architect to follow is Avi Friedman and his next home project.
@rgriffith6476
Жыл бұрын
Moshe Safde my *!!! Thats Shia Lebouf! Didn’t know dude could design anything besides a hole
@inferno7181
Жыл бұрын
Goddamn I love Kowloon Walled City
@cmdrTremyss
Жыл бұрын
Everyone is talking about Habitat 67, but I prefer Habitat 69
@Foxehh
Жыл бұрын
Love yor videos!
@laylahassomethingtosay
Жыл бұрын
I sign a lease in Marina City and then you upload a video about it one week later. I start designing a house of two stacked blocks (my first non-octagonal design in months), and two days later you upload this. Are we on the same wavelength or should I be checking for cameras?😅
@seasong7655
Жыл бұрын
6:05 Awkward hallway vs. awkward unit. Both have their downsides imo.
@diegoperezsommariva2509
Жыл бұрын
Its amazing that great architecture can make a human life much happier and terrible architecture can make a human life hell.
@Dec.H
Жыл бұрын
Id love to live in one of these units over any other turdy rectangular block
@jethrowu27
Жыл бұрын
I am glad that the engineering considerations were briefly discussed and addressed. As a civil engineer, my first thoughts are that there are much more surfaces to insulate and waterproof and there are so many cantilevers. In a world where we start considering carbon footprints and environmental efficiency, these pixel buildings need to be more carefully designed.
@JohnFromAccounting
Жыл бұрын
The space efficiency is also non-existent.
@the_real_swiper
Жыл бұрын
Carbon footprint is a scam. Look up who made it
@ericracine6305
Жыл бұрын
Montreal could be harshly cold in winter. H67 is well known to be difficult and expensive to heat.
@chrismill5303
Жыл бұрын
@@ericracine6305 more suited maybe to hotter or tropical areas.
@Icetea-2000
Жыл бұрын
@@JohnFromAccounting Yeah but a lot more livable than grey depressing apartment blocks. Homes should be made for people after all
@luluandmeow
Жыл бұрын
I loved Habitat 67 when I visited Montreal in 1990, they still hadn't "polished up" the World Expo buildings and I was free to roam and cycle around the island, there was hardly anybody around. Now the site seems to have been Disneyfied, and it's such a shame that so many of the original avant-guarde buildings were taken down, the same happened in London and Paris, what a loss. I really enjoyed hearing from the architect, what an amazing person
@Undrave
Жыл бұрын
A lot of the Expo ground are now covered by the La Ronde amusement park (with some leftover buildings integrated into the park itself). The Montreal Casino is on the island and so is the Gilles Villeneuve racetrack.
@Septilingual
Жыл бұрын
I wonder why I find buildings like habitat 67 so aesthetically pleasing. Compared to a standard glass clad tower, it's just so wonderful to look at.
@ange_109
Жыл бұрын
A standard glass clad leaves nothing to the imagination, no surprises and know new perspectives (it's the same which ever corner you look at). I also find buildings like habitat fun to look at and I imagine interesting to walk through. Also I imagined decorating is a unique challenge (if you like that sort of thing).
@ange_109
Жыл бұрын
@Bruno Desrosiers wind tunnels are part of the surprise 😅 on a serious note I didn't consider this but thanks for bringing this up
@CockatooDude
Жыл бұрын
Irregularities are pleasing. If something is homogeneous it can be boring, especially if that homogeneity is just a repeated grid as we see on most skyscrapers.
@sarbe6625
Жыл бұрын
Probably because it has an actual aesthetic aside from "box people live in", or something like that?
@kevinfleischer2049
Жыл бұрын
Visual complexity. This is what makes even Favelas look "interesting" (not that you want to live in one). Big Glass structures and all other uniform and undecorated surfaces are booring to the eye.
@warrenlemay8134
Жыл бұрын
When I was in undergraduate school for Architecture, I often used the "bottom up" strategy with stacked blocks to create the forms of the designs I did for mixed-use and multifamily buildings, with the shape of the units taking precedence over the hallways and other features. It often felt like this conflicted with the philosophy of the professors at the program, who seemed to favor a more top-down strategy of design.
@danieldonaldson8634
Жыл бұрын
Safdie was very much a citizen of Montreal, the city where I also grew up. He came as an immigrant, to a city with a complex urbanism that's fairly unique in North America, dominated by two large linguistic groups that tend to append various immigrant groups to them, based on the dominance of whichever of English or French prevailed in their country of origin. It's a city that has a more intense form of community, especially in those days, than most others, with a lot of politics, and a lot of historical grievance, as well as fairly profound religious lines that were severe in the 1950's. All of which is to say that I think the underlying driver of Habitat was to create a way of living that made forms of community, discussion, interaction, and even acceptance and cooperation inevitable. You can't pretend you don't live near other people, and the very fact that the windows of many units face the outdoor spaces of others, or overlook the routes people come and go is part of that, whether intentional or otherwise. There's one more factor which is that Montreal was until the 1990's a dominantly rental focused city: it even had and still has a municipal law that prevents leases from ending except on (I think) July 1: everyone moves on the same day, and it's chaos! It was built as a rental city, with many many duplexes and triplexes, typically stacked and packed in tightly. There are rarely side windows, only light shafts and narrow separations, lots of skylights, including ones that continue down to the apartment below. Many Montrealers grew up in these conditions, as did I. Habitat was a kind of upgrade to that way of living: more airy, more light filled, less oppressive. I think that in the end Habitat was a gift to Montrealers, more than to the world. It opened in 67, and in the years before the Worlds' Fair opened, Montreal faced a huge crisis around poor quality housing. Already a poor city, with a rich elite, Habitat seemed to be a place that the rich would never take over: it was impossible to adapt it to the expectations of space and exclusivity; so it contained a kind of democratic ideal within itself. Commenters here who talk about the conditions of life within it may not really get how different life was in Montreal. And then, Safdie was a kibbutzim in his Israeli youth. Surely that now lost socialist impulse to shape how people live was also part of how it came to be. All of which is to say, I think that what Safdie showed is that architects who can't take account of these things may never succeed in creating architecture that isn't merely a monument. That immersion in the living ethos of the place is what never seems to make it into designed buildings: Habitat for me has always been the exception.
@audeboutet6059
4 ай бұрын
Very interesting and nuanced analysis. Greetings from a concitoyenne.
@jn9475
Жыл бұрын
0:10 Said Taiwan while showing a picture of Thailand
@stewarthicks
Жыл бұрын
Thanks, I misspoke. I added a correction.
@MisterJeffy
Жыл бұрын
I remember visiting Habitat '67 in the early 1970s. Its occupants had furnished the raw concrete structure mostly with fancy reproductions of antique French furniture. The exposed concrete absorbs and holds massive amounts of water. Living spaces below decks also create problems for water proofing.
@weatheranddarkness
Жыл бұрын
I think that's a basic problem of doing monolithic concrete. Which topological solutions akin to this one don't absolutley require, it was just logistically efficient, and also de rigeur.
@lozoft9
Жыл бұрын
I'm surprised that you didn't mention pre-street cities, like the Taos Pueblo, where instead of people accessing their homes via a street, they climbed and walked across the roofs of fellow residents.
@raeorion
Жыл бұрын
May I just say I wholly agree with your username 👍🏻
@chris2746
Жыл бұрын
This was the basic idea with the Nakagin capsule tower in Tokyo. It worked pretty well but since the modules were designed to be replaced periodically they got worn down very quickly. They didn't keep the modularity fully in mind when designing it and having one person move/replace a module required many people to have their modules moved as well too. It was demolished last year.
@tHaH4x0r
Жыл бұрын
Stewart did a video on this just 5 months ago
@barryrobbins7694
Жыл бұрын
This basic idea is literally thousands of years old (Pueblo Peoples and probably others).
@WorldRaceMVG
Жыл бұрын
My parents have owned a condo at habitat for years. I love it there but there are definitely a bunch of problems with the building
@jeanbolduc5818
Жыл бұрын
They are more problems with new cheap buildings skyscrapers than Habitat 67
@WorldRaceMVG
Жыл бұрын
@@jeanbolduc5818 yes but also no. You clearly have never lived at habitat
@jeanbolduc5818
Жыл бұрын
First of all HAbitat67 units are not condominiums .... before writing false information ,and negative ones , get the facts and Be Impeccable With Your Word ... you do not own the truth
@jeanbolduc5818
Жыл бұрын
@@WorldRaceMVG you dont know me and you do not know where i live . you are so bad educated
@WorldRaceMVG
Жыл бұрын
@@jeanbolduc5818 yes they own a 2 cube. Which comprises of 2 cubes. Together it makes a single condo.
@jpp7783
Жыл бұрын
This is a great video, but I do feel it only touches upon habitat 1.0’s weakness: those are REALLY expensive buildings to maintain. The maintenance costs there must be astronomical. (There’s a reason the construction style-remember this building was to have been a showcase of a new way if doing-was never really replicated, despite that being its initial intent.)
@neolithictransitrevolution427
Жыл бұрын
I've always been a fan of the modular style, I really appreciate this as a follow up to The Nakagin Capsule Tower. I really enjoy the way multilevel exposed walkways turn the claustrophobic feeling of a hallway into an extension of the space, it's a really inversion of the tight feeling of the pods. The appearance of a growing city, as you said, makes the building feel more full of life and engaging, certainly not the mundane or awkward Commie Tower we are so used to in Ontario. I do think I would enjoy the building more if it were built on a first floor podium of a few stories. Housing some mixed use, particularly first floor commercial, would increase that city feel and create real engagement for residents. At the same time, it would reduce the level of redundancy needed in the modules by lowing the maximum load, potential saving cost. Such a podium could "tease" at modularity with some cut outs, creating a textured place feel for foot traffic, but might make the space feel more inviting by reducing the hidden corners.
@Nphen
Жыл бұрын
This comment just saved this comment section for me. The need for a public space "podium" under the apartments is so spot-on. The big problem with auto-centric design is separation of residential & commercial spaces. One advantage of apartments in general (but especially the "commie blocks" (which so many on other threads hate)), is the density needed to support local business and the tax base to support more parks. I find comments (on other videos) of people who once lived in big apartment blocks in Eastern Europe (which are now being revived with color & new interiors) saying it was a great neighborhood. It was friends & neighbors who mattered. I think that's something a lot of people are missing. But you're right with the attraction to open walkways, which feel integrated into the whole space. I think towns & cities need modern, brutal, and traditional architecture in different places and sometimes mixed.
@ConswaMcGaga
Жыл бұрын
I enjoy this complex, but I do wish it was "softer" in appearance. Looking at all those sharp edges everyday seems stressful on an unconscious level, and if the units had a degree of curvature it would really make the whole structure look hilly and organic. I know that would be logistically more challenging, but I'd love to see someone take that on today :)
@robsilvester6213
Жыл бұрын
It's like it's halfway there. The pixelation gives a more organic and non-uniform structure. There's many more sharp corners than a standard box apartment complex, but the multitude of surfaces breaks up the pattern the eye sees with a conventional one-big-cube building. Add in more dedicated greenspaces, at all heights, like tiny backyards, where overgrown hedges and vines and even full trees can hide many of the sharp corners, and that should give it the 'natural hillside' vibe you seek.
@ThatSkiFreak
Жыл бұрын
I can kind of get where you are coming from, but I definitely prefer this more square style. Or maybe I've just played too much minecraft... On a more serious note, I made something like this in mc once (on a smaller scale), and also tried similar blocky structures in different games. Idk, I just like it, quite cool to see it on a real life building.
@MartijnMcFly
Жыл бұрын
It is a maintenance nightmare, made for high fashion architecture and not very future-proof.
@The_Smith
Жыл бұрын
My first thought on Habitat was thinking of the planning needed for the sewer hookups to work . . .
@PowerControl
Жыл бұрын
Or the water pipes...
@The_Smith
Жыл бұрын
@@PowerControl yes, to some extent, but since the water in is under pressure, it's much easier to make work, but sewer is still reliant on gravity to go away (I think, am a bit behind on new innovations)
@Trixtah
Жыл бұрын
Remember those central elevator towers and linear walkways along each level, the rhythmic nature of each spiral as at 9:41, and the fact the unit modules are in standardised shapes and rotated in a consistent way. While some of the pipe runs might travel down the side of a void space, I bet most of the vertical runs are in those elevator towers. The whole thing isn't as higgledy-piggledy as it appears from the outside.
@Eternalspring22
Жыл бұрын
I’m surprised building out of old shipping containers did not find its way into this video. Are there any adaptations at scale of containers? Or is it more stacking a few to make one home?
@mattturner6017
Жыл бұрын
An architect's dream. A delivery service nightmare.
@veggieboyultimate
Жыл бұрын
I always thought these kind of homes would only be found in poor areas, it is good to know that this design is breaking that view.
@anthonyrepetto3474
Жыл бұрын
A variant on pixels that I play with in my brain: A Ziggurat-shaped exterior (each floor is patio, slight overhang for extra space and feeling of enclosure around the exit) with all the houses on it, but stretch that Ziggurat into a prism, like a Toblerone. Then, within that Ziggurat's massive interior is a *HOLLOW* and a second ziggurat, smaller, like a Russian Matryoshka-doll of pyramid-prisms! That second, interior layer of structures and patios gets indirect, reflected light from slats of open air that separate homes above, AND the homes have balconies overlooking this interior plaza; shops and offices go in the smaller, interior Ziggurat's slots. Then, inside that *second* Ziggurat, you dig down to form a diamond-shaped cross-section, with an enclosed train station at the bottom, running *inside* the many-layered Ziggurats. The wide expanse surrounding that enclosed train station is for events - anything from concerts to art galleries to political town halls to high school chess tournaments, all enclosed and layered beneath the shop & office Ziggurat, so no noise or disruption occurs above, and attendees can hop back on the train easily. It creates separate 'enclosure' scales, and the connectivity between them, with open-air shops and green plaza meandering between the feet of the Ziggurat-hillsides.
@emilymiller7827
2 ай бұрын
the world needs more ziggurats
@pedrobetah
Жыл бұрын
stacked blocks are mainly funny which is the main reason
@robertkoreis
Жыл бұрын
You'll spend more time inside than out, so how do you design a 600 sf space (less interior walls) so that it doesn't feel like a glorified dorm room? Ignoring the dated materials, that kitchen in the Habitat 67 building is a typical design from someone who doesn't cook. And as several have noted here, there is the issue of energy efficiency. So many exterior surfaces.
@bikesarebest
Жыл бұрын
Thank you for coming to Montreal, I hope you had a nice time here! Kudos on the video, the production quality is fantastic
@GhostRyder2008
Жыл бұрын
Yeah because everyone wants to live packed in tightly with so many other people. Name someone who, if they won the lottery, would say "I would spend all my money just to live jam packed in the tiniest place next to everyone else!" People need room
@realmccoy18
Жыл бұрын
theylove living in Habitat but they don't love brutalism...many of the units at stuffed full of old lady furniture. i've been inside Moshe's unit (which he just donated to McGill University) and it a very light and bright and the views are incredible...what's a shame is that it used to be social housing and now it's some of the most expensive real estate in Montreal.
@notapplicable7292
Жыл бұрын
Bottom up units frankly look amazing to live in and that to me is the primary purpose of architecture.
@אניבאמתיהודי
Жыл бұрын
One of Safdies inspirations is the Israeli Sukkoh balcony. An apartment is considered to have a "Sukkoh balcony" if the sky can be seen when looking straight up. Since this is what many families in Israel want, this became a very functional decision. Notice how in habitat 67 most apartments have balconies that get direct sunlight.
@andie3614
Жыл бұрын
Love love love the illustration of why bottom-up design is so much more human-centric, and the inspiration for how we can live communally while still preserving a sense of individuality. I think cities are crying out for more of this.
@barryrobbins7694
Жыл бұрын
Habitat 67 was a worthy experiment. Has Safdie ever returned to this concept on other projects?
@gladitsnotme
Жыл бұрын
10:28 that is freakin painful to look at. These types of units are built to be Air BnBs. Someplace quirky and fun to stay for the weekend, not a place to build a home in for years. There's not even a pantry ffs.
@firebolt100
Жыл бұрын
This is an interesting build idea and I'm a fan of adding some variety, but builds like this NEED to somehow incorporate businesses to occupy some of the "units" in order to further promote a sense of community and financial stability in the long run. Although I'm not an architect, I'm obsessed with the concept of living sustainably. By adding places to shop within established neighborhoods, people can have an extra reason to walk instead of drive places. We have more social interactions by walking which means more physical and mental health benefits. By having the opportunity for people to work near where we live, we can reduce the cost of infrastructure significantly by having less wheels on our roads which then allows those who HAVE TO commute for work to be less impacted by traffic. If most of our errands and work sites are not completed by car, then perhaps we could promote better public transit options. The family structure could benefit a lot by not having to travel so far to window-shop, go to a friend's home, go on a date, etc... Children can become much more independent at a young age when the places or people they want to see are available to them without a chaperone. Perhaps stay-at-home parents can be come proud enough to decorate more for their home and become friends with neighboring parents. Additionally, think of the benefits over numerous years of recognizing neighbors and fellow shoppers who are local to your neighborhood. You might not yet know those people on a 1-on-1 basis, but recognizing people as part of your 'village' might be the key to feeling safer in your neighborhood. And don't get me started on the ecological benefits of this hypothetical neighborhood. 😆
@stephenspackman5573
Жыл бұрын
It's interesting that you mention shading and reduced air conditioning costs as a benefit-when these projects are in Canada. Doesn't the increased surface area increase heating costs? It's true that the summers in Montreal are often irritatingly warm, but the winters are lethally cool.
@TristouMTL
Жыл бұрын
Right next door to Habitat 67 is Les Tropiques du Nord, a building whose SW facing side (towards the river) is a glass curtain atrium forming a huge greenhouse. And yeah, Montréal. Why they decided to build a city there, I'll never know. Horrible winters, horrible summers, and short, short springs.
@stephenspackman5573
Жыл бұрын
@@TristouMTL Same reason as Quebec City? Controlling river traffic at pinch points was how governments made money before they invented income tax. And Montreal was indeed rich until they, um, incentivised the financial industry to relocate to Toronto. But yes, I've often said: Montreal, lovely, except for the location.
@weatheranddarkness
Жыл бұрын
@@stephenspackman5573 location's great outside of those things. The politics is the bigger problem.
@stephenspackman5573
Жыл бұрын
@@weatheranddarkness Well, yes. And the politics.
@jeanbolduc5818
Жыл бұрын
@@TristouMTL You are horrible
@iastyle7
Жыл бұрын
The building in 0:11 is Maha Nakhon tower located in Bangkok, Thailand, not TAIWAN.
@Viper54K
Жыл бұрын
These 45 degree rooms look awful to live in. Even in their demo diagrams, the furniture is in odd angles. The nice big unit with the balcony has a couch blocking a large corner of the room off (!?). Who thought this was a good idea? I can fit way more furniture (and a computer desk/gaming rig setup too) in MUCH LESS SPACE in my boring old "square" box condo (550 sqr ft vs 787). If I had to pick between traditional layout at 787 square feet vs this layout, id pick traditional in a heartbeat. I can do way more with it.
@Viper54K
Жыл бұрын
And dont even get me started on the energy efficiency! Arent we in a climate crisis? Should we be designing buildings that use double the energy to cool off/heat up? Is that even legal to code anymore?
@subnormality5854
Жыл бұрын
How do they do the plumbing in something like Habitat 67?
@SlipsJDR
Жыл бұрын
Weird to see the city I live in featured on your channel (since I mostly expect Chicago-Based stuff) but awesome!
@b_uppy
Жыл бұрын
Needs greenery. Elements that appease biophila are important.
@conniebruckner8190
Жыл бұрын
I enjoyed this video, it brought back memories too as I had always wondered how people got to their units (hallways , lifts) at Habitat. I like the idea, but was told by someone who lived there as a child, that his parents didn't like some of the neighbours looking in on their terrace space. I suppose that is something to consider when placing the units at angles to each other.
@ianprentice4240
Жыл бұрын
You visited my city! Awesome! Did you get a chance to check out some other cool stuff in Montreal? Le Stade D'Olympique as an example, also Vieux Montreal and Le Plateau have lots of interesting features.
@TheCriminalViolin
Жыл бұрын
600sqft is minute! Yikes. And on top of that, it doesn't truly give you privacy and ability to be in quiet alone time either because of how "communal" the arrangements are. Definitely opposite of what I would want and need to be truly home and happy.
Пікірлер: 539