Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
would the bad immigrant areas still have a substantial native white population, or would they be scarce (< 10% or so)?
Here, the Gipton and Harehills ward is 35% White British, and is very deprived. The Killingbeck and Seacroft ward is also very deprived, and is 86% White British. The Harehills area has a huge Pakistani population, and is a lot better than Seacroft - Seacroft is just a bunch of bland estates and concrete high-rises, whereas Harehills has an attractive high street with decent Victorian housing stock.
would the bad immigrant areas still have a substantial native white population, or would they be scarce (< 10% or so)?
From what I've seen, in "bad immigrant areas", small pockets with a scarce native population might exist. Though, it doesn't extend on big areas. No stats to back it up. My neighborhood is rather diverse, it has "commieblocks", an old village center, early 1900s multistory buildings and single family homes areas. In the bus, white European-type people are a minority most of the time. All ethnic groups are in minority actually.
Skimmed through the thread on Skyscraperpage, thanks for the link. Great thread. That area experiences severe decay, but isn't necessarily the most hopeless, as it's fairly close to central Paris. A good part of it is mostly empty, waiting for demolition. It will recover sooner or later. Isolated areas with very high unemployment further out in the suburbs, often far from job hotspots and poorly serviced by public transit are more worrying.
Btw, I didn't answer the first time, but the weird tower blocks in Nanterre are public housing.
Oh, what model is it? I hate shaving and do it only every few days.
The bottom one is pretty nice for being among the worst in Helsinki. Well maintained from the outside (dunno about the inside tho) and little graffiti.
That street view don't show the real situation. The whole area is hideous:
Built in the 60's, it's just concrete, concrete and concrete. Pedestrian walkways are above street level on concrete platforms and bridges, and all traffic is restricted to ground level. On the ground there's just bus and tram stops, and parking halls built of concrete.
From what I've seen, in "bad immigrant areas", small pockets with a scarce native population might exist. Though, it doesn't extend on big areas. No stats to back it up.
From what I heard the French census doesn't track ethnicity (Idea ethnic differences don't matter?) unlike the US census, which keeps detailed track. I found a 1930 scanned census record with my grandfather's name in it. It lists the place of birth of everyone and place of birth of parents.
Built in the 60's, it's just concrete, concrete and concrete. Pedestrian walkways are above street level, and all traffic is restricted on ground level. On the ground there's just bus and tram stops, and parking halls built of concrete.
From what I heard the French census doesn't track ethnicity (Idea ethnic differences don't matter?) unlike the US census, which keeps detailed track. I found a 1930 scanned census record with my grandfather's name in it. It lists the place of birth of everyone and place of birth of parents.
Yes, it's the French republican ideal. No ethnic considerations. Children of immigrants are expected to have thoroughly assimilated to the French society, quite different from American multiculturalism, so why keep track of what makes them different (skin color)?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ariete
Built in the 60's, it's just concrete, concrete and concrete. Pedestrian walkways are above street level, and all traffic is restricted on ground level. On the ground there's just bus and tram stops, and parking halls built of concrete.
Ugly yes, but quite clean. I kinda like (ok, tolerate) the brutalist at the end. Though I agree these "slab districts", as we say here just don't work. Places where pedestrian and car traffics are segregated don't feel urban. There is little greenery anyway, just large swathes of concrete. A huge mistake made numerous times in the 60s/70s. Though I've walked through Barbican, in London, and it's quite different from the usual slab district. Thanks to its very central location, real estate seems very expensive there. https://maps.google.fr/maps?q=barbic...3.65,,0,-15.87
Been in a couple of apartments, and inside they're great. Bright, practical and not a single inch of space wasted.
This is a great example of "Brutalist" architecture that was so common in that era. Believe me, we have a lot of this in the US too...lol. Sad thing is, these buildings will probably still be around two or three centuries from now due to their rock-solid construction.
A college professor told a class I was in that this style came about due to the riots that were so common back then - planners had a real "doomsday" attitude about the future, so they designed buildings that could hold off the zombie hordes, so to speak. Such a shame that this style was emulated the world over at a time when they were still putting up buildings right and left. Sigh. Oh well, at least they're nice on the inside...lol
Yes, it's the French republican ideal. No ethnic considerations. Children of immigrants are expected to have thoroughly assimilated to the French society, quite different from American multiculturalism, so why keep track of what makes them different (skin color)?
Ugly yes, but quite clean. I kinda like (ok, tolerate) the brutalist at the end. Though I agree these "slab districts", as we say here just don't work. Places where pedestrian and car traffics are segregated don't feel urban. There is little greenery anyway, just large swathes of concrete. A huge mistake made numerous times in the 60s/70s.
The Finnish ideal as well. Illegal to ask about ethnicity, religion and sexual orientation. Its origins goes also back to the famous year of 1789.
One reason about not collecting ethnicity is also historical. The nazis had an easy job to track all jews as they got their hands on ethnic census stats in occupied countries.
---
I agree. The separation of pedestrians and traffic was a huge mistake.
Almost every 'hood in Finland is clean, houses renovated and mantained. We have no ghettos.
This is about as bad as it gets: http://freezingfinland.files.wordpre...alot.jpg?w=788
And:
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthStarDelight
This is a great example of "Brutalist" architecture that was so common in that era. Believe me, we have a lot of this in the US too...lol. Sad thing is, these buildings will probably still be around two or three centuries from now due to their rock-solid construction.
Yes. I can accept brutalism as a part of an era, but not when beautiful old buildings were demolished and those terrible blocks built instead.
Here's a computer model how the whole street looked like:
And in the corner of that street they built this shopping center:
Man it makes me pissed.
The old railway station (picture from Uni, thx)
And was replaced by this lego brick in 1940:
AARGH!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
