What are "Groundscrapers"?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 29 вер 2024
- There is a growing trend for "groundscrapers" - effectively the opposite of skyscrapers - being designed and built in cities. We find out more about these ground hugging buildings. For more videos by The B1M subscribe now - ow.ly/GxW7y
Read the full story on this video, including images and useful links, here: www.theb1m.com/...
This video was kindly powered by Viewpoint: bit.ly/2ndXSEU
Images courtesy of Google, Apple, Christian Richters, Fraport AG Aerial Photographs, Bavaria Luftbild, Martin Joppen and BNKR Arquitecture.
View this video and more at www.TheB1M.com
Follow us on Twitter - / theb1m
Like us on Facebook - / theb1m
Follow us on LinkedIn - / the-b1m-ltd
B1M pictures on - / theb1m
#construction #architecture #cities
We welcome you sharing our content to inspire others, but please be nice and play by our rules: www.theb1m.com/...
Our content may only be embedded onto third party websites by arrangement. We have established partnerships with domains to share our content and help it reach a wider audience. If you are interested in partnering with us please contact Enquiries@TheB1M.com.
Ripping and/or editing this video is illegal and will result in legal action.
© 2017 The B1M Limited
I invented the time scraper, it's just a single small room that everyone in the company takes turns at using as their office.
What a underrated comment! )
did you invent the loo ?
sarcasmo57 ha I love it
Lol
wow it could also be very long on the w axis (the fourth one)
Traffic flow doesn't rely on small elevators so people moving can be amazingly faster. Fire control, should it happen, is WAY easier. Lots of advantages.
What about earth scrapers? Buildings built down into the earth. When or if we get to a stage that energy is extremely cheap e.g. with nuclear fusion, perhaps building down will become viable for things like living spaces. Densely populated areas with little room for new buildings might benefit from this a lot. If energy is cheap enough you can create comfortable environments and cost effectively mimic natural lighting and temperature.
Sky scraper gets its name because from the ground it looks as if its scraping the sky. So Ground scraper is just a long building and ocean scraper is oceananic metropolis. Oceania would make a good city name.
So a skyscraper is a building that is taller than it is wide and a groundscraper is a building that is wider than it is tall ...
wow there are a lot of medieval skyscrapers in Amsterdam :)
Informative
Domino's Farms in Ann Arbor, MI is another example. It's about a half mile in length.
Great example!! Image here: medicine.umich.edu/sites/default/files/fammed-DominosFarms.jpg
Very intresting, how about the Gigafactory:s that are coming up from Tesla?
You want to avoid deforestation to fight climate change but you also want vast space of land to build groundscrapers. Vertical development is the future.
not for everything. Try to find vertical train stations, or vertical airports, ... some buildings simply need to be spread out
Apple builds itself a pentagon... Suit it right because of how much information they give them of their users might as well take over
So if skyscrapers are going up and groundscrapers are vertical, what are called buildings going down?
Thumbnail:
*Shows german building*
This comment section is now german property
Next up, our new headquarters are in a giant Mega Zeppelin that circles the SF bay area.
I rather have small building and a community building like this rather than taking land which is very bug
Square is nice
And safety is one of the major advantages, no?
I thought groundscraper is like skyscraper, but buried in the ground 😂
I thought this would mean they would go underground.
I guess this would be called "earthscrapper". There are some projects about it, but they're all speculations.
i think they call em underground scrapers.
Look up iceberg houses. Those what I thought of ground scrapers
El psy kangalee...
Only a mad scientist would think that
So...a regular building? Also, the whole point of a skyscraper is that you get tons of space in a tiny footprint.
yes, in cities where an acre of land runs you 8 million dollars, skyscrapers are the way to go.
However, in more rural areas, they (the people that live there) don't want 1000 ft buildings screwing up the view. The builders would never get the permit to put up an "eyesore" skyscraper. So, they buy land that isn't uber expensive outside of the city, and then build a skyscraper sized building, in the form of a groundscraper, that cost 60% of the price.
Not to mention the layout is: 1) better for the people to interact with each other. 2) easier to move people horizontally, then vertically 3) easier to take care of maintenance-wise 4) Groundscrapers FTW in case of a fire!! Many more exits, and no need to come down from heights unreachable by emergency personnel. The building would be cleared way quicker, with a much smaller % of the building being in imminent danger.
Well it’s a building that is the opposite also it’s a waste of space
Agreed just a stupid name for a big building wasting tons of space that could be used for housing or parks, is this going to be a new thing now in Manhattan, a ground scraper taking up 15 block 😂😂groundscraper, probably the stupidest name I've ever heard 👎🏻
Victor Stuber the video isn’t disputing the purpose of a skyscraper and more so, goes into detail about groundscapers and their benefits to some.
And yeah, it’s a regular building and so are skyscrapers.
@@Sahadi420 screwing up the view? u said word that french ppl said before the eiffel tower lo
Groundscrapers in London, It's not like London is crowded or anything.
+bristoled93 wait, you’re being sarcastic aren’t you?
Yes I am, groundscrapers are very space inefficient.
well if you think more it makes that particular area less crowded than skyscrapers would :)
@@ligametis a groundscraper will be more stable during an earthquake as well, and yes I know that skyscrapers are also safe as it can be seen in Japan, but still a groundscraper will have more stability due to the way it is constructed.
@@ds15ful relative to the original comment, earthquake resistance isn't really relevant due to the lack of earthquakes in the UK. I think earthquake resistance would also depend on where exactly the building is constructed, as it takes up a large area on the ground
Groundscrapers are not a thing. It's just called a "large building".
+Jorge Orpinel Yeah. But that doesn’t sound as cool.
Jorge Orpinel, EXACTLY!
Classic example of commenting, before watching the whole video
“ that moves “
@@TheB1M click bait jesus christ what a dumb fuck I learned a false information
I feel like these are illogical? The whole point of a sky scraper is to use little land for a lot of office space, this does none of that.
Drew Kelley land is cheaper than global warming
And they use up nature and old buildings
Drew Kelley but they link workers and workspaces
It makes sense if land is cheaper. And that one is build over a train station- space that would otherwise not be used. If the land a groundscaper stands on becomes too valuable to be wasted like that, someone will demolish it and build a skyscraper in its place.
Building designers don't always care about minimizing land use. Skyscrapers are common in cities because land is expensive and densely packed, so minimizing land use is a priority. But in other places outside a city, it isn't as much.
Can't imagine there's a lot of land going for this to massively take off in the UK... I may be wrong
jamescrowther1234 I
Couldn't agree more
Outside of current Cities, its possible. Big companies like Google can practically build anywhere and have a village built up around them. This happened with Toyota in Japan. There is literally a Place called Toyota City which houses the thousands of workers of the factory.
Disko H yh, because it's not practical to build anywhere else.
Over top of streets perhaps?
"large amounts of office space needed for global corporations"
Not anymore....
If going for a groundscraper, why not build a campus, with separate buildings and open space.
more buildings = more exposed surfaces = more heat gain/loss
less density too
The Eyles exactly
I think that’s why Apple built a circle with a private park inside.
@@BassGuitarGuy128 But more exposed surfaces also means more natural light & less energy consumed by artificial lighting
Lol this is some stupid shit. Impractical and bad for the enviroment.
What groundscraper? Nonsense. It's just a short building that's occupying a lot of land which renderers it impractical in cities where land is precious. Skyscrapers create a lot of space with limited use of land and are the logical way for urban development. If groundscraper is even a term, a stretch of townhouses would essentially be a groundscraper as well.
Totally right Sen. But the point here is that these companies DON'T WANT TO BE IN THE CITY. LOL So, instead of making an eyesore 1000 foot building in the middle of nowhere, they basically make their office space similar to a local mall setup. No worries about getting permits to put up a 1000 ft building, and all the added cost of making such a building. I love this concept, as long as the rooftop of these buildings is put to use. I think a huge park on top would be cool, with plenty of space for "eyesore solar panels" that no one would ever see.
Building on top of train tracks is genius though. So many kilometres of track that can be built over. And if you make the building provide some form of indoor tram or shuttle for transport....it creates a very viable space for essentially 0 land cost.
+Desmond Aranha You right! That's seriusly smart!
+Desmond Aranha That seems like a good idea tbh.
@@Sahadi420 trust me, the real eyesore is a big ass ugly ass block of concrete that doesn't end rather than a slim, good looking building that points to the sky.
There is absolutely nothing remarkable about groundscrapers
same can be said about skyscrapers that are destroying ancient European church tower skylines.
@@ligametis it's 2018 not that much people even care about religon, just imagine in 2030 less people are gona care
@@idocare1954 There is still magnificent beauty in churches and even non religious people have a strange unexplained feelings when they visit them. Churches are highest level of art, they combine history, masonry, drawings, sculpture, overall best what people have achieved. New buildings can be art but they are still ages away from church architecture.
@@ligametis Yea true what you said, but you can't let religon hold science back you have to always progress.
@@idocare1954 It's not like skyscrapers are the home of science (at least not in the same way churches are the home of religion). They're more like the home of money.
buildings this length should include some sort of mechanical transportation to transport to each side of it like a small scale subway or elevators that move horizontally as well as vertically.
Brandon Ramirez or allowing people to use their feet. working in an office in a tower, sedentarity gets really bad
Hillel Cohen while i'm all for exercise, time is money and you can't make people walk the distance of a horizontal skyscraper every time they need to go to visit different departments or when they need to get to a meeting on time.
I hear you. I am working on 7th floor and I often need to do meeting on the 9th. I spend so much time waiting for those stuffy elevators that I often have to take the stairs. With a system as we can find at the airport things could work.
Real easy, treadmills. Pennies on the dollar in cost to elevators that need to go 1000 feet up. Hell, I bet they'd even have bike lanes inside.
Sahadi420 ok but how wide shall they be without compromising square footage? it’s not a bad concept but can you imagine how many people will be trampling over each other every morning even on conveyor belt that are typically very tight (even the ones in airports)? remember you’ll need them to be going both ways and they need enough space for people to move at their own pace.
What I think people seem to be forgetting is that groundscrapers are perfect for building over the kind of existing infrastructure that people may not want to have below them in living in a house or apartment, such as a railway tracks, industrial facilities or even a freeway. ( you would build them simultaneously)
1:36 Frankfurt loves skyscrapers. The only reason why a groundscraper was built there is the airport megahub, to which the building belongs. A skyscraper at this location would therefore not be possible at all.
plus the Train Station below was already existing so there was no extra land required
outdated after coronatimes. we just need homes and internet connection.
jan prokop That is the interesting point of watching videos years later, it was my thinking, too, when seeing the Apple and google headquarters - having been empty now for 4 months or so and still for quite some months to come (due to COVID-19 - for those who read these comments years later). Me too, for 4 months just a laptop and my mobiles, no printer, no fancy office, no canteen etc, nothing than the screen, with my colleagues on it, once in a while 🙂- but the work goes on and - it works.. So..?
I wonder what the life of pedestrians looks like under these "groundscraper". They may look stunning from afar, but it must be a quite monotonous experience to walk 15 min on a street sided with one single building. They should have at least make it more stylistically eclectic and allows a variety of small shops and public space to flourish on the ground level. Instead, what they have created is simply something that looks pretty from the drone's/god's perspective, not from a pedestrian's perspective. I mean, it might be acceptable for this kind of lifeless "groundscrapers" to be built in the countryside, but to occupy a huge space in city center? No thanks.
In Frankfurts Squire at least I can promise you that as a pedestrian you wont be walking alongside it for long.
So, who walks these days?
This is a very dumb idea. A lot of nature and Iconic architecture will be needed to sacrificed for this waste of space. We already suffer great lack of space, so why not just go for the skyscrapers and stack instead of spread?
YORAMRW II Not all areas lack space that much. There are vast suburban areas where I live and I assume those close to city centers are being replaced by larger buildings with time. This wouldn't be such a waste there. Just a regular building taking up its own block entirely.
While there may be a lot of crowded dense cities in the world, there's also a lot of wide open spaces out there as well.
not at all. Think about all the strip malls you pass by as you go down roads in your area. Now think about if they were all linked together under one roof, how much space would be saved. Just make the roof a green one, like google's at 0:25, with solar panels, and maybe even wind turbines on top to boot. Looks like Apple's "spaceship" is one massive solar panel roof!!!
The one in Germany, over the train tracks is my "how not to do it" style. Yes, it's over train tracks, which is cool.....but it looks like a giant ship in dry dock.
+Sahadi420 I like the design
Nature and Iconic archictecture can even be improved with them.five-story buildings were common since roman times or even more ancient than that,so you could take the space of ugly,inexpensive five-story buildings and transform into a giant and beautiful groudscraper that could even have a neoclassic style fused with lots of solar panels and plants like Apple's HQ.I would love to see some Neo-Gothic,Neo-Baroque and Neo-Victorian style buildings.
Actually,like the guy said about strip malls being transformed into a big building,in my city,the two most beautiful(and quite big compared to the rest of the buildings here) buildings are "groundscraper-ish" Shopping malls located in the heart of the city.One's style is victorian,while the other is baroque,and both are facing two large parks.It should be noticed that our public transport is way better than most of US cities(I'm from Brazil)as the culture of using cars to go everywhere doesn't quite exist here(most things we buy in the suburbs at walking distance,malls here are for fancy or unusual stuff).
I live in a groundscraper. It's a caravan which lost its wheels... Boom boom!
you are Brittish so WHY ARE YOU SAYING AMERICAN DOLLAR, EVEN WHEN IT IS IN THE UK
Lip-smacking is no fun to hear.
Wtf, you defeat the purpose of a sky scraper.
That's why it's not a skyscraper?
These 'groundscrapers' strike me as a horrible idea. I just think of all of the land beneath these buildings that could be used for something else. There could be 3 buildings with the office space of the new Google London headquarters situated on the same footprint. It's almost like pretentious tech people got together to figure out the least efficient use of land possible.
As ambitious this may sound, it could be worth a try in order to help environments. It could also save some people whenever a mass extinction occurs (though hopefully it won’t be soon).
These are not “new” types of buildings. It’s just that nowadays people keep coming up with stupid names for everything, regardless of whether they are needed or not.
$1.3 billion? Sounds like they got ripped off, the biggest cruise ship in the world, The Harmony Of The Seas cost the same, is 6 stories taller at 18 stories and is longer at 1184 feet long, has its own power plant, can move anywhere in the world through the ocean, withstand major storms, and has living quarters for almost 9000 people..
I think I prefer the term 'sidescraper'.
Save groundscrapers for when we build big, underground.
I've always thought a ground scraper was basically a horizontal skyscraper and didn't really think of the Pentagon being considered one. I pass The Squaire in Frankfurt at least once weekly since it's at the airport. The building is so huge that it contains two Hilton Hotels with the office space as well as an entrance to the long distance train station. I actually think it's a marvelous piece of architecture.
I see good use for this in car centric metro areas and perhaps near airports. Skyscrapers are better in nearly every way
Caleb Gallegos Skyscrapers are more expensive to build per m^2 of floor space you get, but they save you on land space. You could draw a graph of what height is the most cost effective for the land value and this will be at the opposite end where land is laughably cheap compared to downtown areas.
What's the point? I thought we were lacking space?
I was expecting a building withmost of it underground...
ua-cam.com/video/v3HdSyqDSv8/v-deo.html
I like the Apple headquarters. It seems easy to defend from external attack. You could hole up in there for months to resist a long siege.
What about a "Corescraper" which is like a skyscraper but is built hundreds of stories downward underground. This eliminates the need for complicated temperature controls because the temperature is fairly constant underground. It also doesn't impact the skyline, and if built large enough and in the proper location can have a geothermal generator that powers the building on the bottom floor.
West: Groundscrapers
Philippines: MALLS
The groundcrapers most resemble a high-speed train station or central, but it is in the United States where nala trains do not exist and only diesel and coal trains exist.
come on man, this is just a regular build, not even tall, and, a groundscraper its a building under the ground not just a little building
These buildings are huge, they are not just a "little" building.
I'm pretty sure skyscrapers are still better though...
Lol you can only build these out in the middle of nowhere though !
Real estate that size is impossible to Aquire inside modern cities.
I love the German building built around a train station. That's ingenious.
How does one live in a round building. ? It’s by definition a big waste of space surely.
The Pentagon is 5 stories tall? I only counted 4.
This is just a long building...
Seems like a waste of space and more trees are being cleared. Go tall or go down or don't build.
Looks to me like a silly term in search of a definition. I've never heard of the Pentagon being referred to as a groundscraper, and I don't think it adds anything to the language to refer to it as such.
A groundscraper by my definition is a large mechanical device for shaping the earth, like e.g. a grader for roads or agricultural fields.
Even skyscraper is a rather silly term that smacks of hyperbole. A large building that is not a skyscraper is a low-rise. High-rise is preferable to skyscraper as being more accurate. No building no matter how high can actually scrape the sky. If you feel the need for another gradation, you can always use mid-rise.
“Time to go to lunch just have to walk a mile through this building”
If only they made them good looking :(
I thought this was gonna be 'bout my old lawn mower with busted wheels.
This could be an onion video, a "GroundScraper," really? That's just a regular building, who would've thought the Mall in my town was actually a groundscraper. Or perhaps a long road of terraced houses can actually be considered a groundscraper too?
well there are normal long buildings and there are extreme ones, just like there are tall ones and extreme ones...
Amazing building, love the design and layouts. Sadly cities have space problems and building up is the only choice.
make in Japan where it is lack of space😂😂😂😂
Large Japanese train stations are really large but not so tall. Ignorance is bliss.
Why did no one ever think of this? Oh wait, they did. The reason Sky scrapers came into being was because of the price of land made it cheaper to go up rather horizontal.
in some places like the example from Frankfurt am Main the space on the ground is occupied already but it used for another purpose right above its primary use ...
It’s a stupid name I don’t care if you spin $1 trillion on it
Waste of space and of time/energy to move around. Most modern hospitals are built vertically, because a doctor can move several stories in a nick of time, as opposed to have to walk in endless corridors.
tbh I hardly see any modern hospitals, most are old-grown over decades and spread out; Even those which are built tall are still spread out in the area as well
Phenomenon. A phenomenon, many phenomena. NOT a phenomena.
+Tanith Rosenbaum you’re right, sorry!
Who else though that ground scrapers are undergroung skycrapes
It's like a cruise ship but on the land instead of the sea.
What are groundscrapers? Is the answer hideous, unimaginative, corporate, bland, a waste of land, etc.?
Bruni
Yup so I have a reason to go to the countryside and see the sky instead of having something that takes too much space that make me have to travel further for the countryside.
But If it was limited because of airplane flying above them then it a great idea.
Bruni - Yes, in a city with other tall buildings, another tall building doesn’t stand out, and may give relief to the eye as it is usually different from its neighbours. And critically where land is scarce and expensive, tall buildings provide cheaper accommodation for people and businesses. Large modern low rise buildings, for instance shopping malls, are universally uniform and bland. Traditionally a town or a city was made up of lots of different small buildings from different eras with different building materials, which gave it character and a human scale. Modern corporate monstrosities spreading across acres of land have zero character and are inhuman like some giant machine.
I'm waiting for undergroundscrapers.
Also, I thought the whole purpose of skyscrapers was to maximize land use - as in, not have a building spread along vast areas.
It's just a longhouse.
Google is too big, time to break up the monopoly.
fuckfannyfiddlefart Do I detect a Bryan Lunduke subscriber?
No, but I'll take a search
The internet is built around them being one company. I guess breaking off youtube wouldn't cause problems, but their advertisement income would be hard to break up since its point of sale is that it is the internet's single stop for people who want to post or host adverts.
The first thing came to mind was the Umbrella HQ under Raccoon City.
What about a groundskyscraper?
The problem is it takes up loads of floor space so you have to buy loads of land which makes them very expensive.
Not necessarily. You have to compare it to alternatives already existing.
el precio por m2 sigue siendo un factor en contra de los "groundscrapers"
1:40 I have seen that one on the 'autobahn'! Thought it was a ship!
The term groundscraper to me sounds like a building that goes very deep into the ground. Would something that goes underwater be a called a seascraper?
By reading the comments you can quickly tell who is european and who is not. Just by the fact that its apparently impossible for some people to imagine a world without 100 Story high concrete/glas boxes in their city centers.
There's a reason why skyscrapers exist...
By this definition its any uninterrupted building with a large footprint in comparison to its neighboring and what looks like a > 4 to 1 ration ( width to height ). Would not every single subway/rail transit hub count? For that matter how about Bridges? The Brooklyn Bridge was once considered a Skyscraper (tallest structure of industrial age at time it was built).
Continuing with this silly logic then every large temple built by Greeks and Romans to the Pantheon of Gods should be considered as ground scrapers. Likewise the Egyptian Pyramids are also Ground and Sky scrapers no?
what if there's a groundscaper, together with a skyscraper? Long and tall at the same time? that would be amazing❤
The Pentagon was a groundscraper.
Hey, i passed that groundscraper in Germany!
The problem is, that these buildings could cause infrastructure problems. Groundscrapers can split a neighborhood into two parts. Like a wall. Pedestrians won't go around and behind them its abandoned and crime rises. Im speaking of groundscrapes with a lengh of 900m (3000ft) and more. Its not good for cities.
Examples:
In Berlin "Märkisches Viertel" was a groundscraper with 1300m (4200ft). About one mile. It was split into 3 buildings. Because it was to hard to get on the other side.
Airport Terminal Berlin Tempelhof was 1,2km. About 4000ft. The airport war closed by 2007. This Building is abandoned. You can see it in the movie: "Hunger Games Mockingjay" Its huuuuge.
In Berlin Kreuzberg was a groundscraper. Later they digg a hole an a street goes through it. Behind the building crime was rising and there were many drug dealers. Berlin had much work to make it better but there is still lot of crime there. Around 900 police operation a year (Berlin Kottbusser Tor)
www.freudefoto.de/wp-jens/uploads/2015/12/hangar_s-1024x770.jpg
www.bz-berlin.de/berlin/friedrichshain-kreuzberg/raub-diebstahl-drogen-so-gefaehrlich-ist-der-kotti-wirklich (in German)
problem is land prices where in new york one square meter can cost 100000 or even more.
The longest Groundscraper is the big Hotel on Prora, Germany. It was built by Adolf Hitler during the WW2 and was designed to be a Hotel that every (German) could effort but it was never completed. The building structure was completed but the interior weren't completed because they needed the money for the war. It is 4,5km/2,8miles long but only 2,5km of this colossus can be used because the USSR destroyed 2km by busting. Some blocks are restored. In one of them is a youth hostel and in another is a museum. This building is absolutly gigantic.
I have groundscraper waiting for me one of this days....
It is 2meters long,50cm high,70cm width,......its called ,...Valhalla here I come!!!
Why not dig deep down like how Umbrella Corp did?
You should have first made a set of rules of what actually differentiate a "groundscraper" from any other long building. Pentagon, Apple HQ... are just big blocks and couldn't imagine them as skyscrapers if they were actually standing up... I think that the first time someone refer to such a type of building was Rafael Moneo's with his 334m long laying down skyscraper L'Illa Diagonal in Barcelona, Spain.
es.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%27illa_Diagonal
Long buildings are incredibly annoying when you need to get from one end to the other. They don’t build skyscrapers without elevators but many “ground scrapers” lack proper and efficient transportation. People can get lost, stranded or worse. Elderly people in particular usually can’t walk long distances. These buildings should have some sort of mandatory transport for people with special needs. Could you imagine being forced to walk to the top of the Empire State Building using only the stairs? They expect people to get around these “ground-scrapers” without any consideration of how much effort and time is wasted merely walking around one of these places. SMH
So what you are saying is that a larger building can contain more stuff? I hope someone puts you up for a Nobelprize or something, because that is fucking genius.
Ground scraper is on of the dumbest names ever. A Skyscraper scraped the sky with its highest point, a "ground scraper" does zero scraping. If anything it's a ground hugger.
Also Frankfurt am Main's pronounced like mine, not main.
Suggestion: Stop saying both measures....i.e., 2200 feet or 660meters...just say 1 of them and maybe put both as text on screen. ..Enjoyed video
groundscrapers are build under the ground like the project proposed by BNKR Arquitectura named "the earthscraper"; or the lowline project (which is more an underground park); the eco-city project, a russian project; or the above below project!! these are groundscrapers! they usually have the form of an inverted pyramid so the natural light can enter!!
I feel sorry for the people working there. sound propagation in that large open room must be absolutely horrible. and "encourage social interaction between staff and outsider" what the fuck? no well-thinking person in the world will drop by one of the mega offices to just kinda hang out. and also, noise pollution. space is a limited resource beyond just how close you are to nearest Starbucks. the vast majority of the planet cannot be used to build on. and from the small space that is left, large (IMO majority) areas need to be nature reserves in order to maintain the biosphere. these things, especially without green roofs are just plain stupid. the video is high quality but I would definitely downvote the buildings if I could.