Live data from Hacker News

Barcelona’s Sagrada Familia will be completed in 2026

cnn.com

191–200 of 341 posts

Re: Barcelona’s Sagrada Familia will be completed in 2026

#191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think most Catholics would know what a minor basilica was, and I'd expect most to misidentify the Sagrada Familia as a cathedral. And that's before you even get into pro-cathedrals and things... 70% of Ireland is nominally Catholic, and look at the confusion over this, say: https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/dublin/2023/06/22/dublin-... Like, the church had to come out and clarify that Dublin didn't have a ca…

What on earth is going on in that picture of St Andrew’s Church?

Luxury mass.

Nah, some event, I assume. It's a big church in the city centre, and I'd assume it has virtually no parishioners these days, so wouldn't surprise me if they use it for other stuff.

Re: Barcelona’s Sagrada Familia will be completed in 2026

#192
post #95

Looking at the surrounding building of the Sagrada, just makes me wonder again, what the hell happened to modern architecture. Modern architecture has destroyed our cities. It's hard to find a building build after WO2 that's actually pretty, let alone an entire neighborhood. Nothing compared the historic cities of Europe. In a time when it's cheaper then ever to build, they've not been able to build anything even clo…

Check out Brent Hull on YouTube who is answering this very question. His basic premise is that post WWII the focus on efficiency and mass production ruined the craftsmanship that went into older buildings.

Meh, we're still very very far from mass-production. We got rich and spend a lot of that on inefficiently building higher quality houses.

https://www.construction-physics.com/p/which-construction-ta... cheaper

https://www.construction-physics.com/p/why-are-there-so-few-... scale

Re: Barcelona’s Sagrada Familia will be completed in 2026

#193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, only the best buildings from hundreds of years ago have been preserved, but that still doesn't explain why we build ugly buildings right now. You would think we would be able to draw on centuries of architectural trial and error to determine what is objectively pleasing to people. Instead it's like the past never existed. Architects keep building hideous blobs of steel and glass and wondering why people don't li…

"hideous blobs of steel and glass" were originally known as glorious and beautiful modern architecture. oversaturation makes the creative into the tired and boring

I am not sure - I can see why Empire State or Chrysler are majestic, but WTC was hideous. And I saw them simultaneously for the first time. The shard is probably nice, shanghai tower is not too ugly, burj khalifa is ok - but almost everything else is eyesore.

Re: Barcelona’s Sagrada Familia will be completed in 2026

#194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the footprint is so expensive, you'd expect more investment in building quality, not less.

bricks and wood are unable to maximize the quality of a limited footprint. an expensive plot of land in a city needs to be built to certain quality standards to make sure it is affordable and safe. this is only possible with steel and concrete. brick and wood alone can't build safely and cheaply over 3 stories

Of course depending on the definition, but light-framed wood is good for around 5 stories. And mass timber (eg. CLT - cross-laminated timber) is good up to ~20. And for the foundation concrete is still needed. But a lighter one.

https://www.construction-physics.com/p/mass-timber-is-great-...

Re: Barcelona’s Sagrada Familia will be completed in 2026

#195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve only seen it in pictures, but I’m not a fan either. Looks completely secular, might as well be a concert hall or something. Maybe that’s the point, throw an as wide net as possible to appeal to everyone to try to justify the cost.

This is an interesting comment to me! How do you define secular-looking? Is it a lack of some particular design element?

It simply lacks Catholic design elements. The stained glass is a jumble of nonsense, not even a nice pattern like the Muslims do, and I suppose there is an altar and a crucifix in there somewhere, but they drown in all the visual clutter, like they’re ashamed of it.

It’s possible, even likely, that the pictures don’t do it justice, so I will take a look in person at some point, but I don’t have high hopes.

Re: Barcelona’s Sagrada Familia will be completed in 2026

#196

I feel like the only person in the world who was thoroughly underwhelmed by it and really don’t see how its future space requirements for a staircase can be justified. This isn’t me trying to be edgy, I like cathedrals, this one (and his general style) just left me cold. Duomo in Milan was far better imo.

I’ve only seen it in pictures, but I’m not a fan either. Looks completely secular, might as well be a concert hall or something. Maybe that’s the point, throw an as wide net as possible to appeal to everyone to try to justify the cost.

Secular? I mean, it's not conventional 19th century cathedral design, certainly, but it has more religious symbolism than you can shake a stick at.

Gaudi himself was deeply religious; this wasn't just the church commissioning a famous architect for the sake of it or anything. It was very much a labour of love for him, AIUI.

Re: Barcelona’s Sagrada Familia will be completed in 2026

#197
post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Population of Barcelona grew from 500K to more than 1.7M in 70 years.

OK (that is much faster growth than Spain as a whole) but the 5.5 billion new people is still irrelevant.

It’s not irrelevant as a ratio. 2.5 billion to 8 billion is very comparable to 500k to 1.7 million. The population tripled in 70 years and, in the current times, you also have to deal with all the existing architecture and infrastructure in the city that wasn’t built for anywhere near that population level.

Re: Barcelona’s Sagrada Familia will be completed in 2026

#198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The purpose of most buildings is to be useful, not to look pretty in pictures. > Modern architecture has destroyed our cities. It's hard to find a building build after WO2 that's actually pretty That's because the things that get preserved are the things that are pretty. You think Romans built their outhouses and warehouses and cheap apartments to look like the colosseum? No, that shit was ugly too, that's why it's n…

I know the economics must somehow make sense, but it's still hard to wrap my head around the fact that even with quite literally once-unimaginable computing power, semi-magical modern materials, structural theory, decades of recorded research and testing, international standardisation, leaps in simulations, optimisation, robotics, pneumatics, hydraulics, electronics, networking, transmission, logistics and supply cha…

Short answer to the riddle is: not enough demand to warrant investment (because you would need a long string of a few magnitudes bigger projects). Basically, the same structural problem that plagues nuclear power plant construction.

All those fancy technological advancements did almost nothing to the typical housing construction, it's still a lot of manual work, a lot of specialized tasks (site prep, foundation, frame/structural stuff, roof, insulation, plumbing, sewage, wiring, HVAC, connecting utilities), a ton of waiting, lots of logistics. An enormous amount of babysitting (project management) of the builders, because everything is basically custom/one-off.

https://www.construction-physics.com/p/which-construction-ta... cheaper

https://www.construction-physics.com/p/why-are-there-so-few-... scale

https://www.construction-physics.com/p/why-its-hard-to-innov...

Re: Barcelona’s Sagrada Familia will be completed in 2026

#199
post #46

I feel like the only person in the world who was thoroughly underwhelmed by it and really don’t see how its future space requirements for a staircase can be justified. This isn’t me trying to be edgy, I like cathedrals, this one (and his general style) just left me cold. Duomo in Milan was far better imo.

I wasn't underwhelmed per se (the thing is mind-bogglingly huge). I just was on one of those "middle aged friend couples go to Europe" trips. Most of my world travel has been solo, and I like to briskly walk around for miles and miles and just see how the city is laid out. "Slowly shambling around cathedrals" was much of the trip, so I was frequently irritated on that trip, particularly so at Sagrada Familia as it mu…

> I like to briskly walk around for miles and miles and just see how the city is laid out

We would travel well together. My wife and I usually do this. We regularly clock up 20-25km a day of just walking around a city, often for 3 or 4 days in a row. We will happily walk from the centre out the the suburbs. From the far west to the far east of a city. We'll retrace our steps and then take a right that looks vaguely interesting. We only start to use the transit system to get further out or when we are short on time.

Re: Barcelona’s Sagrada Familia will be completed in 2026

#200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The purpose of most buildings is to be useful, not to look pretty in pictures. > Modern architecture has destroyed our cities. It's hard to find a building build after WO2 that's actually pretty That's because the things that get preserved are the things that are pretty. You think Romans built their outhouses and warehouses and cheap apartments to look like the colosseum? No, that shit was ugly too, that's why it's n…

I know the economics must somehow make sense, but it's still hard to wrap my head around the fact that even with quite literally once-unimaginable computing power, semi-magical modern materials, structural theory, decades of recorded research and testing, international standardisation, leaps in simulations, optimisation, robotics, pneumatics, hydraulics, electronics, networking, transmission, logistics and supply cha…

There's a lot of costs that go into construction, the actual expense of putting together the parts to make the thing was at one time the biggest one, but not any more.

With all those new technologies that increase the efficiency of buildings and construction come technicians who expect to be paid well for their expertise, so for every manual job removed there's an expert who needs to be paid about as much or more to operate or plan the labor-saving technology so implementing the technology may not actually reduce the cost to the builder at all.

For the parts that do still require manual labor, that's been getting a lot more expensive and hard to find, because hand-in-hand with people specializing in all these fancy new technologies, the appetite for manual labor employment in developed economies has fallen, which pushes up the cost of the parts of construction that technologies hasn't changed.

Regulations and requirements have also massively proliferated in the last century. The number of inspections and approvals that any piece of construction needs is pretty crazy compared to the prewar era, plus new requirements and design limitations set by law that, while good for society (anti-fire, disability access), can sometimes drive up costs or limit design choices because ramps take more space than stairs and fire sprinklers represent a doubling of the amount of plumbing work you need to do.

Land has gotten progressively more expensive as it has become more scarce. Sprawl kinda reached the limit of what commuters are willing to tolerate in the 90s, so nobody can do cheap greenfill development anymore (anecdote, my parents had a new house built on the outskirts of Phoenix in 2006, with a 70 minute minimum driving commute, which I would absofuckinglutely never tolerate for myself): you need to buy more expensive interior land to redevelop. God help you if your local land use regulations require you to provide free parking, in which case you may be forbidden from building on as much as 2/3 of that very expensive land you just bought.

Post reply on HN