Just wanted to show Danny what he could do with Managua.
- "If you obey all the rules, you miss all the fun"
Is a bit difficult to think of Managua, expanding vertically.
Of course the biggest issue will be the hearthquake risks which Managua is subject to, and secondly IMHO the style is not very NICA.
Panama has earthquakes too. Japan has lots of them and they still have tall buildings in Tokyo. Building codes have to be very strict but it can be done.
Plenty of tall earthquake-resistant buildings.
sure, now there are . . .
They made it through the quake in '89.
you call that the big one ; ) wait'll Cascadia slips in, ay carumba . . . give me ground level any day ; )
San Francisco is south of the Cascadia zone. The coast from Tacoma north is pretty well protected from Tsunamis.
The way an earthquake affects buildings depends on more than it's reading on the Richter scale. I felt two big earthquakes when I lived in the Yukon. One was the one where Turnagain Arm in Anchorage was damaged so badly because of ground slippage. Where I was both times I just saw the ground roll like small waves on the ocean. We have had two big (7 & 7.1) earthquakes since I moved to Calif. An entirely different feeling. It felt like someone had grabbed me and shook me, not very nice.
The 1906 San Francisco was not only hurt by fires from broken gas lines but it also had many buildings built on reclaimed land that used to be part of the bay. When you shake this kind of land it turns into a mud pie.
The new buildings there have piers going down to bed rock I hope.
Portugal had a very big one in 1775. The destruction of Lisbon started Portugal on a downward path from being a world power. More than 120 people were killed in Peru when an earthquake measuring 8.4 on the Richter scale struck less than 200 km (125 miles) off the coast of the South American nation in June 2001.
But don't think that you are safe in the U.S. if live back East. The biggest earthquake in the USA was a long way from the West Coast and actually changed the course of the Mississippi, it was in New Madrid, MO in 1811-12. http://asms.k12.ar.us/armem/richards/
Geoscience Australia said an earthquake measuring 8.6 on the Richter scale releases energy equivalent to about 10,000 atom bombs like the one that destroyed the Japanese city of Hiroshima in World War Two.
You are right about the fact that it is possible to build in seismic areas as Nicaland as the Japs do, but their technology is much advanced in respect to the local one, in Nicaragua construction firms have much to learn, therefore forogneir developers have to be called in, and this will push the prices of property much higher then the actual levels.
At the moment those kind of developers will be on their tows in regard to invest in Nicaragua, for obvious reasons (know what I mean??), so probably this will not happen at a very fast pace, like I have seen happening in other parts of the world, plus I prefer to live in low density areas, so hopefully this dream of yours will be postponed as much as possible
Managua does seem to be the worst possible place to build tall buildings if you have a choice. Maybe they will end up building a little farther away from the danger zone, but they will be built.
I was at Metro Centro watching "War of the Worlds" when the big one hit in July of 2005. Everything shook, but nothing fell on top of me. I am glad. :) and happy with what ever technology they are using currently.
NICA's not very stylish.
Its funny, there are a lot of building going UP right now, and it seems as though there is starting to be this surge of Vertical buildings in Managua. Not extremely high, but working their way up.
There is a vertical surge, which a few years ago would have been unthinkable.
In my view this is a bit dangerous, because the risks are there, of course I hope to be proven wrong, and that the architects of those buldindgs are taking all the sismic precautions on board.
At least they are not going up to the same level as Panama City, or other cities.
I work directly with high rise contractors in Panama and am starting to do more business in Nicaragua - there is definately an interest here especially with new seismic technologies - just a matter of time. I have lived there for 14 years and love it but a lot has changed in that time and the city is getting very crowded and congested not to mention problems with every utility etc.
I hope that the matter of time which you are refering, will be long past my staying in Managua.
I reckon this style will not suit Managua or Nicaragua at all.
INMHO Nicaragua is better served by a villas style, and lots of green areas.
But propably I will be proven wrong in the name of progress.
My comments were not so much on the architectural side - I like the way the Managua main streets are laid out. Land is getting expensive and the developers are thinking vertically to make the units affordable.
As it is, some of the new developments on Carr. Masaya are looking very crowded. The homes are cookie cutter homes poured at once.
I'm for lower density too and live outside the city in Panama. My job is helping build in concrete quickly and that brings me to all kinds of places in C.A.
I hope you are right and they do leave some green corridors throughout the city.
I'm with you, in the sense that because of land prices going up, of course the developers are forced to move vertically.
And I agree too on the fact that many projects on the whole of Managua have crowded the scenery.
The fact is that I'm fed up of skyscrapers, and would not love to see this happening anywhere in Nicaragua.
But who can halt progress.
I have my selfish moments when I wish I could go to my favorite places and never see anyone like it used to be in Panama but let's face it people are coming they need to live somewhere and speculators are driving prices up. If you have the land and make the profit you will most likely continue speculating and eventually single familly homes are prohibitively expensive is some areas - that is what's happening in waterfront areas of Panama and will most likely happen here = vertical.
Bocas del Toro in Panama has made it difficult for the native to live there - foreigners have opened business charge higher prices and real estate has skyrocketed - labor has remained close to the same as usual so who's getting pinched out of the economy - the same people that were lured to take the, seemingly, big profits they were offered. Where do they go now?
I prefer how Managua is.
that is a beautiful photograph. . . not to mention, come next earthquake, suvivability goes way up the closer to ground level you start at. I don't think too many have forgotten '72
not exactly what I like about Nicaragua . . . but they do hide the squalour that lies behind them . . . or he could do something about the squalour. And yes, I have been to Panama twice.
If Danny could trade the griminess, grubbiness and smuttiness for cleanliness, freshness and refinement Managua could well do without any high-rise buldings at all.
Mañana doesn't mean tomorrow. It just means not today.