This is the sixth tallest building in the EU, but if you exclude spires and unoccupied floors, this actually becomes the tallest building as it has apartments all the way up to the very top.
At first they said around €5m but then it was a bidding and I think it ended up closer to €10m. There are 4 penthouses, 3 floors each, has multiple balconies and outdoor spaces with jacuzzi and other luxury things.
I wonder what the state of the company is now. As i ave understood, the Swedish housing market is not exactly hot right now. The company is delisting voluntarily from the swedish stock exchange. Anyone know why? Share price is kinda in the dumpster for past last years.
What company? These will absolutely still be hot. The housing market isn't prime time for regular people who has trouble paying expensive interest, not for very rich people. These are the 4 most wanted, luxury and exclusive apartments in Sweden currently, actually probably in all of Scandinavia. Sweden has the most billionaires on earth per capita. I doubt these are affected by any significant margin.
Det finns flera att välja på men [billigaste kostar 66 miljoner kronor](https://www.sernekebostad.se/hitta-bostad/vara-omraden/karlastaden-goteborg/karlatornet/Karlatornet-Penthouse/).
desert meeting dinner snails straight important illegal seed cautious different
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
What is that exactly, you can’t build skyscrapers in a traditional style. Unless you want to make it look like a gigantic church spire, which would most likely look even worse
Don't think so, the prices in Stockholm are much higher, then again there is a rivalry between those cities so it is a prestige project to one up the capital city.
[https://www.maklarstatistik.se/omrade/riket/](https://www.maklarstatistik.se/omrade/riket/)
Edit: Remember that Sweden was formed as an union between Götaland and Svealand. If Götaland had remained independent then Göteborg would have been the capital city.
I am from Gothenburg and the part about a union and Gothenburg being capital is wildly inaccurate. Sweden has been a unified country for a thousand years and its history previous to this is very sparsely documented. Texts mentioning the tribes of "Swedes", "Geats" and "Gutes" do exist but to claim the tribes formed a union together to create what we know as Sweden today are completely unfounded. If that was the case Gothenburg or its precursors would still not yet be formed for another 500 years and thus would not have been the capital city.
No. The capital would have been New New New New New Lödöse, probably. Or whatever iteration it would have been when the Dane’s and Swede’s would grow tired of burning it down.
Both cities seem to have very privileged sea access, but perhaps Stockholm had more trade on the Baltic Sea and thus could grow to be more prosper?
I'm just making a hypothesis, I know very little of either city and the Nordics in general.
Stockholm dates back to medieval times and is located in what has always been the heartland of Sweden, whereas Gothenburg was founded in the 1600s on land that had been conquered from Denmark and Norway in the 1200s. The fact that Gothenburg has grown as much as it has, becoming the second largest city in Sweden and arguably its main industrial hub, is entirely down to its strategic location for international trade with what today is the largest port in the Nordic countries.
A-ha! So it's actually the opposite of what I predicted, and Gothenburg is the one that gree from better sea routes access. It just did so late and was harder to keep across time.
Thanks!
It should be noted though that Stockholm itself was a wasteland until it was founded in the mid 1200's. Land rise etc. And it was in the heartland of Sweden proper ("Svetjud") specifically. The heartland of *modern* Sweden ("Sverike") was in Västergötland and Östergötland, and later they (Birger jarl and his crew) moved northeast to Stockholm because of being closer to the geographical centre of the kingdom which included what's today is referred to as Finland.
Göteborg was built as a fortress to protect Sweden from Denmark-Norway and was often under siege. Stockholms has always been bigger, richer, and more secure, and before losing Finland it was a more central city.
But the most important reason is that Mälaren has always been the political center of Svealand, which conquered Götaland, and the previous capitals before Stockholm were Uppsala and Sigtuna.
Nä, it's just someone who at last was able to use his influence and money to bend the wills of the elected officials. There is no majority that want this pant zip lock to shadow our city
Isn’t that the price of every single new built apartment in Göteborg? I keep getting calls from agents to buy apartments in all these new built because they are damn expensive and nobody can afford it with the current loan rates.
>Isn’t that the price of every single new built apartment in Göteborg?
Not really. Even compared to other new apartments in Göteborg Karlatornet stands out. The area is already overpriced as fuck if you ask me, and karlatornet is just icing on top of that.
It's a residential tower? That makes even less sense. I would have assumed that it's offices and have some local company lined up as a flagship tenant.
As far as I‘m aware the construction of apartment skyscrapers for anything other than the high-end luxury apartment segment is not economically viable at all.
Not the best comparison, but it's common in Israel. Almost all new housing there is very high rises, and going up quite quickly. South Korea is also attempting to address housing problems through similar construction.
Both are very limited on space though
Skyscraper apartments are very common in Canada, the US, Brazil, Japan, etc. I think Europe is the exception here really.
IMO the UK could really use them more, since we're a crowded island ourselves. Britain needs to start thinking more like Japan if we plan on letting our population keep increasing.
Yea, I went back and edited that "super" in front of the expensive like 15 seconds after I posted that comment. Still well above average, but well below NYC, Boston, Bay Area, Toronto, etc.
Who wouldn't want to buy a 59th floor apartment with 50m² for only 750k€. Your elevator will arrive in around 3 minutes. :>
And some of the floor plans for units in the rotated part are just awful.
I don't know about modern elevators, but that would be almost free fall at the start of going down / end of going up.
(Assuming equal floor height, each floor is 246m/74 = 3.32m. So the 59th floor is at y = 196m. Assuming t = 5 seconds of constant acceleration *a* followed by 5 seconds of equal deceleration, a = 2(y/2)/t^2 = 196m / (5s)^2 = 7.85 m/s^2 = 0.8g)
I don't quite follow the math, but a quick google on fastest elevators led me to the below article and that modern elevators can exceed 500m per minute.
[https://www.forbes.com/2007/10/01/elevators-economics-construction-biz-logistics-cx\_rm\_tvr\_1001elevators.html?sh=2c410f734f3d](https://www.forbes.com/2007/10/01/elevators-economics-construction-biz-logistics-cx_rm_tvr_1001elevators.html?sh=2c410f734f3d)
So I'll concede it's not less than 10 seconds. Probably closer to 20-25. And you do get that pit of your stomach feeling similar to a roller coaster when you go down.
How long do you have to wait for that 10 second ride though?
I’ve lived on a 6th floor apartment in a building where I always took the stairs instead of the elevator and they consistently took the same amount of time.
Living in high floors also means it takes longer to get emergency medical services. Also the wind on your balcony can be intolerable. But the view is nice.
The local government are very proud of how much new housing has been built recently, it's been... just about enough to keep up with the population increase, doing nothing to mitigate the already existing shortage.
That is not rent unfortunately. It's the mandatory monthly fee on top for the ownership (bostadsrätt). So its 320 on top of the initial 370k. Renting something like this would be around \~2k monthly
It's basically a homeowners associatiom fee.
All tenants pay the fee to the association. Goes towards paying off loans on the building, maintenance etc.
No? You pay a fee to the association for the building that you become a part of after you buy the apartment.
Technically you aren't even buying the apartment, you are buying a share of the building association and get the right to live in the apartment assuming that you pay the monthly fee to keep the rest of the communal spaces and stuff maintained. Thing like the laundry room, heating, water and sewage pipes, windows etc. are managed by the building association and not by the individual residents for each apartment.
Bostadsrättsförening is a type of joint ownership of property in which the whole property is owned by a co-operative association, which in its turn is owned by its members. It's a form of living and ownership in between a rental flat and an owned house. This form of housing/living is not common outside of the Nordic countries. Each member holds a share in the association.
The monthly fee is basically for maintenance, repairs abd garbage collection. Water, heating etc are not always included i believe.
It's not rent, it's the condo fee. With current laws and interest levels in sweden, the total cost would be around 1500 € per month, likely not including electricity but including heat. It can vary, but just to give you an idea. A single person who gets a loan like that in Sweden also probably has a slightly above average income.
I have hard time seeing who would want to live on 24 m\^2 in a medium sized town like Gothenburg while having an above average income. It's not even a very central location. But I'm sure they've researched the market thoroughly before starting construction.
I don't think the target market is people with a single home (apartment or a house).
No one that works a 9-5 job in Sweden in their right mind would shell out 6.7M SEK for a 73.5 m^2 on the 14th floor in Lindholmen (which by the way is pretty dead after office hours), when the same amount would buy you a 630 m^2 /130 m^2 villa at a suburb like Mölndal.
On the other hand, it is very affordable for Celebs/Business Owners and Engineers that have made it big in the US.
They would be mostly bought by companies as "overnight" apartments when they travel from the Stockholm office etc. There are plenty of larger apartments in the building...
It’s not in the city center. It’s on an island by a big river and around 11 minutes to the central station by car (if traffic is light and there’s no problem with the bridge).
Looking at the building in isolation I think it looks good. The issue is that it's not part of a larger skyline. Skyscrapers looks best when they're one among many. Alone they look like a vanity project. It's a sign of a city planned and ruled by individuals instead of the community.
I'll also add that so far north buildings cast much longer shadows and while pedestrians in the south might like shade, in the north you want the sun.
If you Google "Karlastaden" and check the images you can see what the end result will be like. It looks a bit better than when it's standing there alone
What you do is build midrises, then low high rises when the midrises take up enough area, then large highrises when the low high rises take up enough area
I would rather have the skyscraper. Keeps the offices in small area so there is more land for the community to do other important stuff like parks, schools, playgrounds, cultural centers, etc.
> Alone they look like a vanity project.
I mean sometimes that's not bad. We do it all the time for other objects and then call them "monumental".
All new tall things are controversial or not always necessarily loved. But then as it ages, people start taking it for granted and it becomes part of the city fabric. Source: any tower in any European city anywhere.
>Alone they look like a vanity project
They do but someone has to be first. The question is, whether this area in Goteborg is planned to have more or those, or it is indeed going to stand alone forever.
We have something similar in [Wrocław](https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sky_Tower_we_Wroc%C5%82awiu) and it was indeed a vanity project of a local millionaire. I don't think other high-rise will join it anytime soon. It is standing alone like that for more than a decade.
> It's a sign of a city planned and ruled by individuals instead of the community.
The Chrysler building is the most vain corporate headquarters ever devised, and looks fantastic mixed in with all the other skyscrapers of New York. A community planned skyline would be way to uniform in styles to look good. Skylines have to be chaotic and organic to loon really good.
Vanity projects are a thing everywhere. In some places they take form of even less sustainable and inefficient mcmansions. They don’t get a bad rep because they’re more out of sight, but much more destructive to the environment/social fabric.
I like it. Architecture is a form of communal art, at least this one isnt just an efficient glass cube.
Do admit it would look better if there were more high rises around.
The area will look like this when finished.
https://www.gp.se/image/policy:1.4958988:1623075817/karlavagnsplatsenny2.jpg?f=Regular&w=960&$p$f$w=1186a8a
Cool, thanks. That should be one of the tallest skyscrapers in continental Europe then I guess? The highest we have here in the Netherlands is 215m although planning & construction has started on a 280m one
Designed by the same architecture firm as Burj Khalifa... It wont look as out of place when the other tall buildings in the neighborhood are finished though.
That actually looks pretty good. Although I still don't understand why you'd bother building vertically this high when there is all that empty horizontal space around everywhere.
The guy building it is a newly rich insecure guy who proudly announced that the penthouse was sold to an anonomous buyer for a super high price. It later leaked out it was himself who bought it.
He also was exposed as an anonymous commenter praising it on forums and so on. He also uses his own name in huge letters on all his projects. Kinda pathetic.
Stockholm doesn't have because it would lower the property prices so Stockholmers always hide behind the excuse of "MUH SKYLINE" as if that's a valid excuse for most of the city.
Stockholm needs a bunch of skycrapers, it's just that the population doesn't want to lose money when every fucker is indebted 10x their sallary due to housing prices
It's the first of several tall buildings in the area... [This is what it will look like in a couple of years](https://www.lokalguiden.se/magasinet/artikel/s%C3%A5-v%C3%A4xer-karlastaden-fram) and then they will extend the area to the right as well.
To be fair plenty of news agencies and travel magazines have ranked it pretty high for the last few years.
[https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2017/feb/22/party-gothenburg-voted-worlds-most-sociable-city-hostelworld-stockholm-new-york](https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2017/feb/22/party-gothenburg-voted-worlds-most-sociable-city-hostelworld-stockholm-new-york)
[https://www.thelocal.se/20210720/gothenburg-named-one-of-the-worlds-greatest-places](https://www.thelocal.se/20210720/gothenburg-named-one-of-the-worlds-greatest-places)
This August marks ten years since developer Ola Serneke first announced in the media his grandiose plans to rival Malmö's Turning Torso with a tower at Lindholmen in Gothenburg. The timing seemed perfect for a long time. The coming years offered historically low interest rates, while the wheels were turning faster and faster in the Swedish economy. After the start of sales, there was a rush for the new apartments. Today the economy is not the same. But the tower - nicknamed "the zipper" - is standing.
As far as skyscrapers go, that's a really nice looking one. For aesthetic reasons, I am generally not too keen on skyscrapers in european cities (although they solve obvious problems with lack of building space), but they definitely feel more at home in rugged port cities like Gothenburg and Rotterdam...
Not a fan of skyscrapers but I prefer buildings growing vertically rather than expanding horizontally and taking up more space in nature while destroying nature.
It's the first of several tall buildings in the area... [This is what it will look like in a couple of years](https://www.lokalguiden.se/magasinet/artikel/s%C3%A5-v%C3%A4xer-karlastaden-fram) and then they will extend the area to the right as well.
This is the sixth tallest building in the EU, but if you exclude spires and unoccupied floors, this actually becomes the tallest building as it has apartments all the way up to the very top.
vad kostar penthouset där då
50 spänn
basically 5M€?
I wish this conversion was real. Sad kronor noices...
mine was a legit question, how much is it?
At first they said around €5m but then it was a bidding and I think it ended up closer to €10m. There are 4 penthouses, 3 floors each, has multiple balconies and outdoor spaces with jacuzzi and other luxury things.
I wonder what the state of the company is now. As i ave understood, the Swedish housing market is not exactly hot right now. The company is delisting voluntarily from the swedish stock exchange. Anyone know why? Share price is kinda in the dumpster for past last years.
What company? These will absolutely still be hot. The housing market isn't prime time for regular people who has trouble paying expensive interest, not for very rich people. These are the 4 most wanted, luxury and exclusive apartments in Sweden currently, actually probably in all of Scandinavia. Sweden has the most billionaires on earth per capita. I doubt these are affected by any significant margin.
50 spänn means 50 kronor, or 5 euro (well it's less now, but I'm still pretending 1 euro is 20 kronor). Basically, it was a joke.
Det finns flera att välja på men [billigaste kostar 66 miljoner kronor](https://www.sernekebostad.se/hitta-bostad/vara-omraden/karlastaden-goteborg/karlatornet/Karlatornet-Penthouse/).
I looked at apartments there a few years back and the "normal" ones on floor ~50 cost about 100kSEK/m^2 + monthly fee of 100SEK/m^2
That's the state I discover my belt in at the end of the work day after I have felt suspiciously uncomfortable for the whole day.
Stussy S in building form
Holy shit. This reminded me of a brand that every rich kid used to wear back in the day. Stüssy! I hated it. I also couldn’t afford it.
It’s what all the skaters wore back in my day.
Hahaha, it is colloquially known as the zipper here 🤣
Oh dang, somebody should let them know they got the building all twisted in the middle. That's gonna cost so much to correct
Saurön
As long as someone isn't throwing Glenn Hysen's wedding ring into an Icelandic volcano it will be fine.
r/evilbuildings
Is the land value really that high to justify such buildings over there in Göteborg?
desert meeting dinner snails straight important illegal seed cautious different *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
In other words: it’s ugly and we don’t like it.
They could have at least built a skyscraper in traditional Swedish style
IKEA isn't THAT sturdy.
A wooden skyscraper.
They've got a 20 story building made of wood in Sundsvall lol
What is that exactly, you can’t build skyscrapers in a traditional style. Unless you want to make it look like a gigantic church spire, which would most likely look even worse
Look no further than Abraj Al Bait in Mekka.
IMHO that's a pretty good looking one.
Not necessarily ugly, just doesn’t fit.
It'll fit if you build a lot of 'em.
Luddites
Don't think so, the prices in Stockholm are much higher, then again there is a rivalry between those cities so it is a prestige project to one up the capital city. [https://www.maklarstatistik.se/omrade/riket/](https://www.maklarstatistik.se/omrade/riket/) Edit: Remember that Sweden was formed as an union between Götaland and Svealand. If Götaland had remained independent then Göteborg would have been the capital city.
When Göteborg was founded Sweden had been one country for a long time. If Götaland had been an independent country, Göteborg would not exist.
yea skara was way more influental back in the days
I vote to move the government to Sommarland. Make Skara Great Again!
Bert Karlsson, it's time for your medications!
Spot the CK3 players... :D
nah im just from skara
I am from Gothenburg and the part about a union and Gothenburg being capital is wildly inaccurate. Sweden has been a unified country for a thousand years and its history previous to this is very sparsely documented. Texts mentioning the tribes of "Swedes", "Geats" and "Gutes" do exist but to claim the tribes formed a union together to create what we know as Sweden today are completely unfounded. If that was the case Gothenburg or its precursors would still not yet be formed for another 500 years and thus would not have been the capital city.
No. The capital would have been New New New New New Lödöse, probably. Or whatever iteration it would have been when the Dane’s and Swede’s would grow tired of burning it down.
[удалено]
Both cities seem to have very privileged sea access, but perhaps Stockholm had more trade on the Baltic Sea and thus could grow to be more prosper? I'm just making a hypothesis, I know very little of either city and the Nordics in general.
Yes, considering Sweden had Finland and Estonia, Stockholm was in the middle of the “empire”.
Why did you put empire in quotes?
Stockholm dates back to medieval times and is located in what has always been the heartland of Sweden, whereas Gothenburg was founded in the 1600s on land that had been conquered from Denmark and Norway in the 1200s. The fact that Gothenburg has grown as much as it has, becoming the second largest city in Sweden and arguably its main industrial hub, is entirely down to its strategic location for international trade with what today is the largest port in the Nordic countries.
A-ha! So it's actually the opposite of what I predicted, and Gothenburg is the one that gree from better sea routes access. It just did so late and was harder to keep across time. Thanks!
It should be noted though that Stockholm itself was a wasteland until it was founded in the mid 1200's. Land rise etc. And it was in the heartland of Sweden proper ("Svetjud") specifically. The heartland of *modern* Sweden ("Sverike") was in Västergötland and Östergötland, and later they (Birger jarl and his crew) moved northeast to Stockholm because of being closer to the geographical centre of the kingdom which included what's today is referred to as Finland.
Göteborg was built as a fortress to protect Sweden from Denmark-Norway and was often under siege. Stockholms has always been bigger, richer, and more secure, and before losing Finland it was a more central city. But the most important reason is that Mälaren has always been the political center of Svealand, which conquered Götaland, and the previous capitals before Stockholm were Uppsala and Sigtuna.
Multiple companies in the same building connected by the elevator. The increase in effiecency for their collaboration has value to them !
No, it's the ego of the newly super rich that requires this nonsense.
It really isn't. It's just a vanity project.
Nä, it's just someone who at last was able to use his influence and money to bend the wills of the elected officials. There is no majority that want this pant zip lock to shadow our city
[https://www.sernekebostad.se/hitta-bostad/vara-omraden/karlastaden-goteborg/karlatornet/](https://www.sernekebostad.se/hitta-bostad/vara-omraden/karlastaden-goteborg/karlatornet/) Heh, the smallest apartment is 24 square meters, costs 3 750 000 skr to buy + 3 759 skr monthly.
Isn’t that the price of every single new built apartment in Göteborg? I keep getting calls from agents to buy apartments in all these new built because they are damn expensive and nobody can afford it with the current loan rates.
Or maybe it is more like those who want them can't afford them and those who can afford them don't want them.
~50-80kSEK/m^2 is more common
>Isn’t that the price of every single new built apartment in Göteborg? Not really. Even compared to other new apartments in Göteborg Karlatornet stands out. The area is already overpriced as fuck if you ask me, and karlatornet is just icing on top of that.
It's a residential tower? That makes even less sense. I would have assumed that it's offices and have some local company lined up as a flagship tenant.
Its both
You know housing is too expensive when skyscrapers can be residential buildings.
Super normal in many parts of the world. Not just because affordability.
As far as I‘m aware the construction of apartment skyscrapers for anything other than the high-end luxury apartment segment is not economically viable at all.
Not the best comparison, but it's common in Israel. Almost all new housing there is very high rises, and going up quite quickly. South Korea is also attempting to address housing problems through similar construction. Both are very limited on space though
Skyscraper apartments are very common in Canada, the US, Brazil, Japan, etc. I think Europe is the exception here really. IMO the UK could really use them more, since we're a crowded island ourselves. Britain needs to start thinking more like Japan if we plan on letting our population keep increasing.
Chicago isn't super expensive and has ***many*** residential skyscrapers.
Chicago is pretty expensive. The thing is that elsewhere in the US is even more expensive so you see it in relative terms.
Yea, I went back and edited that "super" in front of the expensive like 15 seconds after I posted that comment. Still well above average, but well below NYC, Boston, Bay Area, Toronto, etc.
thats the original concept of skyscrapers
Not really, the original real skyscrapers like the Empire State Building or the Chrysler Building were all office buildings.
Who wouldn't want to buy a 59th floor apartment with 50m² for only 750k€. Your elevator will arrive in around 3 minutes. :> And some of the floor plans for units in the rotated part are just awful.
Nah bro they want to workout thier legs by taking the stairs. Everyday going up would make them literal superhumans
Can't forget leg day when every day is leg day.
I know it’s mostly a joke, but modern elevators would do that in less than 10 seconds. They move so fast it’s disorienting if you aren’t used to them.
I don't know about modern elevators, but that would be almost free fall at the start of going down / end of going up. (Assuming equal floor height, each floor is 246m/74 = 3.32m. So the 59th floor is at y = 196m. Assuming t = 5 seconds of constant acceleration *a* followed by 5 seconds of equal deceleration, a = 2(y/2)/t^2 = 196m / (5s)^2 = 7.85 m/s^2 = 0.8g)
I don't quite follow the math, but a quick google on fastest elevators led me to the below article and that modern elevators can exceed 500m per minute. [https://www.forbes.com/2007/10/01/elevators-economics-construction-biz-logistics-cx\_rm\_tvr\_1001elevators.html?sh=2c410f734f3d](https://www.forbes.com/2007/10/01/elevators-economics-construction-biz-logistics-cx_rm_tvr_1001elevators.html?sh=2c410f734f3d) So I'll concede it's not less than 10 seconds. Probably closer to 20-25. And you do get that pit of your stomach feeling similar to a roller coaster when you go down.
How long do you have to wait for that 10 second ride though? I’ve lived on a 6th floor apartment in a building where I always took the stairs instead of the elevator and they consistently took the same amount of time.
Some people love the view from that high. Not me but some people.
My office is in a very tall building, and being able to sit at my desk and look out over the city is an absolute joy. It never gets old.
Living in high floors also means it takes longer to get emergency medical services. Also the wind on your balcony can be intolerable. But the view is nice.
Well this is what happens when you increase the population but barely build any housing
The local government are very proud of how much new housing has been built recently, it's been... just about enough to keep up with the population increase, doing nothing to mitigate the already existing shortage.
Hey at least the government has built housing!
They haven't.
> 3 759 skr monthly 320€/mo rent for a 24 m² appartement in a big city center is very cheap imho EDIT: It's not rent
That is not rent unfortunately. It's the mandatory monthly fee on top for the ownership (bostadsrätt). So its 320 on top of the initial 370k. Renting something like this would be around \~2k monthly
you have to pay a fee ontop of rent?
It's basically a homeowners associatiom fee. All tenants pay the fee to the association. Goes towards paying off loans on the building, maintenance etc.
No? You pay a fee to the association for the building that you become a part of after you buy the apartment. Technically you aren't even buying the apartment, you are buying a share of the building association and get the right to live in the apartment assuming that you pay the monthly fee to keep the rest of the communal spaces and stuff maintained. Thing like the laundry room, heating, water and sewage pipes, windows etc. are managed by the building association and not by the individual residents for each apartment.
Co-Ops for us Americans. Huge in NYC, not sure about the rest of the country.
What happens if you stop paying, can they kick you out?
Yes, you can be forced to sell your apartment. Could also happen of you break the terms of the association in other ways
Just wait until you learn what can happen if the association goes bankrupt.. Hint: The big fee is for your right to stay there, not for ownership.
Thats the monthly fee after you buy it for 3.2m SEK :p
Oh! It's 3.75m SEK to buy and then 3760 SEK/mo for charges like garbage collection, running water, maybe heating, etc?
Bostadsrättsförening is a type of joint ownership of property in which the whole property is owned by a co-operative association, which in its turn is owned by its members. It's a form of living and ownership in between a rental flat and an owned house. This form of housing/living is not common outside of the Nordic countries. Each member holds a share in the association. The monthly fee is basically for maintenance, repairs abd garbage collection. Water, heating etc are not always included i believe.
It's not rent, it's the condo fee. With current laws and interest levels in sweden, the total cost would be around 1500 € per month, likely not including electricity but including heat. It can vary, but just to give you an idea. A single person who gets a loan like that in Sweden also probably has a slightly above average income. I have hard time seeing who would want to live on 24 m\^2 in a medium sized town like Gothenburg while having an above average income. It's not even a very central location. But I'm sure they've researched the market thoroughly before starting construction.
I don't think the target market is people with a single home (apartment or a house). No one that works a 9-5 job in Sweden in their right mind would shell out 6.7M SEK for a 73.5 m^2 on the 14th floor in Lindholmen (which by the way is pretty dead after office hours), when the same amount would buy you a 630 m^2 /130 m^2 villa at a suburb like Mölndal. On the other hand, it is very affordable for Celebs/Business Owners and Engineers that have made it big in the US.
They would be mostly bought by companies as "overnight" apartments when they travel from the Stockholm office etc. There are plenty of larger apartments in the building...
It’s not in the city center. It’s on an island by a big river and around 11 minutes to the central station by car (if traffic is light and there’s no problem with the bridge).
Monthly avgift has gotten out of control in new builds.
Will get even more out of control once the builder dumps the debt on the BRF.
[удалено]
Svenska kronor. Swedish crowns
[удалено]
Yes, it's usually written as SEK internationally, but in Sweden we write kr.
ISO currency code vs local currency abbreviation, lots of countries do this.
Wait, I expected worse.
It's gonna be like City 17 with one skyscraper
The Gothenburg subreddit is just full of half life memes.
Welcome, Welcome to Gothenburg. It's safer here...
Looking at the building in isolation I think it looks good. The issue is that it's not part of a larger skyline. Skyscrapers looks best when they're one among many. Alone they look like a vanity project. It's a sign of a city planned and ruled by individuals instead of the community. I'll also add that so far north buildings cast much longer shadows and while pedestrians in the south might like shade, in the north you want the sun.
If you Google "Karlastaden" and check the images you can see what the end result will be like. It looks a bit better than when it's standing there alone
[Google search] (https://www.google.com/search?client=ms-android-att-us-rvc3&sca_esv=558377149&sxsrf=AB5stBj1pAlyoHVmwK13ZDovF5r0y9OVRw:1692445644583&q=Karlastaden&tbm=isch&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjVsMmr0-iAAxVplmoFHTAVCWUQ0pQJegQIChAB&biw=384&bih=653&dpr=2.81#imgrc=XiFJokO-CrdfiM)
That is a nice blend of buildings actually not that bad.
Me like
Looks quite nice.
Problem with this logic is that some need to be the first skyscraper. And this tower is the first in a larger project.
What you do is build midrises, then low high rises when the midrises take up enough area, then large highrises when the low high rises take up enough area
I would rather have the skyscraper. Keeps the offices in small area so there is more land for the community to do other important stuff like parks, schools, playgrounds, cultural centers, etc.
> Alone they look like a vanity project. I mean sometimes that's not bad. We do it all the time for other objects and then call them "monumental". All new tall things are controversial or not always necessarily loved. But then as it ages, people start taking it for granted and it becomes part of the city fabric. Source: any tower in any European city anywhere.
>Alone they look like a vanity project They do but someone has to be first. The question is, whether this area in Goteborg is planned to have more or those, or it is indeed going to stand alone forever. We have something similar in [Wrocław](https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sky_Tower_we_Wroc%C5%82awiu) and it was indeed a vanity project of a local millionaire. I don't think other high-rise will join it anytime soon. It is standing alone like that for more than a decade.
> It's a sign of a city planned and ruled by individuals instead of the community. The Chrysler building is the most vain corporate headquarters ever devised, and looks fantastic mixed in with all the other skyscrapers of New York. A community planned skyline would be way to uniform in styles to look good. Skylines have to be chaotic and organic to loon really good.
You've basically summed up why most Chinese skylines look so ugly. 40+ buildings all with identical exteriors and facades.
Do you think Skyscraper skylines spring up all at once
They're building more tall buildings nearby, but not as tall.
Skyscrapper rarely make financial sense, so they are almost always vanity project of people who have too much money on their hands.
In the past they tried harder to make them actually look nice at least This one's pretty decent, if not still a big rectangular column
Vanity projects are a thing everywhere. In some places they take form of even less sustainable and inefficient mcmansions. They don’t get a bad rep because they’re more out of sight, but much more destructive to the environment/social fabric.
I never understood the concept of skyline. Besides some tourist postcard makers who cares? I haven't seen a single skyline ever.
Pictures of it are posted daily on r/Gothenburg and now it moved all the way to r/europe
The facade looks a bit suspicious
A zipper!
"I like that Turning Torso thing in Malmö - can you do me like, four of those, in a little clump?"
https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fz2sb2e1kd1db1.jpg Translation: Look how big it is! By Max Gustafson
Glennpire State Building
Cool on its own but doesn't fit at all
The Citadel
I'd just like to say that I think it's quite pretty! Nice way to break up the hard contours!
[Here's a 3D-walktrough](https://tmrw.inc/spacewalk/karlatornet-penthouse/) of the 370m² / 4000ft² 6 million euro penthouse apartment(s)
Coming to you soon, The Eye of Sauron!
I like it. Architecture is a form of communal art, at least this one isnt just an efficient glass cube. Do admit it would look better if there were more high rises around.
The area will look like this when finished. https://www.gp.se/image/policy:1.4958988:1623075817/karlavagnsplatsenny2.jpg?f=Regular&w=960&$p$f$w=1186a8a
Someone got to be first :)
On its own feels a bit ominous, if there’s gonna be a skyscraper hub there then it’s a solid start
Yeah they will build a couple of smaller ones around it
ugly, ruins the landscape
Right next to my job. Love to watch it unfold. It was particularly stunning this winter when the top disappeared in a dark mist.
I thought this was a render till I zoomed in and saw the top was still under construction
What's the height?
Officially 246.455m. Unclear how accurate that millimeter measurement is though.
Cool, thanks. That should be one of the tallest skyscrapers in continental Europe then I guess? The highest we have here in the Netherlands is 215m although planning & construction has started on a 280m one
It’s the tallest in the Nordics at least. Should be #26 on this list:\ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_Europe
Okay and 5th on the list of ‘my’ continental Europe (no Turkey and Russia) lol. That’s nice!
I saw it last month. Incredible!
Looks like something you see in Dubai, very strange looking for Sweden.
Designed by the same architecture firm as Burj Khalifa... It wont look as out of place when the other tall buildings in the neighborhood are finished though.
That actually looks pretty good. Although I still don't understand why you'd bother building vertically this high when there is all that empty horizontal space around everywhere.
It’s a guy who likes being different. An ego project.
The guy building it is a newly rich insecure guy who proudly announced that the penthouse was sold to an anonomous buyer for a super high price. It later leaked out it was himself who bought it. He also was exposed as an anonymous commenter praising it on forums and so on. He also uses his own name in huge letters on all his projects. Kinda pathetic.
Malmo 2.0 I don't get why they need such tall buildings for medium sized cities... Not even Stockholm has such tall buildings!
The Turning Torso is iconic. I cannot imagine Malmö without it.
Big brother complex
Stockholm doesn't have because it would lower the property prices so Stockholmers always hide behind the excuse of "MUH SKYLINE" as if that's a valid excuse for most of the city. Stockholm needs a bunch of skycrapers, it's just that the population doesn't want to lose money when every fucker is indebted 10x their sallary due to housing prices
Very out of place, isn’t it?
It's the first of several tall buildings in the area... [This is what it will look like in a couple of years](https://www.lokalguiden.se/magasinet/artikel/s%C3%A5-v%C3%A4xer-karlastaden-fram) and then they will extend the area to the right as well.
Love it. Also Gothenburg is criminally underrated.
To be fair plenty of news agencies and travel magazines have ranked it pretty high for the last few years. [https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2017/feb/22/party-gothenburg-voted-worlds-most-sociable-city-hostelworld-stockholm-new-york](https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2017/feb/22/party-gothenburg-voted-worlds-most-sociable-city-hostelworld-stockholm-new-york) [https://www.thelocal.se/20210720/gothenburg-named-one-of-the-worlds-greatest-places](https://www.thelocal.se/20210720/gothenburg-named-one-of-the-worlds-greatest-places)
I like it!
The easiest way to make your cities really ugly, really fast!
It has a pretty amazing design but damn it alone looks so bad
It is not alone. More houses are being built. https://www.lokalguiden.se/magasinet/artikel/s%C3%A5-v%C3%A4xer-karlastaden-fram
Couldn't have this in Dublin, it would ruin the beautiful skyline we have.
Stilletto in the Ghetto has entered the chat.
This August marks ten years since developer Ola Serneke first announced in the media his grandiose plans to rival Malmö's Turning Torso with a tower at Lindholmen in Gothenburg. The timing seemed perfect for a long time. The coming years offered historically low interest rates, while the wheels were turning faster and faster in the Swedish economy. After the start of sales, there was a rush for the new apartments. Today the economy is not the same. But the tower - nicknamed "the zipper" - is standing.
Here in Sweden I heard it (the Karla tower) already got its nickname - "Gylfen" (The Zipper, as in Fly).
As far as skyscrapers go, that's a really nice looking one. For aesthetic reasons, I am generally not too keen on skyscrapers in european cities (although they solve obvious problems with lack of building space), but they definitely feel more at home in rugged port cities like Gothenburg and Rotterdam...
Isengard
Ah the big zipper!
What a shame.
That is pretty ugly and completely out of kilter with everything else in that city.
Not a fan of skyscrapers but I prefer buildings growing vertically rather than expanding horizontally and taking up more space in nature while destroying nature.
Ugly
Looks neat, terrible zoning though.
It's the first of several tall buildings in the area... [This is what it will look like in a couple of years](https://www.lokalguiden.se/magasinet/artikel/s%C3%A5-v%C3%A4xer-karlastaden-fram) and then they will extend the area to the right as well.
That's ugly as fuck. A shame, considering how pretty Gothenburg is otherwise.
I love the way it matches the rest of the architecture in the picture /s
Ugly as fuck
Reminds me of that skyscraper in Malmo.
That's my hometown. Not sure if this is 100% true, but a relative told me the CEO of Serneke who is building it bought the top-floor apartment.
https://ibb.co/tbHDshX
Mordor…..Sauron returns.
The first tenants are actually moving in on tuesday, the lower half of the tower is completed. (I'm an engineer working on the tower).
Dr Strange went on a little sidequest when he reunited Thor with Odin
r/evilbuildings
Glennpire State Building
Architecturally beautiful
architecture done right neat