No, this is false. Over 4,500 of these highrises are in Manhattan, and of those that are in Brooklyn, Queens, and the Bronx, the VAST majority are right over the river, so yes, they are a continuation of the same skyline.
And I am not even talking about the additional 700 highrises right across the river in NJ, that are a continuation of the Manhattan skyline.
And you have no idea what NYC projects are. The VAST majority of highrises in the outer Boroughs are not projects. Relatively few of the buildings Emporis is counting are projects.
Just because you have residential highrises, it does not mean they are "projects", but someone from Chicago does not know this, because Chicago has the worst projects in the nation, and is destroying all of them to replace them with more suburban sprawl, some even next to the Loop!
Also, you are going by Emporis stats, which are not reliable.
1. Emporis admits they do not have close to all NYC buildings. They guarantee they have 100% of all Chicago buildings.
2. Emporis counts parking garages as height. Almost all Chicago buildings are built on giant parking platforms, which is not height counted for zoning calculations, but Emporis (for some reason) counts.
Oh, and as to quality, Chicago cannot compare to Mexico City, to say nothing of NYC. Chicago highrises are overwhelmingly bland residential modern boxes with giant parking garages at the base. Don't forget the tacky postmodern pastiche. It hasn't done anything since Mies.
Mexico City is a hotbed of global architectural innovation. NYC has every style of building by basically every prominenet highrise architect of the last century.
But you just made that up. 300+ foot isn't a magical number for "skyline".
And your number is false anyways, because you are using Emporis numbers, which include parking garages.
An apples-to-apples comparison would show that Manhattan alone has at least 4-5 times as many 300+ foot buildings as Chicago, and more if you are just comparing to the Loop (nearly half of Chicago buildings are suburban-style towers in a park up in Lakeview, Edgewater, etc.).
This is false. Manhattan alone has 500 million square feet. About 280 million in Midtown, 120 million in Midtown South and 100 million in Lower Manhattan. There's also about 25 million north of 59th street, but it is usually counted separately.
The city as a whole has about 640 million square feet. And there's over 60 million on the NJ waterfront, just across from Manhattan. So 700 million square feet.
130 million, if the number is correct, would mean that Chicago has less than one-fifth of NYC's office space.
No, you made these numbers up. There is no resource or database that could come up with this number.
And why are you going on about office space??
What does it have to do with number of highrises? In both cities, the vast majority of highrises are NOT office space.
Not that it has any relevance to this conversation, but NYC has 8.4 million.
Again, irrelevant, but Chicago has closer to 10, and NYC is 22-23 million.
Yes, please do!
You have discussed office space (incorrectly) and population (better, but still incorrect), neither of which have anything to do with number of highrises!
Highrises tend to not be office, and there is no correlation between population and number of highrises!
Again, you are talking about irrelevent things. None of these things have anything to do with highrises.
You now want to talk about "size of office districts" which is a totally different matter. Chicago's core districts are less than a fifth of the size of NYC, when measuring office space.
And why would one compare the Loop with one subsection of Manhattan? What about all the other commercial neighborhoods?
You should compare the Loop (central Chicago) with Manhattan and environs (central NYC).
What you are doing is twisting the converstaion, as if I wanted to compare all of Manhattan with the Near North Side.
Ummm, again, you seem to have problems with reading comprehension. What does office space have to do with skyline??
Hong Kong, which destroys Chicago's skyline, has very little office space.
Metro Washington, DC, which destroys Metro Chicago's office space, has very little skyline.
Heck, Paris absolutely STOMPS on Chicago office-space wise, but has a very modest skyline.
Oh, and maybe you should travel to Brazil. Tiny cities have giant skylines and almost no office space! How could that be?
Hahahahahahahahaaha!!!!!!!! You need to travel outside of Chicagoland!
A typical European, European or Latin American city has FAR denser land uses than Chicago. Downtown Chicago has parking lots, parking garages, and strip malls all over the place.
Please show me ONE part of downtown Chicago that isn't covered with parking garages and parking lots everywhere. It doesn't exist.
Now show me a part of Venice, Vienna, Valencia, etc. covered with parking garages and parking lots. It doesn't exist.
Even domestically, Boston, San Francisco, and Washington (and maybe Philly) have much more intact centers.
Um, and the Outer Boroughs? Waterfront NJ? Where are the strip malls and parking lots like in Chicago?
Putting aside your odd use of "conclusively"
And more work in Washington, DC. And FAR MORE work on Paris's Right Bank.
So you would then say that Washington. DC's skyline is much larger, super-tall and denser than Chicago, right?
This is what your logic would say!
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
