Which city is most likely to build a 1000 foot skyscraper? (place, population)
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.
I think people are underestimating the power of civic insecurity.
Boston, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Detroit all built their tallest in basically the worst economic decade of the last century for those cities . It was about projecting an image not economics.
I think people are underestimating the power of civic insecurity.
Boston, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Detroit all built their tallest in basically the worst economic decade of the last century for those cities . It was about projecting an image not economics.
Buildings get proposed and then nitpicked about things like how many parking spaces, etc. ASFAIK, they haven't built anything over 300 feet since the early 1990's. As it stands, they have a reasonably tall skyline-but again, parking spaces. Most (almost all) people will be driving to park at these buildings, which is why I don't see anything over 400 feet in their future.
Houston has a 900+ footer that just kind of sits by itself outside of the CBD, so there's that.
It doesn't just sit by itself. It sits in very large business district along with several other tall buildings. I happen to live in that district. Twenty years ago it was one of only a few tall buildings but not anymore.
700 feet is still a pretty big deal in the midwest outside of Chicago. It makes sense to build a flagship skyscraper that represents the industry you want to be known for.
Yep! That's what LeVeque was: American Insurance Union Citadel. 1 foot taller than the Washington Monument, and still the focal point of the Columbus skyline.
Another "fun" fact. Chase has a building on the north side of town that is 2 million square feet, and houses 13,000 employees. Height? 4 stories It was built by the former Bank One and acquired by Chase in 2004. It was built in 1996 before the Polaris area existed. Now it's surrounded by billions of dollars in development.
Anyway, I always found it interesting Bank One didn't build a tower. Obviously much cheaper how they did it, but having a 70 floor building with your name on it comes with other benefits.
Similarly, Abbott Nutrition. When they were still Ross Products they decided to build a nondescript office and research complex out by what would become Easton. I believe it was early to mid '90s. Now surrounded by, again, billions of dollars in development and it's just now ramping up. Anyway, they also own tons of land downtown, and have for generations. Always baffled me why they didn't put a tower up with their name on it. Even their location at Easton: Tens of thousands pass by it on the outerbelt heading downtown/airport every day. And they don't even know it, because:
Asinine to me the HQ of a major division of a 100,000 employee global company doesn't advertise their existence. Don't worry, Huntington Banc and Safe Auto Insurance let people know right next door
Indianapolis actually had a cancelled skyscraper, the Indiana World Trade Center, that was planned at over 1000 feet in the 80s/90s. The city wouldn't let it go through because it would cast a shadow on the State Government building.
I bet tons of cities have had 1000+ ft skyscrapers cancelled after planning.
For cost and demand reasons I don't see any cities other than NY and Chicago building supertalls any time soon.
Miami are building lots of tall buildings, but those are residential so they are not that tall..
SF is short on building space but I don't see them going the 1000+ route either.
In the hierarchy of possibility I would say:
NY, Chicago- highly likely
Philadelphia, SF- next best bets
Los Angeles, Houston- markets would have to be REALLY good
Miami, Boston, Seattle, Dallas- eccentric billionaires do crazy stuff,
Supertall residential towers are possible if the market allows it, and the only US city where that market has excelled in New York, the skyline has dramatically changed in recent years with all of the towers near Central Park.
Realistically New York and Chicago are the only 2 cities where I see 1000' buildings not out of the ordinary.
I do think Philadelphia has a shot for another one in the next few years as the huge parcels of land around 30th Street Station get developed.
BUT, from the list you provided, I would say Charlotte. There isn't a chance most of the others will see a 1000' building anytime soon.
Detroit already has skyscrapers under construction right now. The tallest one being 912 feet but rumored that they may try to push it to 1,000 ft or just under 1,000 ft. Whatever happens, that building will look like a supertall from the perspective of most people.
Most companies these days want campus style headquarters not skyscrapers.
Are you writing from 1990?
In healthy cities, the urban cores are getting higher rents and a large percentage of the growth. Much of the remaining new supply is suburban nodes becoming denser and more urban.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
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.
It was built by the former Bank One and acquired by Chase in 2004. It was built in 1996 before the Polaris area existed. Now it's surrounded by billions of dollars in development.
