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.
If you didn’t know it at first glance a picture from 2010 of Austin would look like a different city than 2019 Austin.
It’s not a 3 buildings out of 100 It’s the whole skyline is radically different.
Well the smaller the skyline ..... the more radical a change in look can appear. Chicago's and NYC's were huge much longer yes .... despite additions. But key editions that stand out. Can be transforming to even larger skylines. Not just 3 buildings and more super-tall's coming and near size. Key viewing vantage points. Also add to visible change over merely distance.
REMEMBER TOO. This is a poll of multiple choice. Maybe you only vote for your favorite. I voted 4 or 5 cities......
If you didn’t know it at first glance a picture from 2010 of Austin would look like a different city than 2019 Austin.
It’s not a 3 buildings out of 100 It’s the whole skyline is radically different.
So true! Chicago has a ton of new high-rises since 2010, but not as mind blowingly radical a change as Austin's skyline.
Also, Nashville's skyline is very similarly changed. However, Nashville's true change will come when you compare 2015 to 2024/25 or so. In the next 5-6 years, Nashville should complete another 15-18 towers over 300 feet.
It will continue to transform Nashville from a mid-sized city to a large, urban dynamic live/work center city.
A poster named c33f tallied Seattle's additions. Since 2000, including work underway, Seattle has added the following, all but one within greater Downtown:
--73 buildings 200'+
--44 buildings 300'+
--32 buildings 400'+
--11 buildings 500'+
--2 buildings 600'+
--1 building 800'+
Bellevue would be another candidate, with six buildings in the mid-400s that are all pretty new.
Are the 44, 32, 11, etc included in the 73? Either way, having just been in Seattle and thinking that it's downtown is fantastic something seems off with these numbers. How many 200'+ buildings did Seattle have before 2000?
Are the 44, 32, 11, etc included in the 73? Either way, having just been in Seattle and thinking that it's downtown is fantastic something seems off with these numbers. How many 200'+ buildings did Seattle have before 2000?
The numbers were cumulative.
c33f's numbers had the 200'+ count at 74 in 2000 and 147 (+73) in 2020 based on work underway.
Since a lot of our growth is in areas with 440' height limits (now 484'), that's the biggest change...from 18 to 50.
Edit...the 400'+ category is a slight an undercount. I count 34 that are built or underway, not 32. BTW 4 more that appear to be starting shoring Monday or thereabouts (cranes and shoring steel are onsite)...
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.
