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.
Location: Watching half my country turn into Gilead
3,530 posts, read 4,175,298 times
Reputation: 2925
Advertisements
On the big city side of things, I think Philadelphia definitely belongs in the discussion. The new Comcast building is the tallest outside of NYC and Chicago, while the FMC Tower gives the skyline a nice stretch out into West Philly. Not as dramatic as Austin, but I’d put it somewhere above LA and near SF as far as skyline “impact”.
I expect Chicago to transform pretty rapidly in the 2020's with the booming going on in the West Loop, and so much untapped potential for development in the South Loop. Plenty of towers still planned, and hopefully more on the way (more and more towers are averaging taller, so this will almost certainly change the skyline in the future). But I don't think anyone can argue that for the 2010's, Austin was the most insane transformation considering where it was at 10+ years ago.
This might be an unpopular opinion, but Chicago needs to build a tower higher than the Sears Tower. Yes I know, it's been the crown tallest building in the city for generations now, but I only see the skyline changing "drastically" if taller and taller buildings are built. Restricting height to the Sears Tower is quickly becoming counter-productive if the city wants to remain relevant on the international "skyline" competition. Of course, the placement of said skyscrapers should be carefully place, and not seem-lessly placed.
Chicago is LOSING population, so I don't see that as sustainable.
Austin has added 15 sky scrapers since 2010. Seattle has added 37 in the same time.
define skyscraper. I was just in Seattle and while it is noticeably different I don't see it that big. BTW I used to work for WaMu and visited the area several times. And relatively speaking, Austin's growth is greater due to a smaller population base.
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?
32 buildings over 400 feet in Seattle I question. I've been there numerous times since 2000 and don't see it. Also the poll is change this decade not the last two decades.
define skyscraper. I was just in Seattle and while it is noticeably different I don't see it that big. BTW I used to work for WaMu and visited the area several times. And relatively speaking, Austin's growth is greater due to a smaller population base.
Literally 14 of the top 21 (2/3rds) tallest buildings in Austin were built since 2010 by the end of next year that’s 16 of 21
32 buildings over 400 feet in Seattle I question. I've been there numerous times since 2000 and don't see it. Also the poll is change this decade not the last two decades.
Then you had blinders on. Seattle makes Dallas look like Podunk in comparison.
Then you had blinders on. Seattle makes Dallas look like Podunk in comparison.
Dallas has substantially more buildings over 300' than Seattle (current count puts Dallas at ~81) but thats mainly due to city limits rather than core size, Seattle just has more buildings over 400'
Still...... compared to Austin, they've both received nothing but a light touch up
To provide some context, this is from Skyscraperpage.com. It is probably missing buildings for every city, but it’s the only comprehensive source we have for context. Does anybody know what these counts were in 2010?
They define high-rise as 12 stories+ I believe:
City................. ....High-rises......Land Area
1. New York City........6034.........303 sq. miles
2. Chicago.................1208.........228 sq. miles
3. Los Angeles.............563.........469 sq. miles
4. Houston..................494..........600 sq. miles
5. Washington, DC.......492...........61 sq. miles
6. Honolulu..................465..........60 sq. miles
7. San Francisco...........453..........47 sq. miles
8. Philadelphia..............385.........134 sq. miles
9. Boston.....................351.........48 sq. miles
10. Miami....................348..........36 sq. miles
11. Dallas....................316..........340 sq. miles
12. Denver..................304..........155 sq. miles
13. Atlanta..................290..........133 sq. miles
14. Seattle...................259..........84 sq. miles
15. Arlington Va............226..........26 sq. miles
16. Minneapolis............201...........57 sq. miles
17. Detroit...................191..........139 sq. miles
18. Baltimore..............175...........81 sq. miles
19. Las Vegas..............172..........136 sq. miles
20. San Diego...............162..........325 sq. miles
21. Miami Beach............159..........8 sq. miles
22. Pittsburgh...............158..........55 sq. miles
23. Portland..................153..........133 sq. miles
24. Fort Lauderdale........149..........35 sq. miles
25. Austin.....................148..........298 sq. miles
Source: skyscraperpage.com
Last edited by MDAllstar; 10-27-2019 at 10:49 PM..
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.
