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: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,560,868 times
Reputation: 5785
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoHyping
Not sure what people are using for height for a minimum or maximum High-rise? Sure we have sunbelt cities building a lot of multi-residential buildings. Many stick wood ones a few stories that I would not define as a High-rise. steel skeleton, concrete to cinderblock use Is far superior over a few stories it better have in much of the stick-construction today. Not that there cannot be a wood skyscraper.... just it is not your usual stick construction.
Anyway because this link has forums.... not sure if it is seen as a competing sight. Skyscraper.com. So one can look states up themselves there, but here is High-rise counts for North American cities.
Given these stats may be a few years outdated for highrises? Populations are still 2010 census it seems.
Seems merely the TOP 7 are probably the same rank...... the rest are close that they could move up and
down if they are or were the most accurate. Seems no links are like monthly changed, but should yearly. I also have to assume these counts did include skyscrapers also....
#1 New Yor k City - 6,116
#2 Toronto -------- 2,504
#3 Chicago -------- 1,238
#4 Mexico City ---- 1,045
#5 Vancouver ------- 755
#6 Montreal --------- 733
#7 Los Angeles ------580
#8 Houston ----------511 #9 Washington DC - 497
#10 Honolulu ------- 468
#11 San Francisco --465
#12 Ottawa --------- 426
#13 Boston ----------407
#14 Philadelphia ---- 393
#15 Miami ----------- 369
#16 Calgary --------- 367
#17 Dallas ----------- 334
#18 Denver ---------- 329
#19 Mississauga ----- 322
#20 Panama City -----311
#21 Atlanta -----------302
#22 Edmonton ------- 282
#23 Seattle -----------278 #24 Arlington -------- 250
#25 Minneapolis ----- 208
These stats do not give how updated they are and by populations of city-propers given.... SEEMS the CITY POPULATIONS WERE WAY OFF or OUTDATED so IT SHOULD GIVE when all these stats were updated last.
Also Mexico and Panama were not given with City next to the name I of course assumed what they are. Another ? was Arlington. When I think of Arlington I think of outside DC and between Dallas and Ft Worth. I assume this Arlington is the one by DC?
Current or projected populations for 2021.
Dallas ------ Ft Worth
1,347,120 + 942,323 = 2,289,443
Houston
2,323,660
Using merely skyscraper.com #s of high-rises
Dallas 334 + Ft Worth 64 without Arlington = 338
Houston ................................................. = 511
DC again still does good with only its smaller city limits. Atlanta has a smaller city limit also in general... still it has 3 CBD's to count and corridor to Buckhead. Same for Dallas and Houston. Houston a much larger city proper of course.
So the title of the thread as which cities one CONSIDERS to have SUBSTANTIAL High-rise counts.
Just makes the thread a SUBJECTIVE list of cities of various sizes and viewpoints by opinion. Hard to get concrete MOST UPDATED STATS to satisfy those boasting their city is building TONS just TONS that should be counted. We are limited to links that do this and not giving how recently it was gathered...... This link I used clearly has 2010 population stats. Just its high-rise #s could be much more recent?
Clearly DC, Seattle, Houston, Dallas, Austin, Atlanta, Miami etc ALL BOAST ONGOING SIGNIFICANT "NEW" CONSTANT HIGH-RISE BUILDING as to keep those arguing for a city open to which has more etc. Some want every multi-residential building virtually counted as if a high-rise. The OP said 15-stories and we know that stat will not be found. 12- 39 is generally the state for a high-rise and if any stats are found. If only residential or mostly residential ones were the criteria.... harder to get stats. Still the general top cities rank would probably stand the same.
Still nothing like a Core that showcases levels in and around a core of high-rises. Though some cities boast corridors to multiple CBD's also with each their center of taller buildings. Scattered throughout a metro is not the same effect from the air or ground if not at least a corridor of them etc.
*** Though Skyscraper.com uses city-proper count..... DC does pretty darn good for DC proper alone. No surprise in a city that cannot go past 20-some stories. So more lower high-rises is how it is done.
Yea I'm pretty certain that's for Arlington, VA and not Arlington, TX. I don't even know that Arlington, Tx is even known for many "high rise" buildings or clusters, and ceratinly not to the level of Arlington, VA. So out dated or not those numbers for Dallas wouldn't include Arlington, TX.
So even in 2010 with those numbers DC/Arlington alone in about 85 sq mi were about 750 high rises around Vancouver's level. In fact I doubt that Fort Worth even has more high rise buildings than Arlington, VA.
I really don't think it's being grasped how "tall" the DC region is overall by comparison (not in peak heights but in aggregate). The Houston's and Dallas' of the world have tall buildings spread throughout, but neither come close to the amount of clusters of buildings at 15+ stories, that you would see in and around the DC region. Those two cities in particular are very flat, and don't have the TOD clusters surrounding stations to the level of DC, Toronto, Vancouver etc.
Last edited by the resident09; 06-22-2021 at 01:54 PM..
Well the OP's criteria is 15 floors+. Going off of that, DC has anywhere from 150 to 300 towers, depending on what you consider as "core". This compares favorably to most other cities mentioned on this thread.
So far I haven't seen any granular data for other cities, though, tailored to the OP criteria. Maybe I missed it but the only list I saw was the ranking based on 12 floor+ city-wide, which obviously grossly undercounted DC as it only included the District.
Pedantic I know, but the OP criteria was greater than 15 floors, so that’s 16+ not 15+. Also that only makes sense when discussing where people live, not the number of floors in a building. If a building has 50 stories and someone lives on the 3rd floor, yes they would live in a high rise, but that’s not high rise living to me. I think that’s a real distinction and not a pedantic one.
Miami is a highrise resident's paradise if they can afford it. The numbers are relatively low due to the fact that the highrises are limited to the shoreline(s.) Ditto to Tampa, St-Pete, Daytona Beach Shores, basically all of Florida. Inland doesn't get much of anything, and that includes Miami West of I-95. I look forward to the day a place like Coral Gables gets some vertical development.
Pedantic I know, but the OP criteria was greater than 15 floors, so that’s 16+ not 15+. Also that only makes sense when discussing where people live, not the number of floors in a building. If a building has 50 stories and someone lives on the 3rd floor, yes they would live in a high rise, but that’s not high rise living to me. I think that’s a real distinction and not a pedantic one.
Whatever criteria you wanna use you can figure out the pecking order. The data is all there. I just don't see anyone doing this... It's much easier to blow hot air than do the work. (This is not so much directed to you but some others)
Whatever criteria you wanna use you can figure out the pecking order. The data is all there. I just don't see anyone doing this... It's much easier to blow hot air than do the work. (This is not so much directed to you but some others)
You're not wrong. We just have different opinions of "highrise living," and there is nothing wrong with that -- it's why I like forums: we share opinions and different viewpoints. Now I know to explore some of the neighborhoods I typically neglect when I am out that way.
You're not wrong. We just have different opinions of "highrise living," and there is nothing wrong with that -- it's why I like forums: we share opinions and different viewpoints. Now I know to explore some of the neighborhoods I typically neglect when I am out that way.
Whatever criteria you wanna use you can figure out the pecking order. The data is all there. I just don't see anyone doing this... It's much easier to blow hot air than do the work. (This is not so much directed to you but some others)
Maybe I’ve missed it but I haven’t seen any data that provides the facts that I would like. Certainly not the list at the top of the page that has LA ahead of Miami and Vancouver. That can’t be right and I figured that was for all high rises and not just residential.
Maybe I’ve missed it but I haven’t seen any data that provides the facts that I would like. Certainly not the list at the top of the page that has LA ahead of Miami and Vancouver. That can’t be right and I figured that was for all high rises and not just residential.
Eh... in LA's defense, there are TONS of highrises along Wilshire, among other areas.
Miami is limited to the coastal shore. Looks great from certain viewpoints, but overall, there aren't dense areas of highrise development away from that. That's Florida in a nutshell.
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.
