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.
Ok, but the list does not reflect this. He has SF at #3, and they only have two buildings above 700 feet. So does Jersey City, a NYC suburb.
I think that's highly debatable. Philly has a fraction of Mexico City's skyscrapers, and nothing really as dramatic as the Santa Fe district in Mexico City.
Mexico City has more 400+ highrises than Philly, so your point is mistaken.
We're not talking 10-15 floor skyscrapers. We're talking tons of 300+ foot skyscrapers, and far more than Philly. I would not be surprised in Mexico City had more 300+ foot skyscrapers than Chicago.
Philly has more at 700+ ft. but that's only five buildings, and a net difference of four with Mexico City.
And Mexico City DOES have a skyline; it's just too big to be captured in one pic (unlike the smaller skyline in Chicago, or the even smaller skyline in Philly).
They aren't scattered in Mexico City; they're clustered. Same with Philly. Except Philly has one cluster and Mexico City has about 10.
Sao Paulo has FAR more highrises than Philly. Even tall highrises (say 300+ feet). It's silly to even compare.
It would almost be like if Center City Philly covered the entire city.
No, it's ridiculous. NYC has six times the number of skyscrapers! It would be like saying Camden has a better skyline than Philly.
The only metric where Chicago scores extremely well is on very tall towers (500+ ft.), yet on this metric it is absolutely destroyed by NYC. Chicago has fewer than 100 towers above 500 feet, while NYC has over 200!
In other words, the difference in 500+ foot towers between NYC and Chicago is bigger than the difference in 500+ foot towers between Chicago and the North Pole!
And that isn't even including Jersey City and other adjacent suburbs where there are even more 500+ foot towers.
Furthermore, the majority of Chicago's 500+ foot buildings are between 500-599 feet, and almost all have giant parking garages at the base that artifically inflate the height of the buildings. This does not occur in NYC or most other cities.
So, if one takes away Chicago's unfair advantage of putting their towers on top of giant parking podiums (which do not count in municipal zoning or height calculations, but for some reason are counted by Emporis), then Chicago has only about 45 buildings above 500 feet, compared to over 200 in NYC.
So, yeah, claiming Chicago has a bigger or better skyline than NYC makes about as much sense as claiming some podunkville has a bigger or better skyline than Chicago.
Well, that's your preference, but it makes as much sense as saying Green Bay is your personal favorite skyline in the world and you like it more than Chicago.
BTW, Manhattan is one small part of NYC.
Six times smaller.
But tiny compared to NYC, and many other cities (Sao Paulo, and many Asian cities).
And really, Chiacago known for being tall, and not dense or large.
Downtown Chicago is not that large, and is not really super-dense, at least by global standards. Lots of parking lots and, of course, parking garages everywhere.
You are making numerous errors here. I just keep telling you, but the # of high-rises don't tell you how large a skyline is or how great it is.
NYC has over 6,000 high-rises over 12 floors while Chicago has 1,100. But this info is very misleading here. A very large portion of those 6,000 high-rises are projects high-rises in Brooklyn, Queens, and the Bronx...and have absolutely no relevance to the Manhattan skyline. The Manhattan skyline itself is NOT 6x the size of Chicago's skyline....more like 3x. Why 3x? Simply put...NYC as a whole has 3x the # of buildings over 300 feet (not 500 feet) that Chicago has...where a majority of them are in Manhattan. NYC as a whole has 400 million sq feet of office space (most in Manhattan), Chicago has 130 million...about 1/3 the size. In fact NYC comprises 30% of all downtown office space in US, Chicago 10%...again 1/3 the size. Population wise, Chicago 2.8 million...NYC 8.3 million, again 1/3 the size. Metro wise, Chicago 8-9 million, NYC 18 million...a little more than 1/3 the size. Need I to go on?
Chicago's Loop is larger than Lower Manhattan, and I'd say Midtown is about 3x the size of Lower Manhattan.
Chicago's skyline is not that large and not really super dense, at least not by global standards? When you are talking about 130,000,000 sq feet of office space in that "little area", that is f****** massive and f****** dense! The Loop is easily one of the densest land uses in the world, eclipsed only by Manhattan and perhaps Hong Kong...and thats about it. Hundreds and hundreds of thousands of ppl work in that little area.
Conclusively, Chicago's skyline is very large, super-tall, and very dense.
You are making numerous errors here. I just keep telling you, but the # of high-rises don't tell you how large a skyline is or how great it is.
NYC has over 6,000 high-rises over 12 floors while Chicago has 1,100. But this info is very misleading here. A very large portion of those 6,000 high-rises are projects high-rises in Brooklyn, Queens, and the Bronx...and have absolutely no relevance to the Manhattan skyline. The Manhattan skyline itself is NOT 6x the size of Chicago's skyline....more like 3x. Why 3x? Simply put...NYC as a whole has 3x the # of buildings over 300 feet (not 500 feet) that Chicago has...where a majority of them are in Manhattan. NYC as a whole has 400 million sq feet of office space (most in Manhattan), Chicago has 130 million...about 1/3 the size. In fact NYC comprises 30% of all downtown office space in US, Chicago 10%...again 1/3 the size. Population wise, Chicago 2.8 million...NYC 8.3 million, again 1/3 the size. Metro wise, Chicago 8-9 million, NYC 18 million...a little more than 1/3 the size. Need I to go on?
Chicago's Loop is larger than Lower Manhattan, and I'd say Midtown is about 3x the size of Lower Manhattan.
Chicago's skyline is not that large and not really super dense, at least not by global standards? When you are talking about 130,000,000 sq feet of office space in that "little area", that is f****** massive and f****** dense! The Loop is easily one of the densest land uses in the world, eclipsed only by Manhattan and perhaps Hong Kong...and thats about it. Hundreds and hundreds of thousands of ppl work in that little area.
Conclusively, Chicago's skyline is very large, super-tall, and very dense.
Your still fighting with him forget it Chicago's skyline is humongous and same with Mexico city.
You are making numerous errors here. I just keep telling you, but the # of high-rises don't tell you how large a skyline is or how great it is.
NYC has over 6,000 high-rises over 12 floors while Chicago has 1,100. But this info is very misleading here. A very large portion of those 6,000 high-rises are projects high-rises in Brooklyn, Queens, and the Bronx...and have absolutely no relevance to the Manhattan skyline.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libohove90
The Manhattan skyline itself is NOT 6x the size of Chicago's skyline....more like 3x. Why 3x? Simply put...NYC as a whole has 3x the # of buildings over 300 feet (not 500 feet) that Chicago has...where a majority of them are in Manhattan.
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.).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libohove90
NYC as a whole has 400 million sq feet of office space (most in Manhattan)
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libohove90
Chicago has 130 million...about 1/3 the size.
130 million, if the number is correct, would mean that Chicago has less than one-fifth of NYC's office space.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libohove90
In fact NYC comprises 30% of all downtown office space in US, Chicago 10%...again 1/3 the size.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libohove90
Population wise, Chicago 2.8 million...NYC 8.3 million, again 1/3 the size.
Not that it has any relevance to this conversation, but NYC has 8.4 million.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libohove90
Metro wise, Chicago 8-9 million, NYC 18 million...a little more than 1/3 the size.
Again, irrelevant, but Chicago has closer to 10, and NYC is 22-23 million.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libohove90
Need I to go on?
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!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libohove90
Chicago's Loop is larger than Lower Manhattan, and I'd say Midtown is about 3x the size of Lower Manhattan.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libohove90
Chicago's skyline is not that large and not really super dense, at least not by global standards? When you are talking about 130,000,000 sq feet of office space in that "little area", that is f****** massive and f****** dense!
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?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libohove90
The Loop is easily one of the densest land uses in the world, eclipsed only by Manhattan and perhaps Hong Kong...and thats about it.
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?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libohove90
Hundreds and hundreds of thousands of ppl work in that little area.
Conclusively, Chicago's skyline is very large, super-tall, and very dense.
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?
Please show me ONE part of downtown Chicago that isn't covered with parking garages and parking lots everywhere. It doesn't exist.
Most of it. I would estimate that 5% of buildings have parking lots on the lower floors... I seriously doubt that you've ever BEEN to Chicago, because in another thread you claim to have seen the Rock and Roll Mcdonald's in the center of downtown Chicago, when in reality it's located northwest of the farthest fringes of the central business district.
Central Chicago is NOT just composed of the Loop (1/2 of the CBD). How can you compare that to Manhattan as a whole, including the 3/4 of that Island that is not commercial space? You might as well compare the NYC Financial District to Chicago from 18th Street to Edgewater. More of what makes me wonder if you've ever been.
What is your problem with Chicago anyway? You very willingly spend gobs of time coming up with facts to debase every little pro-Chicago claim that people make (successfully or not).
Most of it. I would estimate that 5% of buildings have parking lots on the lower floors...
Then you are lying or don't know Chicago.
100% of newer buildings have giant parking garages making up the first 10-20 floors or so. Please show me ONE new building that doesn't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by It'sAutomatic
I seriously doubt that you've ever BEEN to Chicago, because in another thread you claim to have seen the Rock and Roll Mcdonald's in the center of downtown Chicago, when in reality it's located northwest of the farthest fringes of the central business district.
What? We are talking Chicago, IL? Ever heard of it? Murder capital of the U.S.? Most miserable and polluted city in the U.S.?
If you've ever been to Chicago, you would know there's a giant suburban Rock and Roll McDonalds in prime River North, is which is hardly the "furthest fringes" of Chicago. It's just off Michigan Avenue, easily the most important street in Chicago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by It'sAutomatic
Central Chicago is NOT just composed of the Loop (1/2 of the CBD). How can you compare that to Manhattan as a whole, including the 3/4 of that Island that is not commercial space? You might as well compare the NYC Financial District to Chicago from 18th Street to Edgewater. More of what makes me wonder if you've ever been.
LOL, you are comparing suburban trashy Edgewater in Chicago to Manhattan! Single family homes and vacant lots! Kinda like comparing exurban NYC to the Loop!
You're right, actually, I shouldn't compare Manhattan to the Loop. Totally unfair for Mnahattan!
Even the least dense neighborhood in Manhattan is FAR more urban than the auto-oriented Loop. How on earth could I compare Manhattan to a place filled with strip malls, parking lots and parking garages?
It would probably be better to compare Jersey City or thereabouts to the Loop, but even Jersey City is more urban and transit-friendly.
Dude, you're totally batty. The Loop is auto-oriented? Downtown Chicago is filled with parking garages and parking lots? Are you sure you haevn't been looking at pictures of Houston or something?
Where are the strip malls? (Thanks to Shapoor and I_Am_Hydrogen on SkyscraperCity)
You do realize that every new condo tower being built in this country has a boatload of parking involved with it, right? That includes the ones in Manhattan. I'm not sure what makes you think Chicago (especially central) is auto-oriented...when I visited there my family walked or took the L wherever we needed to go. Chicago may have lots of people driving, but most of this country does. It's one of the least auto-oriented cities in the country.
Just in case you don't know what a strip-mall is, here's a picture:
I didn't see any of those around downtown while I was there. I'm sure there could be some somewhere, but it's not like that's at the base of the Hancock Tower.
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.
When you are talking about 130,000,000 sq feet of office space in that "little area", that is f****** massive and f****** dense! The Loop is easily one of the densest land uses in the world, eclipsed only by Manhattan and perhaps Hong Kong...and thats about it. Hundreds and hundreds of thousands of ppl work in that little area. 
