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.
here is the vision for gothenburgs newly projected scyscraper, 202m in height. not as bad looking as turning torso, i'll admit, but still out of place. Stockholm apparantly also has an scyscraper project underway. that one is planned to be 210m.
( As far as I'm concerned it clearly destroys the original design of old European city and it's quite visible.
Skyscrapers don't destroy American cities, since they already took over the original designs ( if there was such thing, and if they were anything of value from architectural point of view. If not - then there was nothing to destroy to begin with.) So in the US skyscrapers are within their own element.
Couldn't skyscrapers add to the architectural mix? A city isn't a museum and most non-commercial neighborhoods won't be affected. Skyscrapers hold a lot of floor space for the area they take up, so the amount of the city they'd affect is small, and the street level effect won't be any different than smaller new building, perhaps less because you wouldn't need as many. You can fit a huge amount of offices plus other uses without skyscrapers.
Here's some photos of NYC when skyscrapers were just starting to show the origonal design:
1930s
Broad Street, 1904. not quite skyscrapers in 1904, but taller than European boulvards. You can tell the origional form was rather different.
I don't like skyscrapers. They create a lot of shadow and have an intimidating effect on the psyche, even if we are not aware of it. I remember the first time I walked between skyscrapers, depressing...
One of the things I don't like about them is that I hate elevators, but skyscrapers without elevators make no sense. I want to be able to reach the street by foot from anywhere within a building within 15 seconds or so.
I guess a lot of people like lit skylines from a distance, simply because they look nice.
I think in terms of actually experiencing the city, skyscrapers seem sort of irrelevant in a way unless they are very clustered to create the urban canyon effect of NYC, Hong Kong.etc. Also even in a city with skyscrapers, most of the action might take place elsewhere. They do create a lot of wind-tunnels, though. For me I like them more because of the skyline, I would say. I suppose if you're from the New World (that includes Australia in the loose sense) it also makes you feel like you're really 'in the city.'
Couldn't skyscrapers add to the architectural mix?
Yes, they could - in case of New-York. As you can see on this video of 1928, New-York is already planned differently comparably to European cities, with those crowded tall buildings and relatively narrow streets. ( I assume this height of the buildings happened because of what? The price of the land? ) So in this case it was only a next logical step to keep on constricting taller and taller buildings; they were already not destroying anything too much, since the older center of the city already looked like this to begin with - crowded tall building along the narrow streets.
A city isn't a museum and most non-commercial neighborhoods won't be affected. Skyscrapers hold a lot of floor space for the area they take up, so the amount of the city they'd affect is small, and the street level effect won't be any different than smaller new building, perhaps less because you wouldn't need as many. You can fit a huge amount of offices plus other uses without skyscrapers.
See, in case of European cities - of course non-commercial neighborhoods would have been affected by skyscrapers big time. If you look at the planning of European cities - they have a sprawl so to speak already in their central parts, making sure that they leave enough of space for open sky, for boulevards in the mix with more narrow streets.
( these are the pics of older Moscow for comparison
This is what European boulevard looks like; (and no, it's not any equivalent of Central park, since boulevards are running here and there throughout the city.)
So well-balanced European cities make sure that for the amount of people living in regular-size buildings there is enough of space around them to walk, there is enough of trees and there is enough of place for children to run and play. If you bring in a skyscraper in full of dwellers and dump them all in the same space - of course this will affect the non-commercial neighborhood big time. Plus it will immediately destroy the architectural balance between the height of buildings vs width of the surrounding streets. The city IS a museum in a way, because the whole atmosphere - those old streets and buildings keep a lot of history, and keep the unique spirit of a city alive. So as I've said although initially big European cities have a lot of sprawl comparably to, say, New York that has tall building concentrated close to each other ( same picture with other major American cities,) big European cities are great place to live in; while American big cities - not so much. That's what a lot of Americans realized with time, starting moving into suburbs, and that's when the REAL sprawl began.
I can not imagine skyscrapers in our capital, Prague. It would destroy spirit of the city. As somebody mentioned earlier, skyscrapers belong to the New World.
I don't like skyscrapers. They create a lot of shadow and have an intimidating effect on the psyche, even if we are not aware of it. I remember the first time I walked between skyscrapers, depressing...
One of the things I don't like about them is that I hate elevators, but skyscrapers without elevators make no sense. I want to be able to reach the street by foot from anywhere within a building within 15 seconds or so.
I guess a lot of people like lit skylines from a distance, simply because they look nice.
I hate elevators too, but I can always admire skyscrapers from afar.
I don't know who can say that Montparnasse tower is not a skyscraper.
Some skyscrapers and high-rises in Paris
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.
) So in this case it was only a next logical step to keep on constricting taller and taller buildings; they were already not destroying anything too much, since the older center of the city already looked like this to begin with - crowded tall building along the narrow streets. 
