Are skyscraper cities becoming---bleh?

[CaliNative]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

They used to be unique and novel--New York, Hong Kong, Chicago--innovative and different. A sign of commerce and bustle, of a sense of place.

Now, every damn city is having highrise booms. Skyscraper construction has truly become commoditized. Asia, the Middle East, South America, Canada. Ho hum towers, and the skyscraper district is no longer synonymous with wealth, power, and commerce. It's just where stacks of people live.

There doesn't seem to be the same glory in it that, say, there was even as recently as 20 years ago!

Thoughts?

The most interesting "skyscraper cities" in my opinion are those with a long history of building skyscrapers in dense concentrations for valid economic reasons (high land costs, high populations)....New York, Chicago etc. Lovely to see the old gothic revivals like the Woolworth and art decos like the Chrysler mixed in with the new stuff. Not so interesting in my opinion are the somewhat artificial places like Dubai or Las Vegas, where everything is "The Jetsons" and feels a bit artificial. But well designed skyscrapers will always be thrilling. The smaller cities in places like China that are building 100 story skyscrapers to show how important they are a bit sad. 100 story skyscrapers in Hong Kong and Shanghai yes, but in the boondock secondary cities where they will probably sit empty? Too much of that going on, even in the U.S. Philistine boosterism. Babbittry.

[10023]

^ the best skyscraper cities are the ones that have shoehorned skyscrapers into an existing, traditional urban form, rather than the city having been built around the skyscraper.

E.g., the City of London is a better “skyscraper city” than Canary Wharf.

Old skyscrapers also did not have the parking structures and enormous service bays that characterize modern towers in many cities (cough, Chicago) and utterly destroy their interaction with the street and public domain.

Originally Posted by The North One

Generally, I say yes but I don't think Chicago has reached an oversaturated point yet although New York certainly has. Also, the height of skyscrapers have gotten ridiculous, there's a point where projects just start looking like awful sci-fi movie rejects. It's easy to build skyscrapers so we make lots of them, but the best kind of urban areas are usually midrise and human-scaled but that's harder to achieve and developers prefer larger projects with much higher payoffs. I still love skyscrapers and skyscraper filled downtowns, especially the old American ones, but everything is only good in moderation and we're not building 20's masterpieces anymore.

But in regards to your question, I say yes. A Vienna/Paris is a thousand times better than a Manhattan/Shanghai.

Your point fails because you picked the wrong cities for comparison.

It’s true that skyscrapers do not a great city make. But Manhattan and (the old part of) Shanghai are great cities for many reasons.

Now, if you had said that “a Vienna/Paris is a thousand times better than a Dubai/Pudong” (the skyscraper-dense but inhuman part of central Shanghai), then I would agree.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

Wow. There’s a LOT of competition for that honor.

Frankly, this thread is pure trolling.

But of course

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by toddguy

*And nobody really likes Little Caesar's...but it is five bucks and you can pull up and get it via drive through window....

Exactly. People who bash Little Caesars simply don't get its appeal. It may not be Gino's East, but it fills a niche that's in high enough demand that it continues to grow and expand.

I was raised in a working class blue collar family, so I'm not bougie like some people when it comes to my food. I'm the type of guy who's happy eating at Waffle House or a Double Quarter Pounder meal from McDonald's, so I have no qualms with eating Little Caesars. As long as it's affordable , fills me up and the food's edible, that's all that's important.

[Sun Belt]

Q: Is pizza becoming---bleh?
--It used to be unique and novel--New York, Chicago--innovative and different.

A: No. Pizza is great no matter where you come across it, whether it's in Miami or Manhattan.

^Same can be said for skyscrapers.

[the urban politician]

^Lol

I’m glad there is a discussion here, and people aren’t lazily decrying this as an anti-skyscraper thread. I love highrises and urbanity—I just feel that we’ve given up quality for the sake of quantity. The skyscraper has gotten choked by its own popularity.

[skyscraperpage17]

.

[HomeInMyShoes]

^I think that's more a case of the economics of building density in North America. We get a lot of cheap knock off buildings with value-engineering choice of materials. There are still great buildings going up in a lot of places, but, and I'm taking a wild guess here, probably 90% of what goes up is pretty uninspiring.

Obviously this uninspiringness makes other things matter, like the street interaction, how it develops the neighborhood, how it fills in gaps in the skyline. What is inherently wrong with a few gaps where buildings can breath? Montreal was a great example where the gaps let you enjoy Tour de la Bourse, 1000 de La Gauchetière, and CIBC Tower.

But tall buildings are oh so special. If you're tired of the skyscraper come live here. You'll be amazed at the excitement of anything over two stories being built.

[Investing In Chicago]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

They used to be unique and novel--New York, Hong Kong, Chicago--innovative and different. A sign of commerce and bustle, of a sense of place.

Now, every damn city is having highrise booms. Skyscraper construction has truly become commoditized. Asia, the Middle East, South America, Canada. Ho hum towers, and the skyscraper district is no longer synonymous with wealth, power, and commerce. It's just where stacks of people live.

There doesn't seem to be the same glory in it that, say, there was even as recently as 20 years ago!

Thoughts?

For me, the biggest issue with new construction highrises (or the majority of all architecture in general), is that, it my opinion, most of the buildings going up in virtually all cities sucks, and looks the same.
Buildings are VE'd to death, and the end result typically looks like shit. My aesthetic preferences lean Brick/Stone/Steal and less glass, so that may have something to do with my opinion.
I live in Chicago and can probably count on one hand the new construction projects I actually like.

My other issue are these super block projects going on such as One Chicago Square, I absolutely hate these massive podiums, generally speaking, I overwhelmingly prefer the narrow highrises going up in Manhattan to basically anywhere else in the US.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Sun Belt

Q: Is pizza becoming---bleh?
--It used to be unique and novel--New York, Chicago--innovative and different.

A: No. Pizza is great no matter where you come across it, whether it's in Miami or Manhattan.

AMEN!

true Pizzatarians don't get hung up on geography; that kind of vs. nonsense is for the juvenile pretenders.

great Pizza is great Pizza. it doesn't matter where it comes from, it's Pizza God's blessed gift to you to enjoy!

Pizza be with you!

Originally Posted by toddguy

*And nobody really likes Little Caesar's...but it is five bucks and you can pull up and get it via drive through window....

ok.

but if i'm gonna spend the calories to eat pizza, i want the pizza to count.

little caesar's does not count. that caliber of pizza is always a sad disappointment.

they could deliver it entirely free to my front door and i could then throw it directly into the toilet.

ya know, just eliminate that whole middle man process of actually having to eat it.

[mhays]

I once had pizza that my friends were soooo excited about. No cheese, no meat, just broccoli and spinach and other vegetables piled high! It wasn't aggressively bad, it just wasn't even 1% of the joy of pizza.

As for the point about traditional urbanity, no parking podiums, and interaction with the street, that's absolutely right. I'd add volume of parking...a 100-space vs. 500-space vs. 3,000-space garage will do less damage to the neighborhood and walking environment. Of course zero is best of all, but with major towers that's a tough hurdle in all but the top cities.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by mhays

I once had pizza that my friends were soooo excited about. No cheese, no meat, just broccoli and spinach and other vegetables piled high! It wasn't aggressively bad, it just wasn't even 1% of the joy of pizza.

i once had pizza in Eugene, OR from an organic, vegan, glutten-free pizzeria.

my friend's ex-wife had a crap-load of hippy-dippy "food weirdness".

i was too polite to say anything out loud, but in my head i was screaming "WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS SHIT?"

[tdawg]

There's a lot of crap going up in New York but there are also some of the most beautiful towers this city has seen since the Art Deco or Modernism eras. New York definitely doesn't feel "bleh" right now, but it is feeling more and more like a playground for the super wealthy and tourists, at least much of Manhattan.

[niwell]

I think it's probably fair to say that in most cities, the main highrise district tends to be less interesting than some of the surrounding low/midrise areas. Most good restaurants, bars, boutique stores, etc. don't locate in a cities CBD. Even in NYC Midtown isn't the most interesting neighbourhood at street level, although objectively it's still far more interesting than most other cities.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by The North One

I still love skyscrapers and skyscraper filled downtowns, especially the old American ones, but everything is only good in moderation and we're not building 20's masterpieces anymore.

But in regards to your question, I say yes. A Vienna/Paris is a thousand times better than a Manhattan/Shanghai.

We can't afford to build 20's masterpieces anymore. You know how much it would cost to build a Chrysler building today? I don't either but I'm sure it would be a lot. The attention to detail during that era was astounding. Even Europe doesn't do anymore (no one does) and most of their contemporary architecture is as subdued as ours. Modern Paris is La Défense...not the Champs-Élysées.

[The North One]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Vienna doesn't look much like Paris, and is mostly commieblocks. 60% of Viennese live in public housing. Manhattan and Shanghai are pretty radically different too.

I doubt you understand the nuances of any of these cities.

You always say this but it's pure delusion, Vienna is surrounded by detached home suburbs and continued attached midrises outside of the midrise core more than anything else. Public housing can exist in various forms not just "commieblocks" and subsidized housing could mean anything and can be privately owned, I'd also like to see a source for this 60% (you probably don't since throwing random percentages around is your shtick). Oh wait, it looks like I found something here: "Vienna’s city government owns and manages 220,000 housing units, which represent about 25 percent of the city’s housing stock." https://www.huduser.gov/portal/pdred...le_011314.html whatever this 60% figure comes from must be a technicality based on subsidies and either way is not an indication for the city's housing typologies.

All of this is irrelevant anyway, just a way for you to derail things. I'm comparing the cores, midrises vs highrises which is obvious. I could throw any European city as an example.

When did I say Vienna looked like Paris? The point is these cities and most other European ones are dominated by old mid-rise development which is in my opinion wholly preferable to some midtown Manhattan Sao-Paulo-esque skyscraper forest or some obnoxiously sized supertall core in Shanghai. These are the "skyscraper" cities. Nuances? oh the glorious irony, as opposed to you and your sea of misinformation? You can't even understand the nuances of a usual American town.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Investing In Chicago

For me, the biggest issue with new construction highrises (or the majority of all architecture in general), is that, it my opinion, most of the buildings going up in virtually all cities sucks, and looks the same.
Buildings are VE'd to death, and the end result typically looks like shit. My aesthetic preferences lean Brick/Stone/Steal and less glass, so that may have something to do with my opinion.
I live in Chicago and can probably count on one hand the new construction projects I actually like.

My other issue are these super block projects going on such as One Chicago Square, I absolutely hate these massive podiums, generally speaking, I overwhelmingly prefer the narrow highrises going up in Manhattan to basically anywhere else in the US.

I don't know, I actually like fat, squat podiums (as long as they aren't blank garages). Fat and squat is the new tall and thin. Look at the Loop. All those fat, squat buildings--they rock! You are immersed in the city.

[cannedairspray]

So they were cool when it was a badge of honor for Chicago and other select cities, but now that lots of them have them, they're played out? Sounds like a guy that only likes bands/restaurants/TV shows/beers/whatever while "before they sold out". Very hipster-y.

[Investing In Chicago]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

I don't know, I actually like fat, squat podiums (as long as they aren't blank garages). Fat and squat is the new tall and thin. Look at the Loop. All those fat, squat buildings--they rock! You are immersed in the city.

Different strokes...Though are you trying to compare a fat, squat pre-war building to a new construction highrise?

This is the type of podium I'm describing, like seriously, what the hell is this?! and why have these aluminum panels (or whatever material they are) become a thing?

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8907...7i13312!8i6656

Ironically, one of the ugliest buildings ever designed (AMLI River North), has a very nice street presence, mainly because they leveraged the existing parking garage adjacent.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8901...7i13312!8i6656

[maru2501]

I actually understand the point of this thread, which maybe puts me in the minority

However, quantity is still good, even though smaller cities think they are catching up by building one or three or six new buildings

the new real city currency is density and urban fabric and entertainment options

Chicago no longer has the world's tallest building or one in the top ten, but it is many many times a better city than it was in 1982, sorry grit fans