HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Jan 7, 2011, 2:44 AM
Centropolis's Avatar
Centropolis Centropolis is offline
disneypilled verhoevenist
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: saint louis
Posts: 11,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evergrey View Post
St. Louis seems to have a lot of prewar skyscrapers in the 200ft-300ft range.
I'd be comfortable calling them soild commercial buildings. But that's the skyscraper h8r in me, yo.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2011, 4:55 AM
Jelly Roll Jelly Roll is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 1,314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
here are some height and numbers data from SSP's database. the numbers include buildings with height estimates too, so take it all with a big grain of salt, it's FAR from definitive. i didn't bother compiling new york because it's so obviously WAY out ahead of everyone else, perhaps even combined!

pre-war buildings over 500':

chicago: 11
pittsburgh: 2
baltimore: 1
cincinnati: 1
cleveland: 1
detroit: 1
boston: 0
buffalo: 0
houston: 0
kansas city: 0
los angeles: 0
minneapolis: 0
montreal: 0
newark: 0
philly: 0
san francisco: 0
seattle: 0
st. louis: 0
toronto: 0






pre-war buildings over 400':

chicago: 21
detroit: 6
pittsburgh: 4
kansas city: 3
philly: 3
cincinnati: 2
houston: 2
minneapolis: 2
newark: 2
san francisco: 2
toronto: 2
baltimore: 1
cleveland: 1
boston: 1
los angeles: 1
montreal: 1
seattle: 1
buffalo: 0
st. louis: 0




pre-war buildings over 300':

chicago: 37
philly: 17
detroit: 13
san francisco: 12
pittsburgh: 10
houston: 6
kansas city: 5
minneapolis: 4
montreal: 4
boston: 3
buffalo: 3
cincinnati: 3
newark: 3
st. louis: 3
cleveland: 2
los angeles: 2
seattle: 2
toronto: 2
baltimore: 1



pre-war buildings over 200':

chicago: 146
philly: 50
detroit: 29
san francisco: 21
pittsburgh: 20
st. louis: 17
toronto: 15
kansas city: 13
baltimore: 12
cincinnati: 12
cleveland: 12
newark: 11
los angeles: 10
seattle: 10
houston: 9
buffalo: 8
minneapolis: 8
boston: 6
montreal: 4
City Hall in Philadelphia is over 500' to the top and was completed in 1901. Just because it does not use steel does not mean it does not exceed 500'
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2011, 5:19 AM
ChiSoxRox's Avatar
ChiSoxRox ChiSoxRox is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 2,488
Oh wow, this thread is like Christmas. In the name of blatant link-dropping, I refer you to the link in my sig, to a directory I have compiled of the tallest pre-war buildings in each city (ranked by 1950 population).

In the Chicago department, cue the Charles W. Cushman:

















Wrigley, Intercontinental Hotel, Tribune


Mather Tower, Carbide & Carbon Building


__________________
Like the pre-war masonry skyscrapers? Then check out my list of the tallest buildings in 1950.

Last edited by ChiSoxRox; Nov 26, 2011 at 5:31 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2011, 7:12 AM
Rico Rommheim's Avatar
Rico Rommheim Rico Rommheim is offline
Look at me!
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: City of Bagels
Posts: 13,567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
:

pre-war buildings over 200':

chicago: 146
philly: 50
detroit: 29
san francisco: 21
pittsburgh: 20
st. louis: 17
toronto: 15
kansas city: 13
baltimore: 12
cincinnati: 12
cleveland: 12
newark: 11
los angeles: 10
seattle: 10
houston: 9
buffalo: 8
minneapolis: 8
boston: 6
montreal: 4
Not that it makes any difference, but what the hell. Montreal had at least 7 Pre-war "skyscrapers" over 200ft.

1. Sun Life 124m - 407 ft
2. RBC 122m - 400 ft
3. Aldred 97m - 318 ft
4. Bell HQ 96m - 315 ft
5. University Tower 72m - 236 ft
6. Windsor Station 69m - 226ft
7. Architects building 68m - 223ft

IF you include the University of Montreal (1943)

8. U of M 92m - 302ft
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2011, 7:14 AM
Rico Rommheim's Avatar
Rico Rommheim Rico Rommheim is offline
Look at me!
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: City of Bagels
Posts: 13,567
Btw, Chicago's skyline, was better back in the days, I'm sorry skidmore and company and Mies, but the classic Chi-town skyline was simply...timeless.

I apologize for the cliche
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2011, 2:30 PM
LSyd's Avatar
LSyd LSyd is offline
Red October standing by
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Columbia/Sumter, SC
Posts: 16,913
wasn't this thread done a few years ago, and done better?

here's the stats for "the south;" i've excluded capitol buildings and similar "towers."

over 400'
Dallas - 2
Houston - 2
Oklahoma City - 2
San Antonio - 1

over 300'
Birmingham - 1
Dallas - 5
Houston - 3
Memphis - 1
Miami - 1
New Orleans - 2
San Antonio - 2

over 200'

Atlanta - 9
Birmingham - 9
Dallas - 9
Houston - 8
Memphis - 5
Miami - 6
New Orleans - 8
Oklahoma City - 2
San Antonio - 3

it seems Dallas wins.

-
__________________
"The vapors! The fainting couch! Those heartless elitists are burning down the plantation with their logic and arithmetic!"

-fflint
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2011, 12:15 AM
NYC4Life's Avatar
NYC4Life NYC4Life is offline
The Time To Build Is Now
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Bronx, NYC
Posts: 3,004
No question about it. New York, Chicago and Detroit are the top 3 cities.
__________________
"I want to wake up in the city that never sleeps"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2011, 5:06 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 29,605
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jelly Roll View Post
City Hall in Philadelphia is over 500' to the top and was completed in 1901. Just because it does not use steel does not mean it does not exceed 500'
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rico Rommheim View Post
Not that it makes any difference, but what the hell. Montreal had at least 7 Pre-war "skyscrapers" over 200ft.
thanks for the corrections, but as i pointed out when i tallied those numbers, i cautioned that they were FAR from accurate and needed to be taken with a grain of salt because they came from SSP's database, which is not without its many errors & omissions.
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a great middle ground for many middle class families.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2011, 7:09 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,352
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rico Rommheim View Post
Btw, Chicago's skyline, was better back in the days, I'm sorry skidmore and company and Mies, but the classic Chi-town skyline was simply...timeless.

I apologize for the cliche
I definitely disagree, but I also have some disdain for most of the wacky new stuff going up in Shanghai and Dubai.

Our skyline today resembles a man-made mountain range with three peaks (Sears, Trump/Aon, Hancock). These peaks roughly correspond to the greatest centers of activity in downtown. Sears is by Union Station and the financial district, Trump/Aon are by Millennium Park and the Michigan Ave Bridge, and Hancock is by Water Tower.

Even if you know nothing about Chicago, all you need to do is look up and the skyline will lead you to where the action is.

Likewise, the 1950 skyline reflected an older pattern where the Loop was uniformly dense and commercial/office buildings were interspersed with warehouses and factories. Peripheral areas were almost entirely industrial, with random pockets of residential remaining from an even earlier era.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2011, 8:03 PM
HomrQT's Avatar
HomrQT HomrQT is online now
All-American City Boy
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Hinsdale / Uptown, Chicago
Posts: 1,939
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rico Rommheim View Post
Btw, Chicago's skyline, was better back in the days, I'm sorry skidmore and company and Mies, but the classic Chi-town skyline was simply...timeless.

I apologize for the cliche
Totally agree. I also have the same feeling about the NYC skyline. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the modern skyline views these cities offer now, but to me their older skylines were epic, almost mythical.
__________________
1. 9 DeKalb Ave - Brooklyn, NYC - SHoP Architects - Photo
2. American Radiator Building - New York City - Hood, Godley, and Fouilhoux - Photo
3. One Chicago Square - Chicago - HPA and Goettsch Partners - Photo
4. Chicago Board of Trade - Chicago - Holabird & Root - Photo
5. Cathedral of Learning - Pittsburgh - Charles Klauder - Photo
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2011, 8:07 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,352
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dralcoffin View Post
Same position today (view from Kendall College):


flickr/saumacus
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2011, 5:21 AM
Ch.G, Ch.G's Avatar
Ch.G, Ch.G Ch.G, Ch.G is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,138
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rico Rommheim View Post
Btw, Chicago's skyline, was better back in the days, I'm sorry skidmore and company and Mies, but the classic Chi-town skyline was simply...timeless.

I apologize for the cliche
Quote:
Originally Posted by HomrQT View Post
Totally agree. I also have the same feeling about the NYC skyline. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the modern skyline views these cities offer now, but to me their older skylines were epic, almost mythical.
...a lot of those buildings are still standing. In the case of Michigan avenue, there is still literally a line of skyscrapers that has been nearly untouched for decades. The difference is there's just a lot more (that's a lot bigger) behind it.

I wonder to what extent the that "epic" or "mythical" quality simply comes from the mode of representation. A lot of the old photographs have qualities we in 2011 perceive as vintage (monochrome, for example), and the haze of pollution that used to hover over Chicago and other American cities gives a sense of atmospheric perspective that we associate with monumentality/grandeur (aided by gradation of soot on the buildings, kind of like an accidental trompe l'oeil).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2011, 1:15 PM
WilliamTheArtist's Avatar
WilliamTheArtist WilliamTheArtist is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Tulsa Oklahoma
Posts: 800
Quote:
Originally Posted by LSyd View Post
wasn't this thread done a few years ago, and done better?

here's the stats for "the south;" i've excluded capitol buildings and similar "towers."

over 400'
Dallas - 2
Houston - 2
Oklahoma City - 2
San Antonio - 1

over 300'
Birmingham - 1
Dallas - 5
Houston - 3
Memphis - 1
Miami - 1
New Orleans - 2
San Antonio - 2

over 200'

Atlanta - 9
Birmingham - 9
Dallas - 9
Houston - 8
Memphis - 5
Miami - 6
New Orleans - 8
Oklahoma City - 2
San Antonio - 3

it seems Dallas wins.

-
Do you consider Tulsa part of the South? or more "midwestern" ?
__________________
Tulsa
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2011, 7:24 PM
HomrQT's Avatar
HomrQT HomrQT is online now
All-American City Boy
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Hinsdale / Uptown, Chicago
Posts: 1,939
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ch.G, Ch.G View Post
...a lot of those buildings are still standing. In the case of Michigan avenue, there is still literally a line of skyscrapers that has been nearly untouched for decades. The difference is there's just a lot more (that's a lot bigger) behind it.

I wonder to what extent the that "epic" or "mythical" quality simply comes from the mode of representation. A lot of the old photographs have qualities we in 2011 perceive as vintage (monochrome, for example), and the haze of pollution that used to hover over Chicago and other American cities gives a sense of atmospheric perspective that we associate with monumentality/grandeur (aided by gradation of soot on the buildings, kind of like an accidental trompe l'oeil).
While I do agree the elements of photography influence our perception of the older skylines, there's no doubt that the subject itself (all of those old art deco, classical, beaux art, gothic buildings right next to each other and stacked on top of each other with no interference from more modern styles are what create that "mythical" view. Imagine a view of a section of Rome with the Colosseum, the Arch of Constantine, other ruins and older Italian buildings scattered about. For those of us that appreciate these things, it's an amazing view. Now stick a typical Mcdonalds (Or anything that would look wildly out of place) right in the center of that view. It distorts everything, especially if that McDonalds is larger than the surrounding older architecture. Just as the newer and larger buildings affect the skylines today. I do appreciate a lot of the large modern additions to the cities of the world, but sometimes I enjoy gazing at those photos of the skylines from well before I was born even more, and not just because of the vintage look of the photo, but because of the very beautiful subject in said photos.
__________________
1. 9 DeKalb Ave - Brooklyn, NYC - SHoP Architects - Photo
2. American Radiator Building - New York City - Hood, Godley, and Fouilhoux - Photo
3. One Chicago Square - Chicago - HPA and Goettsch Partners - Photo
4. Chicago Board of Trade - Chicago - Holabird & Root - Photo
5. Cathedral of Learning - Pittsburgh - Charles Klauder - Photo
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2011, 11:35 PM
stormkingfan stormkingfan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: PhilaPA
Posts: 503
I LOVE this thread!! All the pics of vintage skyscrapers, which mostly lost recognition.

I didn't see Youngstown, OH, mentioned. It's a city of less than 100K, but all the big bldgs there are from before WWII, expect for one. An apt. bldg built in 1962. First time I drove through d'town, I had trouble concentrating on driving plus taking in all the old goodies (I had no time to stop and walk around).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2011, 12:29 PM
MayDay's Avatar
MayDay MayDay is offline
Member of SSP since 1997
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 7,103
Here's is Youngstown's tallest (and only one to go over 200'), Metropolitan Tower at 224'. I always have a soft spot for this one - when I was 4 years old, I saw it and that's when the architecture/skyscraper bug bit:



Also missing from the list is Akron, with First National Tower at 330':

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Mar 20, 2014, 6:23 PM
The North One's Avatar
The North One The North One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,486
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guiltyspark View Post
Detroit... 0 :-(
*sigh* I know.

But Detroit has architectural masterpieces that really cant be found in many places outside of New York. We need to focus on restoring what we have and we have more then enough.
__________________
Spawn of questionable parentage!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Mar 20, 2014, 7:48 PM
summersm343's Avatar
summersm343 summersm343 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 18,362
Quote:
Originally Posted by The North One View Post
*sigh* I know.

But Detroit has architectural masterpieces that really cant be found in many places outside of New York. We need to focus on restoring what we have and we have more then enough.
Philadelphia? Chicago? Boston? These cities have highrises of architectural perfection as well.

For Philadelphia:

City Hall
http://cdn4.vtourist.com/4/4940024-C...iladelphia.jpg

The Hyatt at Bellevue:
http://www.emporis.com/images/show/251617-Large.jpg

The Drake (foreground):
http://www.skyscrapersunset.com/tours/080620/44.jpg

Are just some examples of Philadelphia's superb highrise architecture.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Mar 21, 2014, 12:15 AM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,497
Quote:
Originally Posted by summersm343 View Post
Philadelphia? Chicago? Boston? These cities have highrises of architectural perfection as well.
Chicago, yes, is ahead of Detroit and #2, but Detroit is probably #3 on the planet in terms of prewar towers.

Detroit has extremely strong prewar heritage. The Fisher and Guardian alone have few rivals anywhere. I can't think of any prewar towers in Philly or Boston that reach that type of iconic quality.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Mar 21, 2014, 12:25 AM
Private Dick Private Dick is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: D.C.
Posts: 3,125
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
Chicago, yes, is ahead of Detroit and #2, but Detroit is probably #3 on the planet in terms of prewar towers.

Detroit has extremely strong prewar heritage. The Fisher and Guardian alone have few rivals anywhere. I can't think of any prewar towers in Philly or Boston that reach that type of iconic quality.
Yeah, Detroit's collection of pre-war talls is very impressive. Neither Boston nor Philly can match by a long shot in my opinion. Penobscot, Book, Stott, Cadillac, Book-Cadillac Hotel, Eaton/Broderick... don't forget those as well.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:45 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.