What skyscrapers needed to be taller?

[DCReid]

I always thought that the Hearst Tower in Manhattan should have been at least 1000 feet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hearst...rstowernyc.JPG

It would have been interesting if Marina City in Chicago was at least 1000 feet:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina...-20,_DD_01.jpg

[Buckeye Native 001]

Queen City Square in Cincinnati.

Also, I'd like to see the tiara shortened.

***EDIT***

Or you know what, screw it: Make the Carew Tower taller than QCS.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by DCReid

It would have been interesting if Marina City in Chicago was at least 1000 feet:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina...-20,_DD_01.jpg

sure, it might've been interesting, but considering that they were the 3rd and 4th tallest buildings in chicago at the time of their completion in 1964, and the tallest residential skyscrapers that had ever been built in the entire world up until that point in time, they were plenty tall for their era.

even at only 588' tall, that was still noteworthy enough for the cover of National Geographic back in the day:


source: https://www.marinacity.org/history/m...geographic.htm




full disclosure: i own a unit in Marina City, so i might be ever so slightly biased in their favor

[bilbao58]

Frost Tower in San Antonio. Not a huge amount taller, but a bit taller all the same. Looks stumpy to me.


Droning Over Downtown by bill barfield, on Flickr

[JDRCRASH]

Mellon Bank Center (between US Bank and Cal Plaza 2)


Source: By BDS 2006 on Wikipedia

If it was twice it's current height, I'd be happy.

[Camelback]

I don't think skyscrapers need to be taller and the reason is within a couple blocks of high-rise clusters you have vacant lots and low rise buildings.

Edit, I just saw that the op asked "What skyscrapers need to be taller?" and not "Do skyscrapers need to be taller?"
My bad!

So, I'll go with the Burj Kalifa needs to be TALLER!

[iheartthed]

One Kennedy Square, Detroit:


Source: https://redico.com/properties/one-kennedy-square

It should have been at least twice as tall.

[Boisebro]

Frost Bank tower in Austin:


source

[James Bond Agent 007]

All of them?

[SIGSEGV]

These:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8781...7i16384!8i8192

[Centropolis]

the AT+T building (batman bldg) in Nashville has a crappy sort of felt presence on the skyline for whatever reason for its height. other 600ft buildings seem much more prominent on similarly short skylines like one kansas city place or something (although the KC skyline punches way above its weight with the pre-wars and being on a high bluff).

[edale]

Some good answers in already in this thread. The first buildings that came to mind for me were Queen City Square in Cincy and the Frost Bank building in Austin



I also wish the Wilshire Grand was just a little bit taller. If the building itself rose to the height of the 'sail' on top, it'd be a much more commanding structure, I think.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0878...7i13312!8i6656

[badrunner]

Originally Posted by James Bond Agent 007

All of them?

Not all, but all the stumpy skylines (San Diego, Phoenix, Denver etc) desperately need one or two to rise above the fray. Denver could have a fantastic skyline with a supertall or two. Too bad about the FAA restrictions in some cities though...

[BG918]

Not a fan of Frost Tower in San Antonio or really the entire SA skyline. Probably the biggest under-performer for a metro its size in the U.S.

[Buckeye Native 001]

Originally Posted by edale

Some good answers in already in this thread. The first buildings that came to mind for me were Queen City Square in Cincy and the Frost Bank building in Austin



I also wish the Wilshire Grand was just a little bit taller. If the building itself rose to the height of the 'sail' on top, it'd be a much more commanding structure, I think.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0878...7i13312!8i6656

This is my OCD, but Wilshire Grand drives me nuts. I like the design, but the spire feels like cheating. From almost every angle except from MacArthur Park, it looks shorter than the Library Tower.

[urban_encounter]

Originally Posted by BG918

Not a fan of Frost Tower in San Antonio or really the entire SA skyline. Probably the biggest under-performer for a metro its size in the U.S.

Underperforming skylines for metros 2 million +?

Yes San Antonio but it’s still beautiful imo. Also I do like the Frost tower.

For stumpy I would say San Jose, Sacramento and Oakland.

[suburbanite]

My first thought for Toronto was Commerce Court North. The city wasn't big or prosperous enough prewar to justify a real masonry giant.



It's a pretty small floorplate though. It would look terribly thin if it was just extended twice as high without any additional width.

[Austinlee]

Frost Bank in Austin will always be the first one to jump to mind for me.

[JManc]

Agreed about Frost Bank in Austin. Should have at at least another 20 stories.

As for buildings that shouldn't have needed to be taller, fortunately this never happened.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by JManc

As for buildings that shouldn't have needed to be taller, fortunately this never happened.

huh, i never heard about that proposed plan to extend the ESB.

and yes, thank god they left well enough alone in the end.