Quote:
Originally Posted by homebucket
If we examine this 2nd tier of skyscraper cities, here is the breakdown of completed buildings of at least 500 ft. I thought I'd look up some others too in addition to the ones you listed.
Miami 56 (!)
Houston 36 (this includes 8 non-downtown buildings)
Los Angeles 28 (this includes 6 non-DTLA buildings)
San Francisco 24
Seattle 21
Boston 21
Dallas 19
Atlanta 17
Philadelphia 14
Pittsburgh 10
Minneapolis 10
Austin 7
Charlotte 7
Detroit 7
Cleveland 4
Oklahoma City 2
It appears that Miami by far is the 3rd largest skyline in the US, followed by Houston, LA, and SF. Philadelphia is surprisingly low despite having an impressive looking skyline. Maybe because it's more top heavy? It doesn't seem like they have very many towers below 600 ft (unless Wikipedia is very off), yet the skyline still appears quite dense. Very interesting phenomenon. Austin will likely jump to the top half of this list in the next 5-10 years.
|
If you're using Wikipedia, their LA list contains 31 towers over 500'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed
It's interesting how L.A. has not managed to keep pace with Chicago despite bypassing it in population decades ago. It's also way more expensive than Chicago.
|
It's hardly surprising. Chicago is internationally noted for pioneering the skyscraper form, for building so many of them from the very start, and for continuing to build so many even now. Los Angeles has historically been about horizontal growth--deliberately--and was never nationally or internationally renowned for skyscrapers. LA obviously has skyscrapers, but that's not what LA is about. The energy is elsewhere.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford
Highrise construction doesn't really seem related to land values, or desirability. It's more cultural/regulatory environment.
|
It's also not necessarily about population size or growth, as seen by the fact that Miami has the third largest collection of 500' towers in the nation despite being the focal point of the nation's 11th largest CSA.
Quote:
And just a subjective observation, but to me, living in a highrise in LA largely defeats the purpose of living in LA. The inside-outside living, the peacefulness, the inward-living, etc. It isn't a communitarian environment, at least not for those who can afford otherwise.
|
I agree. For better and for worse, LA was self-consciously built to be a different kind of big city than the older ones back east.