SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/index.php)
-   Buildings & Architecture (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/forumdisplay.php?f=397)
-   -   The US is closing in on a meaningless skyscraper milestone (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=237151)

Steely Dan Dec 28, 2018 8:03 PM

The US is closing in on a meaningless skyscraper milestone
 
according to the stats in the SSP database:



in 1999, there were 94 skyscrapers >700' in the US:

new york - 29 (including the 2 destroyed WTC twins)
chicago -12
houston - 10
los angeles - 8
atlanta - 5
dallas - 5
philadelphia - 4
seattle - 4
minneapolis - 3
cleveland - 2
san francisco - 2
pittsburgh - 2
boston - 2
denver - 2
charlotte - 1
indianapolis - 1
miami - 1
detroit - 1




since 2000, 87 skyscrapers >700' have been built in the US (including U/C):

new york - 53*
chicago -13
miami - 5
san francisco - 3
philadelphia - 3
los angeles - 1
detroit - 1
seattle - 1
oklahoma city - 1
charlotte - 1
houston - 1
mobile - 1
boston - 1
las vegas - 1
atlantic city - 1



there are several more expected to kick off in chicago next year, and i'm sure even more in NYC, so within the next year, the US will have built more 700+ footers in the first 2 decades of this century than it did in the entire 20th century.

the big difference this time around of course is NYC's current skyscraper building boom. it's off the charts relative to the rest of the nation. chicago is certainly holding its own, and miami is the big new comer to the top of the list



(*) includes three 700+' towers located across the hudson in jersey city.

Steely Dan Dec 28, 2018 8:36 PM

here's the combined list of the two lists above.


total skyscrapers >700' (including U/C):

new york - 80*
chicago - 25
houston - 11
los angeles - 9
philadelphia - 7
miami - 6
san francisco - 5
atlanta - 5
seattle - 5
dallas - 5
minneapolis - 3
boston - 3
cleveland - 2
detroit - 2
pittsburgh - 2
denver - 2
charlotte - 2
oklahoma city - 1
mobile - 1
las vegas - 1
atlantic city - 1
indianapolis - 1



(*) includes three 700+' towers located across the hudson in jersey city.

Pedestrian Dec 28, 2018 8:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan (Post 8420552)
the big difference this time around of course is NYC's current skyscraper building boom. it's off the charts relative to the rest of the nation. chicago is certainly holding its own, and miami is the big new comer to the top of the list

One planned in San Francisco (Transbay Parcel F: has already been fully leased to Salesforce but I'm not sure when they'll break ground).

Here a lot of what's new is, I think, technology in seismic resistance. From viscous damping to buckling-restrained bracing to base isolation, design of buildings today to resist earthquake swaying as well as actual damage is much improved allowing more taller buidlings that won't sway so much in even the moderate quakes that are fairly common as to alarm people in them.

Leveled Dec 28, 2018 9:25 PM

I do wonder what miami is in 50 years. When do the banks start refusing 30 year loans down there?

Crawford Dec 28, 2018 9:29 PM

Is that by city proper or metro? For example, is JC included with NYC, or is Sunny Isles included with Miami?

Probably the other big difference relative to the past is the skyscraper type. I'd guess like 80-90% of of pre-2000 700 ft+ skyscrapers were office, while a similar share of post-2000 skyscrapers were residential or mixed use.

Steely Dan Dec 28, 2018 9:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 8420614)
Is that by city proper or metro? For example, is JC included with NYC, or is Sunny Isles included with Miami?

it's by city proper, except for NYC which includes jersey city's three 700+' towers.

no other metro area in the nation has buildings over 700' outside of the main city.

i've now edited the first post to clarify the issue.

Crawford Dec 28, 2018 10:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan (Post 8420619)
it's by city proper, except for NYC which includes jersey city's three 700+' towers.

Thanks, this makes sense.

JC actually has four 700 ft+ towers if we're including u/c (Goldman Sachs, URL 1, 99 Hudson and Journal Squared 2).

Steely Dan Dec 28, 2018 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 8420643)
JC actually has four 700 ft+ towers if we're including u/c (Goldman Sachs, URL 1, 99 Hudson and Journal Squared 2).

all data is from the SSP database.

"Journal Squared 2" is not listed in the SSP database.

James Bond Agent 007 Dec 28, 2018 11:29 PM

Yup, that was pretty meaningless.

AMWChicago Dec 28, 2018 11:29 PM

I did something similar earlier today without even realizing this was posted here :haha:

And it looks at all cities in the US with at least one 500 footer in their skyline. And then looking at the change in the number of buildings in the skyline up until 2001 and then up until present. I think it gives a good look at cities booming with respect to certain height ceilings. So for example New York and Chicago are pretty neck and neck percentage wise up until 750' where New York begins to run away with it. Another interesting bit of info is how insane Miami's skyline has grown this century.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7804/...12ca07f1a9.jpg250 by Andrew W, on Flickr
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7848/...9ab20d5cfd.jpg500 by Andrew W, on Flickr
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4845/...4c6e4c822e.jpg750 by Andrew W, on Flickr
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7860/...87a143375c.jpg1000 by Andrew W, on Flickr

mas1092 Dec 30, 2018 2:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AMWChicago (Post 8420717)
I did something similar earlier today without even realizing this was posted here :haha:

And it looks at all cities in the US with at least one 500 footer in their skyline. And then looking at the change in the number of buildings in the skyline up until 2001 and then up until present. I think it gives a good look at cities booming with respect to certain height ceilings. So for example New York and Chicago are pretty neck and neck percentage wise up until 750' where New York begins to run away with it. Another interesting bit of info is how insane Miami's skyline has grown this century.

You're missing several cities with 500 footers in their skyline: Cleveland, Columbus, etc.

Crawford Dec 30, 2018 3:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan (Post 8420664)
all data is from the SSP database.

"Journal Squared 2" is not listed in the SSP database.


JSQ2 is well u/c, for nearly a year now. It's a 760 ft. residential tower in Journal Square; the second in a three-tower project.

Steely Dan Dec 31, 2018 1:24 AM

I moved all of the Hudson tower construction debate to the Hudson tower project thread: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=208634

Pedestrian Dec 31, 2018 7:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leveled (Post 8420612)
I do wonder what miami is in 50 years. When do the banks start refusing 30 year loans down there?

Somebody from your area was on Meet The Press (which had a special edition today on climate change, no doubt so it could be filmed a week or two early) today saying you are all going to be moving to Orlando shortly.

BG918 Dec 31, 2018 5:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mas1092 (Post 8421662)
You're missing several cities with 500 footers in their skyline: Cleveland, Columbus, etc.

And Tulsa with (4) 500+ footers.

digitallagasse Dec 31, 2018 11:01 PM

The crazy thing about the Las Vegas numbers is that a large portion of the high rises are not in the city of Las Vegas. The Las Vegas strip isn't in the city. It is county land and the township of Paradise. The Stratosphere tower is in the city of Las Vegas. Everything south of Sahara Ave on Las Vegas blvd is the township of Paradise. Also the welcome to Las Vegas sign is likewise not in the city of Las Vegas as well.

The strange thing is that the city of Las Vegas came first but the strip has since come to dominate the primary city. That and it took the name of the primary city even though isn't. I can't think of a similar situation elsewhere. Paradise, NV is the true center of the valley and metro. The Las Vegas metro area is listed as Las Vegas-Henderson-Paradise. The city of Las Vegas does have the highest population and the city of Henderson the second highest in the metro. The city of North Las Vegas has slightly more people than the township of Paradise and is growing faster.

Austin55 Jan 2, 2019 5:59 PM

Here's some charts I've put together showing skyscraper growth (250 ft minimum) by decade since 1960. (Note that 2020 is present+U/C and destroyed are not counted for). I have left NYC and Chicago out as they are simply off the charts.

First is cities between 100 and 210 skyscrapers. Miami's growth is intense, dead last among this group in 1990, now at the top and still going strong.

https://i.imgur.com/POC0Bfk.png?2


The 40-100 250fters group. Boston leads despite a massive effort from Vegas in the 00s, San Diego also stands out. Pittsburgh was 1st entering 1960, not much since.

https://i.imgur.com/KXwBllc.png?1


The final group is 29-40 skyscrapers. Miami's metro is again shocking, Austin coming from behind, Charlotte going strong as well.

https://i.imgur.com/HdioYt0.png?2

NYguy Jan 3, 2019 1:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan (Post 8420552)
within the next year, the US will have built more 700+ footers in the first 2 decades of this century than it did in the entire 20th century.

the big difference this time around of course is NYC's current skyscraper building boom. it's off the charts relative to the rest of the nation. chicago is certainly holding its own, and miami is the big new comer to the top of the list


I think it's noteworthy, especially since people have been saying for years that the skyscraper is "dead", as more companies moved to suburban office parks. And that sentiment only got worse after 9/11. But surprise, surprise, the skyscraper is alive and well. And booming around the world. Not only have we seen so many tall buildings built in the US, but record numbers are being built around the world. The skyscraper is here to stay.

Steely Dan Jan 3, 2019 6:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 8424276)
Not only have we seen so many tall buildings built in the US, but record numbers are being built around the world. The skyscraper is here to stay.

indeed.

looking at things globally:

in 1999 there were 168 skyscrapers >700' on our planet.

since 2000, roughly 1,200 towers >700' have been built or are currently U/C.

Austin55 Jan 3, 2019 9:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan (Post 8424932)
indeed.

looking at things globally:

in 1999 there were 168 skyscrapers >700' on our planet.

since 2000, roughly 1,200 towers >700' have been built or are currently U/C.

Global skyscraper construction's curve is remarkably smooth,

https://i.imgur.com/kNgxyX2.png


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:45 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.