HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2010, 10:07 PM
Tom In Chicago's Avatar
Tom In Chicago Tom In Chicago is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Sick City
Posts: 7,313
I have no opinion on this matter. . . for the record. . .

. . .
__________________
Tom in Chicago
. . .
Near the day of Purification, there will be cobwebs spun back and forth in the sky.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2010, 10:32 PM
samne's Avatar
samne samne is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Eastend
Posts: 3,731
100 m or 300'...thats about 30 stories = highrise

150m or 500'.... 50 stories = Skyscraper!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2010, 6:13 AM
LMich's Avatar
LMich LMich is offline
Midwest Moderator - Editor
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Big Mitten
Posts: 31,745
My definition of what makes a building a skyscraper is rather old fashioned and visual. For me, it's being able to stand on a sidewalk below a building (no more than a dozen feet outward from said building) and not being able to easily discern the roofline.
__________________
Where the trees are the right height
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2010, 6:41 AM
Phil McAvity Phil McAvity is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 3,618
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom In Chicago View Post
I have no opinion on this matter. . . for the record. . . .
okay, so why did you post?

I agree with what urbanlife said about the context playing a big role but I also think the width of a building matters. If a building is really thin it appears taller which is why I am going to say 100m because i've seen residential buildings that aren't even 300 feet tall that are thin so they appear really tall.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2010, 8:45 PM
Tom In Chicago's Avatar
Tom In Chicago Tom In Chicago is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Sick City
Posts: 7,313
^I was looking for a reaction. . . thanks for playing. . .
__________________
Tom in Chicago
. . .
Near the day of Purification, there will be cobwebs spun back and forth in the sky.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2010, 10:31 PM
stormkingfan stormkingfan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: PhilaPA
Posts: 503
The old 7 World Trade Center was 573' tall. Not too far from 600', but when you looked at its north or south faces, because of its width, it looked more like a high-rise. The CBIC tower in Montreal, on the other hand, is not much taller, but it appears taller than it really is from the east or west, because it's slender.

It was said before that even a 14-storey bldg could be considered a skyscraper. Everything's relative. If it's located among 4- or 5-storey bldgs, then there's going to be a break in the town's profile.

For the longest time, I've always considered buildings over 600' a skyscraper, but if there's a big cluster of 600-700 footers viewed from a distance, then there doesn't seem to be anything that appears to be scraping the sky. Just this huge "box" these buildings are corporately forming. Until an 800 footer is placed in the middle of them.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2010, 11:01 PM
Matthew's Avatar
Matthew Matthew is offline
Fourth and Main
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Johns Creek, GA (Atlanta)
Posts: 3,142
How many people in the middle of downtown Memphis could say they don't see any skyscrapers? How many people can stand beside Sacramento's tallest building and say they don't see any skyscrapers?

I agree with urbanlife. It varies from city to city.
__________________
My Diagram
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Apr 6, 2010, 9:40 PM
fordgtman1992 fordgtman1992 is offline
Future architect!
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dac150 View Post
Highrise: 300' - 499'

Skyscraper: 500' - 999'

Supertall: 1,000' +
Agreed.
__________________
"To give anything less than your best is to sacrifice the gift." Prefontaine
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Apr 8, 2010, 12:42 PM
jodelli's Avatar
jodelli jodelli is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Windsor, ON
Posts: 1,277
FWIW, I agree with two points being made here. The further back in time, the less should be the height requirement, as even the early 10-12 story buildings were marvels in their time.

Secondly, 150-300 m (approx. 500-1,000 ft) seems to neatly sum it up these days.
Also I remember a list a few years back of skyscrapers in New York City, and 500' was the cut off, so that was the assumption I made. (it was in the World Almanac, I believe)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Apr 8, 2010, 11:13 PM
RLS_rls's Avatar
RLS_rls RLS_rls is offline
▓▒░
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Manitoba
Posts: 1,601
Coming from a small town I would consider 12 floors to be a skyscraper in a generic sense. Really though 200' seems a bit more legitimate.
__________________
ಠ_ಠ
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2012, 10:44 PM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
DENNAB
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NA - Europe
Posts: 6,100
I agree with urbanlife, it all depends on what's around it... what could be called a
"skyscraper" in say, Richmond, Va is a midrise in Chicago or NYC. I remember standing on top of a 22 story, ~80 meter hotel in Guadalajara, with only 2 story buildings around it and it felt like a supertall.

But in general, this is how I've always looked at it... buildings under 100 meters can still be considered tall buildings if nothing surrounds them but I'll start at 100 just to make things easier.

100+ meters - highrise
150+ meters - small skyscraper
200+ meters - skyscraper
250+ meters - large skyscraper
300+ meters - small supertall
350+ meters - supertall
400+ meters - large supertall

Buildings beyond 500 meters are megatalls as far as I'm concerned.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Mar 25, 2012, 6:16 PM
Amanita's Avatar
Amanita Amanita is offline
Crane Goddess
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,229
I think skyscraper is subjective too, dependent on location. A building 20 stories tall here in Halifax would be a skyscraper, not so much in NYC.
__________________
"Build me to the heavens, and Life never stops"
"Live as if the world were as it should be, to show it what it can be"
-Angel
"Prayers are fleeting and wars are forgotten, but what is built endures"
-Ambassador DeLenn, Babylon 5
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Apr 24, 2012, 11:31 PM
JohnMarko JohnMarko is offline
Architect
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Henderson (Las Vegas)
Posts: 58
I would say 20 stories is a "highrise" or skyscraper.

But compared to current era buildings, many consider this too low.

I've noticed that for people who hate tall buildings, anything approaching ten stories is (incorrectly) considered a "highrise".

Up to 10 stories - low-rise.
10-15/20 stories - mid-rise.
Anything over 20 stories - high-rise.

As things got craziers, then you get "supertalls", etc.

But that's just me and you asked...
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

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



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:11 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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