# The birthplace of the skyscraper new york city or chicago ?



## Ebola (Mar 12, 2006)

Well everyone has different opinions, but I can agree because today I don't consider stuff under around 150M a skyscraper, so I guess it could be Philadelphia too!


----------



## velut arbor aevo (Oct 5, 2007)

well, it really depends on how you define skyscrapers, it could be measured by height, or from the viewpoint of history, how long it had been the tallest in a place, either in a absolute or relative sense


----------



## Chicagoflo (Oct 8, 2007)

Chicagos the bith place but New Yorks definetely got more towers... The fewer the more charming like they always say lol


----------



## charmedone (Aug 31, 2007)

i still say new york city when you look at building such as the Empire State Building,The Chrysler Building,40 Wall Street,GE Building,American International Building,Woolworth Building,20 Exchange Place,570 Lexington Avenue,

just to name a few these are some of the tallst building made at a time when chicago wasent really building such tall sky scrapers this is why i think new york is the true home of the sky scraper also the home for the first super tall the empire state building also its home to the frist building to have 100 floors even though the empire state building has 102


----------



## VisionMIA (Oct 29, 2006)

born in Chicago
Raised in New York


----------



## Ebola (Mar 12, 2006)

The first supertall was the Chrysler Building, then the ESB.


----------



## cbotnyse (Jun 13, 2007)

The first steel skeleton skyscraper was built in Chicago. I didnt even know this was debatable.


----------



## nygirl (Jul 14, 2003)

charmedone said:


> i still say new york city when you look at building such as the Empire State Building,The Chrysler Building,40 Wall Street,GE Building,American International Building,Woolworth Building,20 Exchange Place,570 Lexington Avenue,
> 
> just to name a few these are some of the tallst building made at a time when chicago wasent really building such tall sky scrapers this is why i think new york is the true home of the sky scraper also the home for the first super tall the empire state building also its home to the frist building to have 100 floors even though the empire state building has 102


Actually during this time some of the greatest skyscrapers of all time were going up in Chicago. 35 Wacker,The Chicago Board of trade, The Wrigley, The Tribune Tower, Mather Tower, The Playboy/ Palmolive, The Pittsfield Building, Merchandise Mart, Lasalle- Wacker Building, Metropolitan Tower, Carbon and Carbide, and The Chicago Temple Building.


----------



## cbotnyse (Jun 13, 2007)

nygirl said:


> Actually during this time some of the *greatest skyscrapers of all time were going up *in Chicago. 35 Wacker,The Chicago Board of trade, The Wrigley, The Tribune Tower, Mather Tower, The Playboy/ Palmolive, The Pittsfield Building, Merchandise Mart, Lasalle- Wacker Building, Metropolitan Tower, Carbon and Carbide, and The Chicago Temple Building.


kay: They just dont build them like that anymore. >(


----------



## charmedone (Aug 31, 2007)

nygirl said:


> Actually during this time some of the greatest skyscrapers of all time were going up in Chicago. 35 Wacker,The Chicago Board of trade, The Wrigley, The Tribune Tower, Mather Tower, The Playboy/ Palmolive, The Pittsfield Building, Merchandise Mart, Lasalle- Wacker Building, Metropolitan Tower, Carbon and Carbide, and The Chicago Temple Building.


true and there all greta buildings but they lacked alot in hight compaired to whhat new york city was building idk why chicago had hight restrctions on there buildings back then


----------



## bluto (Oct 19, 2007)

Its Chicago. Obviously the important criterion here is building technology, i.e. the steel frame. If height were the exclusive consideration then Italian belltowers, European cathedrals, Asian pagodas, Indian stupas, Middle Eastern minarets, or even Egyptian pyramids and obelisks could all lay some kind of claim as the germseed of tall structures. How about the tower of Babel? With the contemporary preference for concrete, Rome deserves a nod. Industrial England, particularly Liverpool, played an important role in modern construction methods. Unheralded Cincinatti is home to the first reinforced concrete skyscraper. Otis contributes on the New York end of things. SOM's innovations are really the clincher for today's supertalls. And yes, as a lifelong Chicagoan, I concede that New York refined and perfected the art of tall buildings.


----------



## TalB (Jun 8, 2005)

Why did Chicago demolished its very first skyscraper, the Home Ins Bldg?


----------



## charmedone (Aug 31, 2007)

well even if chicago is the home of the skyscraper new york is hime to the frist super tall and the frist building to have 100 floors or more


----------



## TalB (Jun 8, 2005)

At least in NYC we still have our first skyscraper which is the Potter Bldg.


----------



## Taller Better (Aug 27, 2005)

It depends if you are referring to the "modern" International Style highrise, or the older 19th century one. The older ones are from New York, and Chicago is the birthplace of the modern "skyscraper". The Bauhaus School of Architecture fled Germany during the war and set up in Chicago. A stroke of luck for The Windy City! :cheers:

by the way you can see that the Potter Building, above, probably had two extra storeys added to the original.
The first skyscraper in Canada was in Montreal, from the 1880's...


----------



## ADCS (Oct 30, 2006)

It doesn't matter who started first, because the competition of the two is why we have such great skyscrapers today. The US's first and second cities engaging in a competition incomparable until today is why we have such amazing buildings all over the world. Chicago is the little brother that said "look what I can do", NYC the older brother that said "well, watch this", and then the two went back and forth and created masterworks.

Modern skyscrapers would have never developed in the timeframe they did without the competition.


----------



## cbotnyse (Jun 13, 2007)

TalB said:


> Why did Chicago demolished its very first skyscraper, the Home Ins Bldg?


it really is a damn shame that building got the ax. I still cant believe it did, and I've never really read why, or why no one tried to save it.


----------



## TalB (Jun 8, 2005)

We are no different than Chicago over here in NYC b/c the World, Manhattan Life Ins, and Singer Bldgs were all demolished and those were the first three buildings that were built that gave NYC the WTB.


----------



## Gary_A_Hill (Aug 7, 2007)

*Sullivan*



cbotnyse said:


> ... exactly. Chicago built the first steel frame, which made taller structures possible.
> 
> The answer to this thread is Chicago.


Yes. The structural innovation is what matters, not the height. Also, Chicago was the home of Louis Sullivan, who first gave expression to the tall building when other architects were resisting it with designs which looked like a stack of several short buildings.


----------



## Jayskyline (Dec 1, 2006)

Chicago. History tells it.


----------



## -Corey- (Jul 8, 2005)

The birthplace is chicago, but NY prefected it


----------



## charmedone (Aug 31, 2007)

Gary_A_Hill said:


> Yes. The structural innovation is what matters, not the height. Also, Chicago was the home of Louis Sullivan, who first gave expression to the tall building when other architects were resisting it with designs which looked like a stack of several short buildings.


yes but hight is also a key thing in a skyscraper with out hight its just outher building in the city


----------



## QuantumX (Mar 19, 2008)

The enginering techology that made the skyscraper possible was born in Chicago after the Great Chicago Fire destroyed much of downtown in 1871. That is why Chicago is considered the birthplace of the skyscraper. The idea that we could go taller with a steel frame as was mentioned earlier came out of Chicago and that was the key to creating very tall buildings. This is a historical fact and it doesn't really matter what was built when in what city. Chicago architects came up with the idea.


----------



## Hudson11 (Jun 23, 2011)

Chicago started it but New York is where building tall really took off.


----------



## DFDalton (Jul 16, 2009)

I went to a skyscraper museum near Battery Park in New York a few years back. Here was displayed the entire history of skyscraper development. According to this museum, New York solely invented and led the way in developing the skyscraper. Period. When I asked a docent about it he said, "Whatsa Chicago? Neva hoid of it."


----------



## CNB30 (Jun 4, 2012)

New York Invented the tall office building, while Chicago pioneered in the modern technology to build it.


----------



## CNB30 (Jun 4, 2012)

DFDalton said:


> I went to a skyscraper museum near Battery Park in New York a few years back. Here was displayed the entire history of skyscraper development. According to this museum, New York solely invented and led the way in developing the skyscraper. Period. When I asked a docent about it he said, "Whatsa Chicago? Neva hoid of it."


Thats a joke, right


----------



## DFDalton (Jul 16, 2009)

CNB30 said:


> Thats a joke, right


A slight exageration. But the museum really exists.

My complaint is that the museum in question presents a (perhaps understandable given the location) very New York-centric view of skyscraper history. I mean, if they are going to call it a "Skyscraper Museum" they should take a more universal approach toward the subject, else more accurately call it a "New York Skyscraper Museum". 

There was no mention of any rivalry or co-development involving the NYC and Chicago (because as all New Yorkers know, New York is the most impoitant city in the universe and to mention any other city would just be cluttering up the narrative with trivialities). As I remember, the sole mention of Chicago's contribution came in the form of a large blow-up of a 1970s Chicago Tribune front page showing the topping out (or maybe it was just the announcement of the design being world's tallest) of the Sears Tower. The problem was, the Sears Tower story was secondary to a blazing headline of yet another story of Chicago corruption. I can't remember exactly what the headline was, but it portrayed Chicago in a bad light unnecessarily. Why use this unflattering front page in a skyscraper museum? It seemed gratuitous and petty, especially in the context of the total snub elsewhere.

This is the website of the museum: 

http://www.skyscraper.org/home.htm

It is apparently still in operation. Whether the content and viewpoint has been improved is something I wouldn't know. (Maybe someone who has been there recently can advise on this.) I was there in maybe 2005 or 2006. The website does show they are exhibiting models of buildings in other cities. But I still wouldn't recommend this place when NYC has so many better museums and attractions to spend your money on.


----------



## CNB30 (Jun 4, 2012)

DFDalton said:


> A slight exageration. But the museum really exists.
> 
> My complaint is that the museum in question presents a (perhaps understandable given the location) very New York-centric view of skyscraper history. I mean, if they are going to call it a "Skyscraper Museum" they should take a more universal approach toward the subject, else more accurately call it a "New York Skyscraper Museum".
> 
> ...


I've been there, and they seemed to have their facts straight. I even recall seeing some stuff from Chicago.


----------



## DFDalton (Jul 16, 2009)

CNB30 said:


> I've been there, and they seemed to have their facts straight. I even recall seeing some stuff from Chicago.


Thanks. As I said, the website seems to suggest they've improved the content and made it more all-encompassing than it had been when I saw it in 2005. I am sure they received complaints about the "homerism" from visitors. :lol:


----------



## Core Rising (Jan 4, 2011)

Oriel Chambers in Liverpool is the world's first metal framed glass curtain walled building, beating New York and Chicago to the title. It might not be the first skyscraper, but it was the first building with the ingredients for skyscraper construction. Built in 1864. I wouldn't go so far as to say it was the birthplace of the skyscraper, but it was where the skyscraper foetus formed so to speak.


----------



## CNB30 (Jun 4, 2012)

Core Rising said:


> Oriel Chambers in Liverpool is the world's first metal framed glass curtain walled building, beating New York and Chicago to the title. It might not be the first skyscraper, but it was the first building with the ingredients for skyscraper construction. Built in 1864. I wouldn't go so far as to say it was the birthplace of the skyscraper, but it was where the skyscraper foetus formed so to speak.


There Was cast Iron following the same principle in NY?C before 1864


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

*Neither!*

Skyscrapers were a result of technological advancement and no one city can be credited with it. Chicago and New York were simply the largest cities of the day that were rapidly expanding so this is where the need to go taller was most prevalent. People simply borrowed available technology to build taller. Similar efforts occurred in Melbourne, Toronto, Philadelphia, Sydney, Montreal, Buenos Aires, Liverpool, etc. 

Assigning credit to one of these 2 cities is like saying that Detroit is the birthplace of the automobile because the first big factories happened to be built there. Utter nonsense. If Chicago and New York were stagnating in the 1870s and 1880s and Melbourne had 3 million people and booming, the tallest early buildings would have been built there instead. 

The skyscraper is a product of advancements in building techniques in the western world. Credit rests with the iron/steel industries, civil engineers, and innovators in the Western world back in the 1870s/1880s.


----------



## Dean (Sep 11, 2002)

Because of the gold rush Melbourne was considered the most important and richest city in the British empire outside of London in late 1800's.

As a result many fabulous buildings were commissioned and many still stand today.

The oldest surviving 'skyscraper' of the time is the Queen Anne inspired Lombard Building in Melbourne, the first to have an elevator installed rather than being a walk up. Built 1886-87.










The tallest at the time was the incredible 'APA - The Australian Building'. Another Queen Anne masterpiece from 1889. Sadly demolished in 1980. One of the greatest acts of civil vandalism in Melbourne's history.


----------



## Portobello Red (Aug 1, 2007)

Core Rising said:


> Oriel Chambers in Liverpool is the world's first metal framed glass curtain walled building, beating New York and Chicago to the title. It might not be the first skyscraper, but it was the first building with the ingredients for skyscraper construction. Built in 1864. I wouldn't go so far as to say it was the birthplace of the skyscraper, but it was where the skyscraper foetus formed so to speak.


Oriel Chambers (1864) - 14 Water Street - Liverpool

Oriel Chambers is the world's first metal framed glass curtain walled building. Designed by architect Peter Ellis and built in 1864, it comprises 43,000 sq ft (4,000 m2) set over five floors.[1] A Grade 1 Listed Building, it is located on Water Street near to the town hall in Liverpool, England.

Oriel Chambers, and the architect's only other known building at 16 Cook Street, are amongst the city's precursors of modernist architecture.[2]

jackwarshaw










Arturs Tols










Here it is as part of the streetscape (by the taxis)

oneterry


----------



## CNB30 (Jun 4, 2012)

Portobello Red said:


> Oriel Chambers (1864) - 14 Water Street - Liverpool
> 
> Oriel Chambers is the world's first metal framed glass curtain walled building. Designed by architect Peter Ellis and built in 1864, it comprises 43,000 sq ft (4,000 m2) set over five floors.[1] A Grade 1 Listed Building, it is located on Water Street near to the town hall in Liverpool, England.
> 
> ...


False, The 1857 E.V. Haugwout building was one of the first cast Iron buildings in the world ( In Soho NYC) to use a cast iron frame, if not before. the modern skyscraper was born in NYC, period.


----------



## CCs77 (Jul 30, 2008)

isaidso said:


> *Neither!*
> 
> Skyscrapers were a result of technological advancement and no one city can be credited with it. Chicago and New York were simply the largest cities of the day that were rapidly expanding so this is where the need to go taller was most prevalent. People simply borrowed available technology to build taller. Similar efforts occurred in Melbourne, Toronto, Philadelphia, Sydney, Montreal, Buenos Aires, Liverpool, etc.
> 
> ...


*
And we have a winner!!!* :banana::banana::banana:

I agree with you. For example, gothic cathedrals could be considered as skyscrapers (so much that many earliest office skyscrapers were constructed inspired in those) and when they build the first gothic cathedrals neither of those cities were even founded. Also the romans build, 2000 years ago, "insulaes" apartment buildings that could go up to 7 stories high (and sometimes even 9) that was about the limits of the materials in that time.

But whatsoever, there were mainly two inventions that made possible modern skyscrapers, one was the steel frame, developed mostly in Chicago. The other was the modern "safety elevator" developed in New York by Elisha Otis (Yonkers actually, acording to wikipedia, but I think of it as New York)

And I forgot to mention that the chinese people have been building pagodas for centuries. (as many other ancient civilizatons developed some forms of multi-story buildings)


----------



## Portobello Red (Aug 1, 2007)

Oriel Chambers - Liverpool - 1864
14-16 Water Street, Liverpool, L2 8TD 

*Engineering Timelines*










The first building in the world to make extensive use of glazed curtain wall construction. Considered by some to be the finest building in Liverpool, it is certainly one that had a world-wide influence on the design of tall buildings.

Oriel Chambers has a cast iron frame. Where it isn't glass, it's stone clad — slender full-height masonry piers break up the facades up into bays. Seven bays face Water Street, twelve face Covent Garden (pictured). Between the piers are delicately detailed iron framed oriel windows, tall and rectangular.

The building consists of a basement and three and half storeys of offices. The entry is narrow, placed asymetrically in the Water Street facade. An elongated octagonal window sits above it.

The building had considerable influence on the design of tall office buildings, particularly in America through the American architect John Root's early Chicago skyscrapers. For these he drew heavily on Ellis's work, which he studied first hand while in England to avoid the American Civil War. 

The building was not well-received initially by some. The Builder hated it, calling it a "vast abortion" and an "agglomeration of protruding plate glass bubbles". Reilly called it a "cellular habitation for the human insect". 

Ellis designed only one other building, also in Liverpool — 16 Cook Street. It dates from 1866 and also features glazed curtain walling. It too received bad reviews at the time. Ellis's later recorded works are civil engineering projects.

A 1959 extension at the rear of Oriel Chambers, by James & Bywaters, replaced a war damaged section.

*Architect*: Peter Ellis

*Research*: PD

*bibliography*

"The Buildings of England: South Lancashire" by Nikolaus Pevsner, Penguin, Harmindsworth, 1969

"Studies in the History of Civil Engineering" edited by R. Thorne, Vol. 10, Structural Iron & Steel 1850-1900, Ashgate, Aldershot, 2000"

A History of Architecture" by Sir Bannister Fletcher, The Athlone Press, London, 1975 (eighteenth edition)


----------



## tpe (Aug 10, 2005)

Even a reference as simple as wikipedia got the distinction right:



> In 1852 Elisha Otis introduced the safety elevator, allowing convenient and safe passenger movement to upper floors. *Another crucial development was the use of a steel frame *instead of stone or brick, otherwise the walls on the lower floors on a tall building would be too thick to be practical. An early development in this area was *Oriel Chambers in Liverpool*. Designed by local architect Peter Ellis in 1864, *the building was the world's first iron-framed, glass curtain-walled office building*. It was only 5 floors high.[30][31][32] *Further developments led to the world's first skyscraper, the ten-storey Home Insurance Building in Chicago, built in 1884–1885*.[33] While its height is not considered very impressive today, it was at that time. The architect, Major William Le Baron Jenney, created a load-bearing structural frame. *In this building, a steel frame *supported the entire weight of the walls, instead of load-bearing walls carrying the weight of the building. This development led to the "Chicago skeleton" form of construction.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyscraper

What is the point of all the obfuscation on this thread? Any material scientist will tell you that STEEL has superior tensile strength compared to IRON. It is STEEL, and not IRON that made HEIGHT possible. The elevator made it PRACTICAL.


----------



## rayvs99 (Jan 3, 2014)

Chi-town


----------

