# Achieving Density



## gonzo (Jul 30, 2006)

American model: height









European model: narrow streets and attaching buildings to one-another.









Which do you prefer?


----------



## Penhorn (Mar 28, 2006)

It's nice to have a good mix, like Paris ...not sure what I would pick out of the two.


----------



## drunkenmunkey888 (Aug 13, 2005)

i would not say the American model is one of height. I would definitely say that height is the East Asian model as demonstrated by the sea of commieblocks in Hong Kong, Seoul, Shanghai, etc.


----------



## gonzo (Jul 30, 2006)

^^ when I say "model" I mean 'the originators of this approach'. Regardless of how "communist" highrises may appear, the trend originated in the U.S.


----------



## gonzo (Jul 30, 2006)

...and when I say 'highrises' I mean 'skyscrapers'.

Are there any places that combine both models to achieve a sort of 'ultra density'?...I can't seem to visualize any attached highrises for example. Perhaps they exist in Hong Kong?


----------



## ChicagoSkyline (Feb 24, 2005)

gonzo said:


> ...and when I say 'highrises' I mean 'skyscrapers'.
> 
> Are there any places that combine both models to achieve a sort of 'ultra density'?...I can't seem to visualize any attached highrises for example. Perhaps they exist in Hong Kong?


Well, I am more of American model with supertalls and skyscrapers!
Actually, there are lots of parts in Chicago loop are very european model, but instead, skyscrapers wall to wall! Visiting my Chicago Skyline Heaven photo thread, and you will know what I mean for Chicago! :cheers:


----------



## Metropolitan (Sep 21, 2004)

gonzo said:


> ...and when I say 'highrises' I mean 'skyscrapers'.
> 
> Are there any places that combine both models to achieve a sort of 'ultra density'?...I can't seem to visualize any attached highrises for example. Perhaps they exist in Hong Kong?


Well, Manhattan is the perfect example of this, and that's what makes the place so unique. Buildings are attached at one-another and there are tons of skyscrapers.


----------



## Slartibartfas (Aug 15, 2006)

gonzo said:


> American model: height
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Of course the latter. I can perfectly live without skyscrapers, allthough they can be a huge attraction, but I could not without the European way of dense city centers.









Thats actually a good example of the density model you named to be the European one from my hometown Vienna. What you see is not a dead end. The street continues, its just getting a little bit more compact


----------



## Crispy (Mar 31, 2006)

I prefer the American style, which I believe China and Dubai have followed. Unfortunately, what America invented America seems to have abandoned in favor of endless sprawl, which is bad, indeed, for the environment and for establishing an affordable mass transport system, which America is sorely lacking. It will pay dearly for abandoning density, as fuel continues its upward spiral in price. Right now, I would say China is doing the right thing in rapidly becoming more dense & moving people out of the country.


----------



## spyguy (Apr 16, 2005)

It's not like the "American model" relies exclusively on skyscrapers though. Of course the downtowns have many skyscrapers, but once you go further out you typically see buildings on a much smaller scale.

Also interesting is the fact that until this recent boom, most of those skyscrapers in American cities were for offices. Only now are we seeing a big push in residential towers outside of New York and Chicago.


----------



## EtherealMist (Jul 26, 2005)

some places have the best of both worlds


----------



## TheKansan (Jun 22, 2004)

I think that the skyscrapers are wonderful, however with the cost of construction becoming too much for a single project, I imagine short, dense developments are much easier and faster to complete. 

Just as an example, I would rather have a city block full of 5-10 floor buildings with retail/restaurants/etc. and mixed use housing than a single monolithic skyscraper with no storefronts.


----------



## Nouvellecosse (Jun 4, 2005)

I like both, the built environment at ground level is most important. For me, scrapers r like the icing on a cake; I still like cake by itself, but icing by itself is unappealing. And skyscraper density by itself usually doesn't make for an appealing environment.


----------



## snot (May 12, 2004)

gonzo said:


> ^^ when I say "model" I mean 'the originators of this approach'. Regardless of how "communist" highrises may appear, the trend originated in the U.S.


the 'trend' is just a logic step in city developement. It's true the US builded the first real skyscrapers but far before the US excisted there were overcrowded cities were buildings get higher and higher. 

an old city in Yemen:









NYC has attached buildings also, even attached mid and highrise like we see on Etheralmist's pics.


----------



## EtherealMist (Jul 26, 2005)

^^

holy crap that pic is awesome, it looks like its out of Star Wars or something. (maybe your Chewy pic is causing me to think this)


----------



## EtherealMist (Jul 26, 2005)

Nouvellecosse said:


> I like both, the built environment at ground level is most important. For me, scrapers r like the icing on a cake; I still like cake by itself, but icing by itself is unappealing. And skyscraper density by itself usually doesn't make for an appealing environment.


I totally agree. 

What gives a city character and life is what is happening at ground level. I really like a 4-5 story buildings maybe with storefronts on the bottom if they are on a busy street. Height does not bring this type of a character. A good example is the typical high rise condo that is usually pretty isolated and may have a gated off area around it. It may be 20-30 stories but it feels about as lively as a suburb.


----------



## Slartibartfas (Aug 15, 2006)

EtherealMist said:


> I totally agree.
> 
> What gives a city character and life is what is happening at ground level. I really like a 4-5 story buildings maybe with storefronts on the bottom if they are on a busy street. Height does not bring this type of a character. A good example is the typical high rise condo that is usually pretty isolated and may have a gated off area around it. It may be 20-30 stories but it feels about as lively as a suburb.


I totally agree.


----------



## elkram (Apr 1, 2006)

snot said:


> an old city in Yemen:


Wasn't this place derelict some years ago? It's great seeing it being resettled.

The European way of densifying impresses me more than clusters of highrises do. I gauge the worldliness of a city by how well it densifies closer to the human scale.


----------



## gonzo (Jul 30, 2006)

> Visiting my Chicago Skyline Heaven photo thread, and you will know what I mean for Chicago!


Wow! An amazing an underrated skyline. I couldn't find any wall-to-wall skyscrapers though.  



>


I can't see the pic!  



>


Wow, some places in NYC are ultra-dense whether it be residential or office! 


>


What a place! It looks old, as if it were history's first 'real' skyline.  



> densifies closer to the human scale.


What do you mean?....everything accessible by stairs, not elevators?


----------



## EtherealMist (Jul 26, 2005)

gonzo said:


> Wow, some places in NYC are ultra-dense whether it be residential or office!



check out these Manhattan pics that Swivel posted:

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=386111


----------

