# Capital of Skycrapers!



## Anekdote (Apr 11, 2005)

Marathoner said:


> HK is not just a couple of buildings. Yes. It only has a couple of over-400m. But the highrise & skyscraper number is now unbeatable. Please refer to the statistics.
> 
> You don't see most of the skyscrapers in HK from the photos because there are so many, scattered all over HK.


True, it's impossible in HK to not see a high-rise building. They are everywhere


----------



## polako (Apr 7, 2005)

Here's an update for the 5 cities that have more than 100 buildings(100m+):

city--compl.--u.c.

HK--657--18
NYC--484--20
Tokyo--287--61
Chicago--233--12
Shanghai--186--19

I was surprised that Tokyo has so many 100m+ buildings u.c.(More than Dubai-WOW. Probably, because the Japanese economy has been rebounding from over a decade long recession)

*Dubai is next in line to have more than 100(100m+) buildings. At current pace it should be there in 2008: 
39 completed-58 u.c.-11 approved.



All data from www.emporis.com


----------



## Marathoner (Oct 1, 2005)

polako said:


> Here's an update for the 5 cities that have more than 100 buildings(100m+):
> 
> city--compl.--u.c.
> 
> ...


Sorry, the number of HK is not update or incorrect. As I have mentioned here before. The number of building over 40-storey in HK is more than 900(check from emporis). And in HK, a 40-storey building should be at least 120m or taller. If not, how can people live there?

So, the number of over-100m building in HK should be one thousand something or near 2000, just a rough guess. The number of over-100m buildings is continuing to increase rapidly because all the new residential now built are over 50-storey. 

Please believe me because I live here and is a property maniac. I know the data of most of the new residential estates. Even the estate I am now living already have 20 blocks over 50-storey. The residential estates I know taller than 100m is already near the number you quoted. Not to mentioned other private estates & numerous public housing eatates I don't have statistics. and those commercials you guys usually see in the pics. 

I think maybe the statistics you quote see the whole residential estates as one building because they look the same. But they are actually individual buildings accroding to definitions. Or maybe the data is just incorrect.


----------



## Harkeb (Oct 12, 2004)

New York City. No doubt.


----------



## vincent (Sep 12, 2002)

spyguy999 said:


> Chicago will have 3 over 400m, 5 over 300m, and 9 over 250m


looks like you are counting the fancy proposal as one of the three for the 400m+ catergory. Hmm, you want to count proposal too?

HK got like 4 then for 400m+


----------



## spyguy (Apr 16, 2005)

Well yes, because the user above was commenting on "when US7 is finished" so that would be the future.

Looking at Emporis, HK (including completed, UC, and proposed) will have 3 400+, 4 300+, and 9 250+.


----------



## malec (Apr 17, 2005)

^^ What's the 3rd 400m building?


----------



## Indica (Mar 19, 2005)

Shangai (and HK), and NY are soo impressive to me because of the density.. Chicago is dense too, but when I compare the pics around on this site, HK seems to be the most dense I've ever seen!!


----------



## RAS85 (Nov 16, 2005)

That pic of Seoul is ugly, all those buildings are so bland. Hong Kong's residentials are the same way. Big white blocks, nothings jumping out at you.


----------



## Skybean (Jun 16, 2004)

The Arch? Harbourfront Landmark? Summit? Highcliff?










I find that people who say HK is all full of bland residentials to be people who are either jealous are totally ignorant. HK has more residential towers than all of the highrises in New York City. There's no way you should generalize any city's buildings as being totally bland or boring unless you have seen every one of them.


----------



## spyguy (Apr 16, 2005)

I think every capital has quite a number of "bland" towers that contribute to its overall appearance and density, but some cities far worse in the skyscraper gems : bland towers ratio.


----------



## bs_lover_boy (Apr 16, 2004)

I don't consider the towers in HK to be bland because having a few identical towers in the same location on top of a large podium not only gives a sense of grouping and unity, but it also sets a name out for people to recognize the towers. If each buiding in HK was different and each had different names and such, then who on earth can remember all of their names. Even taxi drivers will have a tough time to recognize the thousands of towers around the city. Now, we just say so and so place (eg. Sorrento) Then they know where it will be.


----------



## Marathoner (Oct 1, 2005)

Also, can a city able to design or have, say, 50,000 buildings very different, without similarities from each others? I think cannot. 
Even music cannot. Many songs or music are quite similar.


----------



## chris9 (Jul 22, 2003)

New York City. 
Honk Kong does have a considerable number of bland residential towers, that is a known fact (you can view every single one on Emporis), the city's expansion has always been limited by political and topographic constraints, only 200 sq km for actual highrise development.


----------



## Ya Mar (Nov 15, 2005)

Well, who really knows?


----------



## ROYU (Jul 19, 2004)

For now Chicago, New York and Hong Kong . In the future Shangai or Dubai will see.


----------



## samsonyuen (Sep 23, 2003)

Toronto has quite a few mid-rises too.


----------

