|
Home Themes Regions Tourist Boards Services Search Trips |
![]() |
Current
Issue |
| CulturalTravels.com - Home |
Volume 7, January 2005 |
ISSN 1538-893X |
|
|
|
|
New York produced two great masses of tall buildings:
downtown, around Wall St. and midtown, below Central Park. Both clumps
are composed of dozens of buildings of seemingly identical height, with
none soaring emphatically above its neighbors. (Of course that wasn’t
the case when the World Trade Center towers were standing.)
The skyline’s current greatest punctuation point, the Empire
State Building, stands isolated from midtown by several blocks. Besides their massing and density, New York skyscrapers also
use setbacks to a great extent. This was in response to the construction
in Lower Manhattan of the 36-story Equitable Building in 1915. It was a
behemoth 1.2-million-square-foot structure that occupied an entire block and
rose sheer to its full height without a
single setback. The structure cast such long shadows that New Yorkers
demanded zoning laws that would prevent any subsequent buildings like
it. The city’s response was the famous 1916 zoning law that
mandated setbacks at certain intervals as a skyscraper rose. The theory
– and it worked – was that stepped-back buildings would let in more
light and air. In exchange for developers acquiescing to the loss of
large floor plates throughout their buildings, they were allowed to
build the final setback as high as they wanted.
New York’s unconcern with height would later lead to the
famous construction duels of the late 1920s to erect the world’s
tallest building – competitions to led to such marvels as the Chrysler
and Empire State buildings.
(Donald Trump’s new tower on the north bank of the Chicago
River, now under construction next door to the Wrigley Building and
where the old Sun Times building used to be, will rise 1,125 feet
and give Chicago its fourth 1,000-footer.) Overall, Chicago’s skyline, despite having a greater number
of 800-foot-plus buildings than New York, lacks New
York’s density. Another thing it lacks is New York’s setbacks –
most Chicago skyscrapers arrive at their ultimate height just as wide at
the top as they are where they emerge from their foundations. Visually,
the skyline’s components have a boxier look than New York’s, but the
sheer tallness of many of the skyscrapers makes the Chicago skyline look
more “spikey” than New York’s. In its Big Building’s exhibition, The Skyscraper Museum
examines another aspect of the Chicago-New York rivalry: The race to
build gigantic, as well as tall, buildings. Over the years the two
cities have duked it out with each other. Chicago responded to New
York’s brobdingnagian
Pan Am building that loomed over Grand Central Station (1963) with the 100-story John Hancock Building in 1968,
the first 1,000-foot skyscraper of the post-war period. New York
“responded” with the twin World Trade Center towers in 1973 (which
were so enormous that some wags claimed they were “the packing crates that
the Empire State Building came in”). In 1974, Chicago topped off the
110-story Sears Tower, whose 4.5 million square feet of gross floor
space gave it a volume 2.5 times that of the Empire State Building. The museum, located in lower Manhattan, opened in 1996. It is
a superb chronicler of the history of the skyscraper, particularly (and
understandably) in New York City. One of the notable things about the
museum is that its narrow building site made its designers compensate by
creating a dazzling interior space lined with reflective surfaces and
multi-story atria. Visitors enjoy an artfully created sense of spaciousness. The museum web site is superbly done. |
|
To receive a FREE email version of our monthly newsletter just fill in the Key Interest form |