CTBUH Technical Paper

Transcription

1 CTBUH Technical Paper Subject: History, Theory & Criticism Paper Title: Skyscrapers and Skylines: New York and Chicago, Author(s): Affiliation(s): Rutgers University Publication Date: 2014 Original Publication: Paper Type: CTBUH Journal 2014 Issue I 1. Book chapter/part chapter 2. Journal paper 3. Conference proceeding 4. Unpublished conference paper 5. Magazine article 6. Unpublished Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat/Author(s)

2 CTBUH Journal International Journal on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat Tall buildings: design, construction, and operation 2014 Issue I Tree House Residence Hall, Boston Skyscrapers and Skylines: The Social Sustainability of High-Rises Midcentury (un)modern A Year in Review: Tall Trends of 2013 Talking Tall: Rem Koolhaas New York s New Delirium

3 cities are strategic substitutes: if City 2 sees that City 1 is heavily engaged in construction, builders in City 2 fi nd that reducing construction is the most profitable response. In general, markets in which a handful of fi rms all produce a similar commodity will exhibit this strategic-substitutes property. Companies, for example, are frequently moving their corporate headquarters, based on which city provides the best bundle of office space, employees, and access to markets and suppliers (Strauss-Kahn & Vives Author 2009). If these companies see an opportunity, Associate Professor to move to a city with newer office space, Department of Economics Rutgers University they will do so. Newark NJ 07102, United States t: f: However, if building height has non-expresslyeconomic purposes, such as advertising, local Chicago and New York Chicago in 1885 (see Figure 1), was the fi rst e: jmbarr@rutgers.edu Introduction competition is about luring businesses and residents, and promoting job growth and pride or ego satisfaction, then relative height to incorporate an iron-skeleton structure to Since the late 1880s, New York and Chicago profits. is an important strategic variable. If developers With the completion of the Erie Canal in 1825, bear the load of the building; it paved the is an associate professor of economics have been two of the world s premier in one city go particularly tall, builders in the and the settling of Chicago in the 1830s, New way for the city s early skyscraper boom. at Rutgers University, Newark, and the Director of skyscraper cities. By 1929, New York and However, because of their symbolic and other city will respond positively by adding York and Chicago became trading partners. Architects, engineers, and builders who cut Graduate Studies for the economics department. He received his Bachelor s degree from Cornell University Chicago contained 68% of the nation s aesthetic nature, skyscrapers can also be used height to their buildings. In this case, building Capital, imports, and settlers fl owed west, while their teeth on Chicago s fi rst generation of in 1992, and his PhD from Columbia University in buildings of 20 stories or greater in height to express psychological or sociological heights can be called strategic complements, agricultural goods fl owed east. But as the skyscrapers were later employed in New York His research interests include urban and real estate economics. In particular, Dr. Barr studies the (Weiss 1992). Of the 10 current tallest needs. A tall building can be a monument to in the sense that heights in the two cities relationship developed, they also became rivals. as well. This interaction has lead John economic determinants of skyscraper height since buildings in the United States, four are in local pride or a work of civic art that enhances move together. Since Chicago and New York Zukowsky to write: Chicago and New York the late 19 th century. His work has appeared in prominent economics journals, such as the Journal Chicago and four are in New York; six would citizens sense of place. The skyscraper can were the fi rst skyscraper cities in the United In 1871, Chicago s Great Fire destroyed much of these are often thought to be the two of Regional Science, the Journal of Economic History, be in New York, if the Twin Towers had not advertise the city, as a form of urban States and were linked economically, we can the city s office space, and gave it the chance great superpowers of American architecture. and Real Estate Economics. He is currently writing a book on the history of the Manhattan skyline. been destroyed (Skyscraper Center 2013). boosterism, drawing tourists, and placing it look to these two cities to test these to build a modern, fi reproof business district. Architects consider each city to have its own within the national and international competition theories. The Home Insurance Building, completed in style, its own way of shaping its local Ever since the telegraph and railroad created a conversations on cities. environment, its own individualistic national market in the mid-19 th century, contributions to the history of architecture. businesses and residents have had much Additionally, tall buildings can be used to Yet these contributions were not developed greater mobility and locational choices. Given express developers desire to engage in in isolation. Throughout the 19 th and 20 th the ability of labor and capital to go where the conspicuous consumption (or investment) to centuries there has been, and still is, a returns are greatest, we would expect this to project economic strength, and achieve a considerable amount of competitive generate some competition between leading higher social status. But the need for pride-, interaction between architects, contractors, cities. If residents of one city see its rivals ego- or advertising-based construction is also and developers in both cities (Zukowski growing rapidly, they may feel compelled to a competitive process, since the height and 1984:12). respond. size of these projects mainly serve their purposes only relative to the height and size The list of past and present interactions is Historically, skyscrapers have embodied two of other projects. long, but here are a few important examples. types of competition. The fi rst is regional In the early period, Louis Sullivan, arguably competition for employment and industrial The two forms of competition can lead to two Chicago s most famous skyscraper architect, growth. Economic activity must be housed different outcomes. On the one hand, if designed one of his signature buildings in somewhere; if developers don t provide the developers in City 1 go on a building spree, it New York the Bayard-Condict Building, in space in one location, developers in another will reduce the price of building space. If 1899 (see Figure 2). Builder and skyscraper place will. As the economy evolves, buildings developers in City 2 see a falling price, the pioneer George Fuller and his fi rm built age and become functionally obsolete. The rational response is to hold off on skyscrapers such the Monadnock (1893) and needs of businesses and residents change, construction because of declining revenues the Rookery (1888) in Chicago, and the New and, again, if one city doesn t supply these from new projects. This negative response by York Times (1904) and Flatiron (1902) needs, then another city will. Thus, builders means that skyscrapers in the two Figure 2. Bayard-Condict Building, New York, Figure 3. Flatiron Building, New York, Marshall building (see Figure 3) in New York, the latter Figure 1. Home Insurance Building, Chicago, Antony Wood Gerometta 18 History, Theory & Criticism History, Theory & Criticism 19 Suruchi Modi Authors Suruchi Modi, Associate Professor Sushant School of Art & Architecture Ansal University Sector 55, District Gurgaon , Haryana, India t: e: suruchimodi@ansaluniversity.edu.in Suruchi Modi Suruchi Modi is currently an Associate Professor and Assistant Dean at Sushant School of Art & Architecture, India. She is a gold medalist with a double masters in Urban Design from Cept University and Tall Building Design from the University of Nottingham, United Kingdom. She has received the Sir Patrick Geddes Award for her innovative project revival of the mixed land-use concept as a tool to develop a sustainable city model. She is also an international award winner of the Passivhaus skyscraper design for New York City, facilitated at the University of Prague. Modi has worked on large-scale masterplanning and urban revitalization projects throughout India, and has been actively involved in academia and research on sustainable architecture for over 10 years. Her work aims to extend the realm of sustainability to the real estate-driven high-rise development of today s cities. Recent trends of urbanization have caused a dramatic increase in the worldwide urban population. The failures of the tower block schemes of the 1960s made living in high-rises unpopular in Europe and North America. For much of the last century, developers have historically found tall buildings appropriate only for office and commercial uses. However, limited buildable land resources have inevitably changed city growth patterns from outward horizontal spread to vertical growth. The re-emergence of the high-rise as a housing typology presents the opportunity to consider the mistakes of the past and address the demands of a wider population. The current trends of residential living in the sky reveal that home buyers today hold a different perspective on high-rise living. They expect a vibrant urban setting. They are moving to developments that require little maintenance and provide communal space for recreation and socializing. As these shifts occur, designers and developers have a mission: to understand these needs and desires and translate them into sustainable, integrated residential places. Residential Tall Buildings Re-emergence Today the world is facing escalating rates of urbanization and exponential growth in the use of energy and resources. The world population presently stands at 6.9 billion a fi gure expected to reach 10.1 billion by the year 2100 (United Nations 2011). Furthermore, statistics indicate that in developing countries, the urban population is expected to double from 2.6 billion in the year 2010 to 5.2 billion by Developed nations show an increase in urbanized populations from 0.9 billion in 2010 to 1.1 billion in However, during the same period the world s rural population decline is 0.6 billion(ibid). This has been the principal cause of the everincreasing demand for homes a challenge for all cities across the world (see Figure 1). History has witnessed various planning discourses intended to solve the problem of housing, such as urban sprawl, which loosely follows the principles laid down by Ebenezer Howard and Le Corbusier. This single-use, automobile-driven suburban development had dominated the urban milieu in the latter half of the 20 th century, which has been condemned due to its negative environmental and social impact. By the 1990s, the Compact City model, based on the principles of New Urbanism, was envisioned as a solution to urbanization. It promotes mixed-use, high-density living, based on efficient public transport systems, walkable neighborhoods, increased that is compatible with the harmonious residential living, which reached their zenith in opportunities for social interaction and an Such trends, when combined with scarcity of evolution of civil society, fostering an the 1950s and 1960s. This period was followed overall sustainable system with low energy land and increasing need for affordable environment favorable to the compatible by the oil crisis of 1973, which resulted in loss consumption and reduced pollution (Burton housing, are pushing high-density residential cohabitation of culturally and socially diverse of public funding and stagnation in the et al. 1996). buildings to the forefront. Though the idea of groups, while at the same time encouraging incomes of households, which had a direct living in supertall buildings has gained social integration, with improvement in the impact on the housing market. Such momentum with the introduction of quality of life for all segments of the situations provided little incentive for 24 Social Issues Social Issues 25 Report by Daniel Safarik and Antony Wood, CTBUH; Research by Marty Carver and Marshall Gerometta, CTBUH Note: Please refer to Tall Buildings in Numbers 2013: A Tall Building Review in conjunction with this paper, pages By all appearances, the small increase in the that the slight slowdown of 2012, which Across the globe, the sum of heights total number of tall-building completions recorded 69 completions after 2011 s record 81 of all 200-meter-plus buildings completed from 2012 into 2013 is indicative of a return to was a blip, and that 2013 was more globally in 2013 was 17,662 meters also the prevalent trend of increasing completions representative of the general upward trend. the second-ranked in history, behind the each year over the past decade. Perhaps 2012, 2011 record of 21,642 meters (see graph on with its small year-on-year drop in Of course, each year is extraordinary in its own page 38). completions, was the last year to register the way. Here are some of 2013 s key milestones: full effect of the 2008/2009 global financial Of the 73 buildings completed in 2013, 12 crisis, and a small sigh of relief can be let out 2013 was the second-most successful year or 16% entered the list of 100 Tallest in the tall-building industry as we begin on record for completion of buildings 200 Buildings in the World. meters or greater in height. In 2013, 73 such At the same time, it is important to note that buildings were completed, second only to For the sixth year running, China had the 2013 was the second-most successful year the 81 completions of 2011 (see most 200-meter-plus completions of any ever, in terms of 200-meter-plus building completions graphic on page 39). nation, at 37 located across 22 cities. completion, with 73 buildings of 200 meters or greater height completed. When examined For the fourth year running, nine supertalls The tallest building to complete in 2013 in the broad course of skyscraper completions were again completed in These 36 was the 355-meter JW Marriott Marquis since 2000, the rate is still increasing. From supertalls, built over the last four years, Hotel Dubai Tower 2 in Dubai, UAE (see 2000 to 2013, the total number of 200-meterplus buildings in existence increased from 261 supertalls that now exist (77). comprise nearly half the total number of image on opposite page). to 830 an astounding 318%. From this point Three of the fi ve tallest buildings of view, we can more confidently estimate completed are in the United Arab Emirates, for the second year in a row. 01 JW Marriott Marquis Hotel Dubai Tower 2 Dubai, 355 m/1,116 ft 03 Modern Media Center Changzhou, 332 m/1,089 ft =05 Deji Plaza 11 United International Mansion Nanjing, 324 m/1,063 ft Chongqing, 287 m/942 ft 02 Mercury City Tower 04 Al Yaqoub Tower Moscow, 339 m/1,112 ft Dubai, 328 m/1,076 ft 07 Cayan Tower 10 Dongguan TBA Tower Dubai, 307 m/1,008 ft Dongguan, 289 m/948 ft 12 Chongqing Poly Tower =05 The Landmark Chongqing, 287 m/941 ft Abu Dhabi, 324 m/1,063 ft =08 East Pacific Center Tower A =08 The Shard Shenzhen, 306 m/1,004 ft London, 16 East Pacific Center Tower B 306 m/1,004 ft Shenzhen, 261 m/856 ft Figure 1. Urbanization trends. Source: UN, Department of Economic and Social Affairs World Urbanization Prospects, the 2011 Revision. Dense urban living proves better for the high-end luxury apartments, the experience people and the city in terms of retaining of high-rise affordable housing has not been countryside, saving time and money on travel, as satisfactory. Despite the middle class reducing infrastructure, and allowing people increasing difficulty in purchasing homes, and to enjoy the vibrancy of city life. However, a the fact that the designs of residential challenge to architects and planners lies in high-rise solutions for this demographic are translating this urban compaction into a not backed up by much research into the sustainable future for our cities. In pursuit of actual experience of living in them. Many of this goal, the beginning of the 21 st century these projects still continue to resonate with saw planners and municipalities choose the fears and problems of the past; they are developments with smarter, more considered to be socially unsustainable. community-focused plans. These movements aim to achieve sustainable neighborhoods. Smart growth does so by focusing on The Significance of Social Sustainability regional characteristics to foster a unique sense of place and community, offering better Today, social sustainability is regarded as an employment, transportation, and housing important pillar of sustainability in general. As solutions. Urban infill focuses on development per the 1992 UN Earth Summit and the 2000 of vacant, undeveloped, and underdeveloped Presidency Conclusions of the European land parcels within an existing community Council, social concerns will be taken up for and organizing populations densely, and due consideration in the sustainability increasing work and play opportunities agenda (United Nations 1993). Social through adjacency. sustainability is defined as a development The city of Goyang, Korea, has debuted on the world skyscraper stage with eight 200-meter-plus buildings completing in Europe has two of the 10 tallest buildings completed in a given year for the fi rst time since Panama added two buildings over 200 meters, bringing the small Central American nation s count up to 19. It had none as recently as Of the 73 buildings over 200 meters completed in 2013, only one, 1717 Broadway in New York (see image bottom right), was in the United States. Key Worldwide Market Snapshots of 2013 Asia Asia completely dominated the world tall-building industry, at 74% of worldwide completions with 53 buildings in 2013 (see region pie chart on page 39), against 53% with 35 buildings in Asia now contains 45% of the 100 Tallest Buildings in the World. China remained the heavyweight and overall undisputed champion of tall-building 13 Shimao International Center Office Tower Fuzhou, 273 m/896 ft 15 Bicsa Financial Center Panama City, 267 m/876 ft 14 Suzhou Center Suzhou, 17 Jing An Kerry Centre Tower m/879 ft Shanghai, 260 m/853 ft =18 Garden Square Shanghai, 258 m/846 ft construction in A total of 37 twohundred-meter-plus buildings were completed 50% of the global total up from 24 in The sum of heights of all 200-meter-plus buildings in China in 2013 was 8,876 meters, compared to 5,823 meters in 2012, an increase of 52.4%. These buildings were spread across 22 cities. Shenzhen proved to be the most active skyscraper city, doubling its number of completions from the previous year, from two to four. It was closely tailed by Chongqing and Shanghai, which tied at three. Nanjing, Shenyang, Suzhou, Hefei, Tianjin, Nanning, Xiamen, and Guangzhou each claimed two completions. Of these, Hefei and Xiamen are first-timers; these cities have never completed buildings of 200 meters or more until The tallest building to complete in China in 2013 was the 332-meter Modern Media Center in Changzhou. Korea had the next-largest number of tall completions in the Asian region, though its figure of nine buildings was almost entirely due to the opening of an eight-building complex, the Tanhyun Doosan project, whose subtitle, appropriately enough, is We ve the Zenith. Goyang, a city of 1.5 million near Seoul, is now on the world skyscraper map, in =18 The Metropolitan Office Tower Tianjin, 258 m/846 ft =18 Radisson Plaza Hotel Xiaoshan Tower 1 Hangzhou, 258 m/846 ft population (Polese & Stren 2000). Also, social communities are defined as places where people want to live and work, now and in the future. They meet the diverse needs of existing residents without compromising on those of the future, by being sensitive to their environment and contributing to a high quality of life. Social sustainability is now of paramount concern alongside mankind s withdrawal from traditional social structures. This has happened with the invasion of electronic social networking and the diminishment of outdoor spaces in which children can play and adults can interact. Technology enables leisure and work from home but is making people less social in the physical world (Beld 2012). A deficit of social support, reduced exposure to divergent views, the lack of ability to consider opposing viewpoints and the gestation of mistrust or general disengagement from the community are all results of reduced physical interaction. A generation conditioned to isolation could have devastating effects on society. Evolution of Social Spaces in Residential High-rises The practice of living in multistory structures dates back to ancient Rome, where such structures often appeared as mixed-use buildings with shops for the rich on the lower fl oors and housing for the lower-class residences above. Medieval city skylines also reveal such mixed-use towers. However, purely residential tall buildings did not begin to dominate the city skylines until after the Second World War. In the years that followed, social movements motivated architects to conceptualize housing for the masses, as well as the growing middle class in the cities. The Modernist, Humanist, and Rationalist movements laid out their visions of ideal 2013 Tallest #1: JW Marriott Marquis Hotel Dubai Tower 2. JW Marriott Marquis Hotel Dubai 2013 Tallest #40: 1717 Broadway, New York City, North America s only 200 m+ building in Tectonic Photo Figure 1. The tallest 20 buildings completed in A Year in Review: Tall Trends 2013 A Year in Review: Tall Trends Inside News and Events This Issue Dennis Poon, Trustee CTBUH Latest Antony Wood, Executive Director Debating Tall: Antennas vs. Spires Global News Highlights from the CTBUH Global News archive Case Study Tree House Residence Hall, Boston B. K. Boley and Tamara Roy Research Skyscrapers and Skylines: New York and Chicago, Improving the Social Sustainability of High-rises Suruchi Modi Midcentury (un)modern Bill Browning, Alice Hartley, Travis Knop, Christopher Starkey & Curtis Wayne A Year in Review: Tall Trends of Features Tall Buildings in Numbers 2013: A Tall Building Review Talking Tall: Rem Koolhaas & David Gianotten The New Context of Tall CTBUH New York s New Delirium Daniel Safarik CTBUH 12 th Annual Awards Events Daniel Safarik, Payam Bahrami & Dario Trabucco CTBUH on the Road CTBUH events around the world. Diary Upcoming tall building events Reviews Review of new books in the CTBUH Library Comments Feedback on past Journal issues Meet the CTBUH Richard Witt CTBUH Organizational Member Listing History, Theory & Criticism Skyscrapers and Skylines: New York and Chicago, This paper investigates skyscraper competition between New York City and Chicago from 1885 to Skyscraper rivalry between these cities is part of U.S. historiography, yet little work has explored the veracity of this belief. Using a newly created data set on skyscrapers, a series of statistical tests were performed to see whether there is, in fact, competitive interaction across cities. First, the results show that each city has positively responded to decisions in the other city, suggesting that residents in each city have a desire to build more and taller than the other. Second, height regulations for each city have periodically reduced the size of each city s skyline, and have spurred increased building activity in the other city, providing evidence that skyscraper space is substitutable across cities. Social Issues Improving the Social Sustainability of High-Rises A deficit of social support, reduced exposure to divergent views, the lack of ability to consider opposing viewpoints and the gestation of mistrust or general disengagement from the community are all results of reduced physical interaction. There appears no good reason for people to move to suburbs in search of a better life. If cities can offer them substantial reasons to keep coming back, such as jobs, entertainment, and amenities, the city should be able to provide a socially sustainable habitat. With adaptations from low-rise environments, tall buildings would soon be a desirable format to live in. This paper studies the social benefits of horizontal neighborhood communities, and explores the difficulty of transferring them into a vertical format. A Year in Review: Tall Trends of 2013 Small Increase in Completions Marks Return to Upward Trend Architects consider each city to have its own style, its own way of shaping its local environment, its own individualistic contributions to the history of architecture. Yet these contributions were not developed in isolation. There is a considerable amount of competitive interaction between architects, contractors, and developers in both cities. We are not contextualists in the sense of feeling obliged to be similar, but we are contextualists in the sense that every one of our buildings is a comment on its context. Sometimes a comment is critical; sometimes it is supportive in enlisting that context into a greater whole. Rem Koolhaas, page 48 Inside 3

4 History, Theory & Criticism Skyscrapers and Skylines: New York and Chicago, Author, Associate Professor Department of Economics Rutgers University Newark NJ 07102, United States t: f: e: is an associate professor of economics at Rutgers University, Newark, and the Director of Graduate Studies for the economics department. He received his Bachelor s degree from Cornell University in 1992, and his PhD from Columbia University in His research interests include urban and real estate economics. In particular, Dr. Barr studies the economic determinants of skyscraper height since the late 19 th century. His work has appeared in prominent economics journals, such as the Journal of Regional Science, the Journal of Economic History, and Real Estate Economics. He is currently writing a book on the history of the Manhattan skyline. Figure 1. Home Insurance Building, Chicago, This paper investigates skyscraper competition between New York City and Chicago from 1885 to Skyscraper rivalry between these cities is part of US historiography, yet little work has explored the veracity of this belief. Using a newly created data set on skyscrapers, a series of statistical tests were performed to see whether there is, in fact, competitive interaction across cities. First, the results show that each city has positively responded to decisions in the other city, suggesting that residents in each city have a desire to build more and taller than the other. Second, height regulations for each city have periodically reduced the size of each city s skyline, and have spurred increased building activity in the other city, providing evidence that skyscraper space is substitutable across cities. Introduction Since the late 1880s, New York and Chicago have been two of the world s premier skyscraper cities. By 1929, New York and Chicago contained 68% of the nation s buildings of 20 stories or greater in height (Weiss 1992). Of the ten current tallest buildings in the United States, four are in Chicago and four are in New York; six would be in New York, if the Twin Towers had not been destroyed (Skyscraper Center 2013). Ever since the telegraph and railroad created a national market in the mid-19 th century, businesses and residents have had much greater mobility and locational choices. Given the ability of labor and capital to go where the returns are greatest, we would expect this to generate some competition between leading cities. If residents of one city see its rivals growing rapidly, they may feel compelled to respond. Historically, skyscrapers have embodied two types of competition. The first is regional competition for employment and industrial growth. Economic activity must be housed somewhere; if developers don t provide the space in one location, developers in another place will. As the economy evolves, buildings age and become functionally obsolete. The needs of businesses and residents change, and, again, if one city doesn t supply these needs, then another city will. Thus, competi- tion is about luring businesses and residents, and promoting job growth and profits. However, because of their symbolic and aesthetic nature, skyscrapers can also be used to express psychological or sociological needs. A tall building can be a monument to local pride or a work of civic art that enhances citizens sense of place. The skyscraper can advertise the city, as a form of urban boosterism, drawing tourists, and placing it within the national and international conversations on cities. Additionally, tall buildings can be used to express developers desire to engage in conspicuous consumption (or investment) to project economic strength, and achieve a higher social status. But the need for pride-, ego- or advertising-based construction is also a competitive process, since the height and size of these projects mainly serve their purposes only relative to the height and size of other projects. The two forms of competition can lead to two different outcomes. On the one hand, if developers in City 1 go on a building spree, it will reduce the price of building space. If developers in City 2 see a falling price, the rational response is to hold off on construction because of declining revenues from new projects. This negative response by builders means that skyscrapers in the two cities are strategic substitutes: if City 2 sees that City 1 18 History, Theory & Criticism

5 is heavily engaged in construction, builders in City 2 find that reducing construction is the most profitable response. In general, markets in which a handful of firms all produce a similar commodity will exhibit this strategicsubstitutes property. Companies, for example, are frequently moving their corporate headquarters, based on which city provides the best bundle of office space, employees, and access to markets and suppliers (Strauss-Kahn & Vives 2009). If these companies see an opportunity to move to a city with newer office space, they will do so. Architects consider each city to have its own style, its own way of shaping its local environment, its own individualistic contributions to the history of architecture. Yet these contributions were not developed in isolation. There is a considerable amount of competitive interaction between architects, contractors, and developers in both cities. However, if building height has non-expresslyeconomic purposes, such as advertising, local pride, or ego satisfaction, then relative height is an important strategic variable. If developers in one city go particularly tall, builders in the other city will respond positively by adding height to their buildings. In this case, building heights can be called strategic complements, in the sense that heights in the two cities move together. Since Chicago and New York were the first skyscraper cities in the United States and were linked economically, we can look to these two cities to test these competition theories. Chicago and New York Figure 2. Bayard-Condict Building, New York, Antony Wood With the completion of the Erie Canal in 1825, and the settling of Chicago in the 1830s, New York and Chicago became trading partners. Capital, imports, and settlers flowed west, while agricultural goods flowed east. But as the relationship developed, they also became rivals. In 1871, Chicago s Great Fire destroyed much of the city s office space, and gave it the chance to build a modern, fireproof business district. The Home Insurance Building, completed in Chicago in 1885 (see Figure 1), was the first to incorporate an iron-skeleton structure to bear Figure 3. Flatiron Building, New York, Marshall Gerometta the load of the building; it paved the way for the city s early skyscraper boom. Architects, engineers, and builders who cut their teeth on Chicago s first generation of skyscrapers were later employed in New York as well. This interaction has lead John Zukowsky to write: Chicago and New York these are often thought to be the two great superpowers of American architecture. Architects consider each city to have its own style, its own way of shaping its local environment, its own individualistic contributions to the history of architecture. Yet these contributions were not developed in isolation. Throughout the 19 th and 20 th centuries there has been, and still is, a considerable amount of competitive interaction between architects, contractors, and developers in both cities (Zukowski 1984:12). The list of past and present interactions is long, but here are a few important examples. In the early period, Louis Sullivan, arguably Chicago s most famous skyscraper architect, designed one of his signature buildings in New York the Bayard-Condict Building, in 1899 (see Figure 2). Builder and skyscraper pioneer George Fuller and his firm built skyscrapers such the Monadnock (1893) and the Rookery (1888) in Chicago, and the New York Times (1904) and Flatiron (1902) building (see Figure 3) in New York, the latter of which was also designed by one of Chicago s most famous architects, Daniel Burnham. History, Theory & Criticism 19

6 Figure 4. Tower Building, New York, Source: Museum of the City of New York Competition between the two cities in this early period was keen. For example, the Chicago Daily Tribune reports a typical case of interest in 1900: The newest thing in the racing field is the skyscraper. It involves Chicago and New York, and as usual Chicago is in the lead. A novel race of skyscrapers has been in progress for nearly a year at Cedar Street and Broadway, where two 16-story office buildings are going up on opposite corners The American Exchange National Bank Building is being erected on the northeast corner by a New York firm of builders, and on the northwest corner Chicago contractors are putting up the St. Lawrence Building The Chicago firm celebrated its triumph today by hanging out a sign announcing that its building will be ready for occupancy in May. The New York firm admits that it can only finish in time for the autumn renting. (Chicago Daily Tribune1900: 2). In the 1920s, architect Raymond Hood, who resided in New York, designed both the Chicago Tribune Tower (1924) and the New York Daily News Building (1929). After World War II, German-born architect Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, head of the architecture department at Chicago s Illinois Institute of Technology, designed one of New York s most famous modernist buildings, the Seagram Building (1958). The architecture firm Skidmore, Owings, and Merrill (SOM), founded in Chicago in 1936, has designed many buildings in the two cities, including the Sears (Willis) Tower (1974) and the John Hancock Center (1969) in Chicago, and the Lever House (1952) and One Worldwide Plaza (1989) in New York. Lastly, New York-based builder Donald Trump, who has built many skyscrapers in New York, in 2009 completed the 92-story Trump International Hotel and Tower (designed by SOM) in Chicago. Over the years, however, Chicago has developed a reputation for suffering from Second City Syndrome. That prompted Chicago newspaper reporter Don Hayner to write in 2000: Chicago always wanted to show the world who was boss. And in case you haven t heard, it ain t New York. No matter what it achieved, Chicago saw itself as the underdog with the second city syndrome. But its insecurity gave the city its power. Chicago wanted to be better than the best, but never felt like it was. So it kept challenging New York like a kid picking a fight with the toughest punk on the corner (Hayner 2000). This quote suggests two things about competition. First, Chicago positively responds to New York s skyscraper decisions, because it feels a need to prove itself; and second, if New York also responds positively to Chicago, then Chicago is more aggressive than New York. Height Policies Over the years, city governments have created policies that either directly or indirectly regulate building height. If competition exists across cities, it s important to consider how these policies might have affected that competition. Table 1. Height regulations in New York and Chicago New York s first skyscraper, the Tower Building (11 floors), was completed in 1889 (see Figure 4), about four years after Chicago s first. With the use of steel-skeletal construction and elevators, the engineering limits to height were essentially eliminated (Peet 2011). The initial reaction of New York s government was to do nothing. The first generation of skyscrapers were not subject to any height or bulk regulations, and developers felt free to build tall buildings that maximized the total rentable space by using as much of the plot area as possible. Partly as a result of skyscrapers emergence, New York City implemented comprehensive zoning rules in 1916 that created height and use regulations for all lots in the city. The 1916 code created setback requirements; buildings had to be set back from the street based on some given multiple of the street width. The multiples ranged from 1.0 to 2.5. For a particularly wide street of 30.5 meters, in a 2.5 multiple zone, the curtain wall of the building could rise 76 meters before it had to be set back. A tower of any height could be built, as long as its area was not more than 25% of the lot area. This law promoted the wedding-cake style of architecture, most famously embodied by the Empire State and Chrysler buildings. By regulating the shape of buildings, sunlight blockage would be reduced, and height arms races, where developers built taller solely to access sunlight that was being blocked by surrounding towers, could be prevented. In 1961, New York City implemented an updated zoning law. The new code put limits on the total building volume by fixing the floor area ratios (FARs) in different districts. The FAR Year Chicago New York meters limit meters limit meters limit 1916 Setback multiple meters limit on podium meters for tower = meters meters podium meters tower = meters, with area & volume limits 1942 Volume capped at 44 meters x lot size (FAR 12) 1957 FAR limits + bonus 1961 FAR limits + bonus 20 History, Theory & Criticism

7 40 New York Chicago 500 New York Chicago Figure 5. Number of skyscraper completions in New York and Chicago, Figure 6. Height of the tallest completed building (meters) in each city, gives a building s total allowable floor area as a ratio of the lot size. For example, a FAR of 10 means that total floor area can be ten times the lot area. Thus, a builder could construct a 10-story building that covers the entire lot, or a 20-story building that covers half the lot. The maximum FAR was set at 15, but there are various ways to get FAR bonuses to increase height or bulk. Chicago, however, unlike New York, put direct limits on building heights between 1893 and Table 1 summarizes the building-height regulations in New York and Chicago. In 1893, Chicago imposed a 39.6-meter cap. In 1902, the height limit was doubled to 79.2 meters; but only nine years later in 1911, the maximum height was reduced to 61.0 meters. In 1920, a new approach was taken. The height limit for occupiable spaces was raised again to 79.2 meters, but the law allowed for the construction of towers that could rise to 122 meters, though they could not be occupied, and were to be used only as ornaments. The fact that such uninhabitable towers were allowed in Chicago strongly suggests a demand for buildings that could be used for advertising or strategic purposes. In 1923, the Chicago height limit was raised to 80.5 meters, and habitable towers were also permitted, if the area of the tower was less than 25% of the plot area and less than one-sixth of the volume of the main building. These rules were in effect until In that year, a more flexible approach to height was implemented based on a consideration of volume, rather than floor area alone. For much of downtown Chicago, the maximum building volume was capped at the area of the plot times 44 meters. Finally, starting in 1957, the current approach was implemented. Builders were given FAR caps. In downtown Chicago, builders had a FAR of 16; FAR bonuses were given if builders provided plaza space around the building (Schwieterman et al. 2006: Chapter 9). As in New York, these regulations promoted the boxy towers that are common today. Shultz and Simmons argue that height limitations in Chicago were helpful to New York. They write that during the fixed-height limitations period, New York could and did build office buildings to house the great expansion of business. Some of this business wanted to come to Chicago, and would have, if it could have been accommodated there (Shultz & Simmons 1959: ). Testing for Competition Despite the widespread belief that skyscraper height is a strategic weapon, there has been no systematic, statistical study testing the veracity of this claim. While the popular media tends to focus on the tallest of the tall and the record-breaking buildings, a larger data set is needed to perform a series of statistical tests to investigate the competition hypotheses. To this end, a data set was created for skyscrapers in New York and Chicago from 1885 to 2007, focusing on two measures related to building height. The first variable, the number of tall buildings completed each year in each city, is a measure of developer competition in general. For example, if developers see construction in one city, they might decide to marginally increase the size of their buildings, thus carrying them over the skyscraper threshold. To simplify the analysis, in this study, a fixed cutoff was used to determine whether a building is a skyscraper or not. For Chicago, a skyscraper is a building that is 80 meters or taller; while for New York, the threshold is at least 90 meters. The 80-meter threshold was chosen for Chicago because of its history of limiting height; reducing the threshold increases the number of years with at least one 80-meter or taller building (though using a 90-meter threshold does not materially affect the conclusions). Buildings of these heights were commonly built after The second variable examined is the tallest building completed in each city in each year since This variable is used to observe how building height responds across the two cities. In this study, no attempt was made to distinguish the underlying uses of the building themselves; the data set contains offices, residential, and all other types of occupied buildings. This is done, again, to simplify the analysis. Figure 5 shows the annual number of completions, and Figure 6 shows the height of the tallest building constructed in each city from 1885 to The graphs demonstrate a few interesting facts. First, based on Figure 5, tall-building construction happens in long waves of about 25 years in duration, on History, Theory & Criticism 21

8 average. Second, the cycles of each city tend to be in sync, with their peaks and troughs roughly corresponding. New York s peaks, however, have tended to be higher. The 1931 peak reflects the building boom of the Roaring Twenties; the peak in the mid-1980s was due, in part, to government policies that encouraged construction. # Pseudo-Equation 1 NY Completions = Economic Variables (two years prior) + Chicago Completions (year prior) 2 Chi. Completions = Economic Variables (two years prior) + NYC Completions (year prior) 3 NY Height = Economic Variables (two years prior) + Chicago Height (year prior) 4 Chi. Height = Economic Variables (two years prior) + NY Height (year prior) Table 2. Pseudo-equations for testing for competition. In regard to building heights, Figure 6 shows that New York consistently built taller, until the mid-1960s, when average height in the two cities became comparable. While there is no way to directly conclude anything about height competition from the graphs, the fact that the two cities have such similar cycles suggests that competitions cannot be ruled out. If the peaks and troughs across the two cities were unrelated, it would likely indicate very few linkages. In order to test for competition, it s necessary to first to account for the factors that drive height within a city, separate from any inter-city interactions. The building patterns seen above may simply reflect the ebb and flow of economic activity within each city and the nation as a whole, more so than direct competition between two cities. Because specific data on actual incomes and costs are not publicly available for the vast majority of projects, national or city-wide variables were used to help explain construction patterns. To account for the demand for building space, the data set contains the annual growth rate of the national gross domestic product (GDP), the fraction of workers employed in the Finance, Insurance and Real Estate Industries (FIRE), the growth in the Standard and Poor s 500 Index, and each city s regional population. These variables are likely to be positively related to skyscraper construction. Measures of the plot sizes for the underlying buildings were also included, because presumably large plot sizes are more favorable for constructing tall buildings, since they help limit the constraints imposed by elevators. Taller buildings require more elevator shafts, which eats into rentable space. A larger plot allows builders to add the extra elevators needed to reap returns from having more floors. To account for the costs of construction, an index of national building-materials costs was included; this is likely to be negatively related to skyscraper height. To measure the cost of and access to financing, data on real interest rates, and the growth rate of commercial real estate loans nationwide were also collected. Higher interest rates or lower loan availability is likely to reduce construction, all else equal. Finally, the total number of skyscrapers already completed in each city was also included as a measure of the supply of space; one would expect a negative relationship between the total amount already built and future construction, since a greater supply would reduce the price of space. The third set of variables relate to government policies on height. To this end, a set of dummy (1/0) variables were created for the years in which each type of regulation was in place. These variables measure the average impact of these policies on height across the 20th century. For example, for New York City, a 1916 Zoning Variable took on the value of one for the years 1916 to 1960; and zero for other years, to determine how building height was impacted during those years, controlling for the other variables that determine skyscraper construction patterns. After the data collection, the next step was to perform a regression analysis. This statistical procedure shows how the above-listed variables are correlated (and are presumably causal) with building completion counts and heights. The results show that these variables can largely account for the changes in building activity from year to year. In other words, the results show that number of tall buildings and their heights are first and foremost a rational response to the economic climate of each city when demand for space is high, so are building heights; when costs go up, heights go down, etc. In order to test for competition, the next step, after accounting for the supply and demand variables, was to see how construction decisions in one city affect the other. We asked, Do building decisions in one city determine decisions in other, after controlling for the economic factors that drive skyscraper height? To this end, for each of the four variables of interest (the number of completions and the height of the tallest building in each city), the other city s decision in the prior year is included as a control variable. Table 2 gives the pseudoequations that are estimated by using regression analysis. The goal was to perform a series of statistical tests to see if the other city s building decisions should be included on the right-hand side of the table, and if so, whether the effect was positive or negative. The results show positive and statistically significant relationships in all four cases. The statistical tests support the strategic complements theory; namely, each city has positively responded to building patterns in the other city. For both cities, the estimated response from the other city is relatively small. For example, if one city doubled the number of skyscrapers completed from one year to the next, for example, from 10 to 20, the other city would increase skyscraper completions by about 20 to 25% (two to three more buildings), on average. For the height of the tallest building, the results show that New York adds an average of 1.2 meters to its height whenever there is a 10-meter increase in Chicago s height in the prior year, all else equal. Chicago s response is 22 History, Theory & Criticism

9 greater; with every 10 meters added in New York, Chicago responds by adding about 2.6 meters, one year later. The results, however, do not show convincing evidence that Chicago suffers from a Second City Syndrome. In terms of skyscrapers completed, New York s response to Chicago s construction is slightly larger. In terms of the height of the tallest building, while Chicago s height appears more responsive than New York s, it is not so much larger to safely conclude that Chicago acted out of a sense of inferiority. Lastly, the results show that height restrictions in one city, were, in fact, met with increased building activity in the other city, supporting the theory that skyscraper space is substitutable across the two cities. For example, during the height-restrictions period in Chicago, the regression results suggest that, on average, New York doubled the number of completions during that time, and added about 60 meters to the heights of the tallest buildings, controlling for the other determinants of building height. Conclusion A version of this article appeared in the Journal of Regional Science Vol. 53(3), 2013: References Chicago Leads New York in a Race of Skyscrapers. Chicago Daily Tribune. March 11, 1900: 2. Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat Skyscraper Center. HAYNER, D Looking Back, the Bark of the Underdog. in 20 th Century Chicago: 100 Years, 100 Voices, edited by Adrienne Drell: Chicago: Chicago Sun Times. PEET, G The Origin of the Skyscraper. CTBUH Journal, 2011 Issue I: The Effects of Height Regulations The fact that each city has had different height regulations means that statistical tests can be performed to see how these regulations have impacted not only their own city s skyline, but that of their rival as well. Shultz and Simmons argue that Chicago s height caps were a boon to New York. If this is the case, it would provide evidence for the strategic substitutes theory. Those businesses and residents priced out of Chicago due to low building supply would move to New York. This would increase demand in New York, and a few years later, more and/or taller skyscrapers would be completed. To investigate the effects of height regulations, two tests were performed. First, each city s own yes/no zoning variables were included in the regression equation for each period they were in effect to see if these height restrictions were, in fact, binding, (i.e., a real constraint to developers). Second, the yes/no zoning variables from the other city (from four years prior) were included in the regression equation. The statistical results show that, on average, height regulations did, in fact, bind developers in their own cities. Note, however, that these conclusions say nothing about whether height regulations are good or bad for the quality of life in each city. Height regulations were generally designed to reduce shadows, excess congestion, or fire risk; but they did so at the expense of limiting supply. Chicago and New York are the two most important skyscraper cities in the United States. Their rapid growth in the late-19 th and early-20 th centuries drove them to construct tall buildings to house their businesses and residents. But cities don t grow in isolation; their well-being depends on what other cities do. This interaction can lead to skyscraper competition, both to house economic activity and to out-do rivals. Using a newly-created data set, a series of statistical tests were performed, and they confirm competitive interaction between New York and Chicago. The results show that each city added to its skyline as a response to the other city. Further, the evidence indicates that height regulations in each city provided opportunities to the other city as well. What will the future bring? Perhaps American cities will be drawn into competition with their newly-emerging Asian rivals, which are arguably already competing with each other and globally. Schwieterman, J.; CASPALL, D. & Heron, J. (eds.) The Politics of Place: A History of Zoning in Chicago. Chicago: Lake Claremont Press. Shultz, E. & Simmons, W Offices in the Sky. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill. Strauss-Kahn, V. & Vives, X Why and Where do Headquarters Move? Regional Science and Urban Economics, 39(2): Weiss, M Skyscraper Zoning: New York s Pioneering Role. Journal of the American Planning Association, 58(2): Zukowsky, J The Capitals of American Architecture: Chicago and New York. In Chicago and New York Architectural Interactions, edited by David van Zanten and Robert Sharp. Chicago: The Art Institute of Chicago. If one city doubled the number of skyscrapers completed from one year to the next, for example, from 10 to 20, the other city would increase skyscraper completions by about 20 to 25% (two to three more buildings), on average. History, Theory & Criticism 23