View Full Version : The best height of building


IshikawajimaHarima
September 1st, 2005, 11:48 AM
How tall?

Sinjin P.
September 1st, 2005, 12:03 PM
I think there's no best height of a building. It all depends on the foundation and the quality of materials being used + the threat of calamities :)

wjfox
September 1st, 2005, 03:42 PM
I can't answer this question. It depends on so many factors.

A building can be less than 100m tall and still be just as impressive or suitable as a 400m+ building.

samsonyuen
September 1st, 2005, 09:27 PM
I said 500-600m, not too high. But it really depends on what fits into the skyline...

hkskyline
September 2nd, 2005, 03:35 AM
Isn't there a height to width ratio that makes a building aesthetically pleasing? A lot of the shorter buildings in European cities are stunning in their surroundings.

I find these buildings to be very aesthetically beautiful and in harmony with its surroundings :

http://www.globalphotos.org/paris/20050417/PARIS1450.jpg

http://www.globalphotos.org/paris/20050417/PARIS1455.jpg

SUNNI
September 2nd, 2005, 07:31 AM
i have no voted..

because there is no 'best height'
i think great skylines consist of various skyscrapers and different heights

B@dGuYoM
September 22nd, 2005, 10:45 PM
stupid or curious question i think

DarkFenX
September 23rd, 2005, 06:07 AM
A 1000 footer would be for me. That would be around 304 meters tall.

Travis007
September 23rd, 2005, 11:13 PM
There is no ideal height for a building because it would all depend on the location and situation.

But the ideal height for a SKYSCRAPER is over 1000 ft. :)

Arpels
September 24th, 2005, 12:59 AM
I can't answer this question. It depends on so many factors.

A building can be less than 100m tall and still be just as impressive or suitable as a 400m+ building.
totaly agree :yes:

cello1974
September 24th, 2005, 01:02 AM
150 to 300 or 400m. All above that they are just energy eaters!!!

beyond 1000
September 24th, 2005, 07:43 AM
I voted over 600m because it would be novel for the general population to witness something that tall. My heart however is still for a building whose height is beyond 1000.

JJB
September 24th, 2005, 09:54 AM
Id say 600+ aswell. Just imagine a skyscraper with that height, well set, and with a superb location in the city center!

New Jack City
September 24th, 2005, 06:02 PM
300-349 m seems like a good range, not too short, not insanely tall, also allows for a lot creativity in a design.

cello1974
September 27th, 2005, 01:43 AM
^^ That is right. A 1000m cube or tube would be the worst to imagine in a city!!!

DrunKao
September 28th, 2005, 05:01 AM
I can't answer this question. It depends on so many factors.

A building can be less than 100m tall and still be just as impressive or suitable as a 400m+ building.

Coming from a true Londoner! :lol: