Futuristic skyscrapers, Asian or European?

[myszoman]

I guess Asian cities are futuristic in all, but skyscrapers? Tough question, I choose none because you cannot say this is more futuristic than this, it is futuristic or not and both areas has a lot of them

[james2390]

Europe.

There's a difference between futuristic and tacky.

[mauritius gunner]

From afar, Asian city skylines look spectacular, but up close, very bland and clinical and without character. Look at Pudong district in Shanghai, amazing but the environments are over planned, lack greenery. Frankly, if I had to live and work there, I would want to kill myself with depression within a month.

European skyscrapers, may look out of place or not be tall enough, but 'fit in' to the existing city's character and environment. Aesthetically and artistically. They add to the character of the city irrespective of immediate appearances. Paris is a classical example- La Grande Arche (courtessy of Steve Skyline, thank you), the George Pompidou Centre, may look strange, but add character to a city I love.

When it comes to skyscrapers however, debate aside, New York tops the bill, with historical skyscraper architecture dating back to the 1900s. I think the Chrysler building is perhaps the most beautiful in the world...

[XCRunner]

They both have innovative new scrapers, but how do you define what is futuristic and what isn't?

[Manila-X]

The reason why I discussed this thread is because I had a debate with a friend of mine on which skyscraper is more futuristic whether it's Asian or European. He chooses European while I choose Asian.

Alot of Euroscrapers are futuristic and are innovative. The Swiss-Re in London is an example of this though it's not as tall compared to other Asian scrapers.

Another one, this is the tallest right now in the continent is the Commerzbank Tower in Frankfurt.

[LordMarshall]

Europe IMO does not have that many really intresting skyscrapers.

Asia seems to building up and pushing the envelop in scraper design, just like UAE.

[Manila-X]

Originally Posted by LordMarshall

Europe IMO does not have that many really intresting skyscrapers.

Asia seems to building up and pushing the envelop in scraper design, just like UAE.

Actually they do like the Swiss-Re, Torre Agbar or Turning Torso for example. In fact, some proposals like The Russia Tower for example are state of the art.

Again, the only thing in Europe is they don't build them as tall compared to Asian scrapers. Well it's probably because European cities are less populated or crowded compared to Asian cities.

[Mekky II]

Originally Posted by steve_skyline

The La Grande in Paris is ugly and Swiss Re is nice. Overall, Asian skyscrapers are futuristic

La Grande Arche is maybe ugly but it was the first skyscrapers like this in the world, since then Tokyo copied it and Beijing will built a similar.

Also Torre Agbar and Swiss Re don't exist outside Europe, I predict you that asians will copy them in the future ! Be futuristic means that others will copy what you have because they never had that and they find it attractive, most of big projects in Asia (beijing airport, opera houses of Beijing and Shangaï and so on) are made by european architects ! Zara Hadid, Norman Foster and Calatrava are enough well known to make Europe ahead.

The number of towers and the height of skyscrapers don't make them futuristic, they can be considered futuristic with technical figures (like the big ball of Taipei 101), but artistically it's another world !

[Mekky II]

Originally Posted by WANCH

Actually they do like the Swiss-Re, Torre Agbar or Turning Torso for example. In fact, some proposals like The Russia Tower for example are state of the art.

Again, the only thing in Europe is they don't build them as tall compared to Asian scrapers. Well it's probably because European cities are less populated or crowded compared to Asian cities.

No, it's because lands cost more, do you know how much cost a land in Frankfurt or London ? Hong-Kong is not specific of other asian cities considering its small land, but Tokyo actually have not really tall towers, the cost of land is quite big, but in China it's easy to buy one ! (a proof is that only 30% of Shangai offices are used ...). It's one of many reasons ! preservation is another, some districts of Paris have twice the density of Hong-Kong, but we still prefer don't built towers, it's like this in Paris you have a big quality of life either and the sensation that in some districts, you are in a small village of town, and not inside a metropolis of 10 millions inh. !

[hkskyline]

Asian skyscrapers make better use of lighting to make their new skyscrapers stand out at night. The use of neon is quite common, and it permeates not just the skyscrapers but also the low- and mid-rises at street level (Taipei, Tokyo, Seoul, etc.)

Shanghai's office vacancy rate is actually quite low at around 6-7%. The 30% occupancy rate is definitely not true.

Shanghai hungry for grade-A office space
American and Japanese firms are the main drivers in the leasing market, as multinationals go into expansion mode
22 February 2006
South China Morning Post

The upward trend in the leasing market in Shanghai shows no signs of abating, even after new office supply last year reached its highest level since 2000.

In the past year, a total of 391,892 square metres of office space came on the market, more than 90 per cent of which was developed to grade-A specifications (see chart).

The average vacancy rate for grade-A office space in Shanghai was 6.6 per cent last year. The average was 6.4 per cent at the end of 2004.

Many grade-A properties completed last year, such as the AZIA Center and K. Wah Centre, were heavily pre-leased, with more than 60 per cent of space committed and nearing full occupancy by year-end.

We witnessed a moderate 4 per cent increase in the average asking rent in the fourth quarter of last year to 216 yuan per square metre per month.

The year-on-year increase was 15.3 per cent.

Multinational companies are the key driver in the sector. United States firms continue to dominate the scene both in terms of numbers and area occupied, followed by Japanese companies.

The outlook is expected to remain bright this year, with some interesting developments forecast.

With the latest round of World Trade Organisation-related market concessions for the banking sector, we noticed several foreign banks, particularly on the retail operating side, making plans for substantial office expansion this year.

Besides the banking sector, a number of industries are in expansion mode, including service providers and professional firms. In fact, professional service firms were a major presence in international grade-A properties last year, expanding in parallel with the banking and insurance sectors.

Companies in these sectors are expected to benefit from increasing business opportunities arising from China's commitment to the WTO, thus contributing to growth in office demand.

This year, new supply is expected to reach another high at an estimated 440,000 square metres.

I expect that in the coming year the market will be characterised by substantial pre-leasing activities as a result of strong pent-up demand for quality space.

Rentals are forecast to continue to follow a moderate upward trend, especially on the Puxi side. But as rents rise, companies are weighing their options in leasing space.

This year should see moves by multinationals to alternative office hubs, such as Zhuyuan in fringe Lujiazui and suburban office space at Zhangjiang Hi-Tech Park in Pudong. This is to be expected as headcount grows and companies seek to avoid unnecessary exposure to rising rents downtown.

Some corporations are considering moving their back-office functions to grade-B office space as a cost-efficient option in downtown areas of the city.

Edward Cheung is general manager of DTZ Debenham Tie Leung (Shanghai)

[Manila-X]

Originally Posted by Mekky II

No, it's because lands cost more, do you know how much cost a land in Frankfurt or London ? Hong-Kong is not specific of other asian cities considering its small land, but Tokyo actually have not really tall towers, the cost of land is quite big, but in China it's easy to buy one ! (a proof is that only 30% of Shangai offices are used ...). It's one of many reasons ! preservation is another, some districts of Paris have twice the density of Hong-Kong, but we still prefer don't built towers, it's like this in Paris you have a big quality of life either and the sensation that in some districts, you are in a small village of town, and not inside a metropolis of 10 millions inh. !

True. Actually most of Paris' highrises are built outside the city centre or beyond the freeway ring But there are some high-rises in the city centre like Montparnase, Bibiotechque Nacional and a few high-rises near The Statue Of Liberty.

Anyway, some of the skyscrapers in La Defense are also very impressive not just The Grande Arche but also other scrapers like the Tour Societe Generale. Also, there was suppose to be a supertall built there which was the La Tour Sans Fins but I think the project has been cancelled.

[hkskyline]

Originally Posted by WANCH

True. Actually most of Paris' highrises are built outside the city centre or beyond the freeway ring But there are some high-rises in the city centre like Montparnase, Bibiotechque Nacional and a few high-rises near The Statue Of Liberty.

Anyway, some of the skyscrapers in La Defense are also very impressive not just The Grande Arche but also other scrapers like the Tour Societe Generale. Also, there was suppose to be a supertall built there which was the La Tour Sans Fins but I think the project has been cancelled.

Montparnasse isn't exactly in the CBD. It's in Paris proper, but in the 14th district. The core of Paris is the 1st district. La Defense is technically outside Paris proper (it's not in the arrond. network).

[Jo]

Originally Posted by Mekky II

Also Torre Agbar and Swiss Re don't exist outside Europe, I predict you that asians will copy them in the future !

It's only fair if it's 'copied' because phallus shaped stone towers has dominated SE Asian skylines for centuries

[DARKNIGHT]

This one is a tough debate. Both continents are good. If we are counting Dubai as part of Asia than I would have to give the edge to Asia. Dubai has an amazing number of futuristic skyscrapers built, being built, approved and proposed. I must admit that London and Paris are getting some amazing buildings. I've always like Frankfurt skyline overall too. On the other hand Hong Kong, Shanghai and tokyo's smaller buildings are just amazing as well among other cities in Asia.

[mithology77]

Europe this changing a lot above all Moscow and Madrid.

[Ozcan]

Definitely Asia. Next question please.

[Prestonian]

Depends how you want to consider 'futuristic'. Asia certainly has more of the, IMO, tacky sci-fi scrapers which look quite wacky and daring but also lack a degree of quality in some cases. On the other hand Europe offers more svelte corporate futuristic buildngs which have a very high level of quality and technological innovation. I think in many cases European buildings are the more futuristic due to the complexity of sqeezing them into unforgiving locations and in dealing with regulations making designs very very clever.

[Newcastle Guy]

Now, Asia.

Soon, europe:

The Shard (310m):

[IMG]http://i2.************/sv1loj.jpg[/IMG]

Russia tower (600m, taller than anything in Asia):



Dubai Tower istanbul (300m):



Bishopsgate tower (290m):



Minerva Tower (247m):



Federation tower (432m):



Diamond of Istanbul (256m):

[Manila-X]

The Federation Tower looks nice except I don't like those skybridges.

[www.sercan.de]

isn't dubai also Asia?

BTW
DOI will be IMO 238m

and i loveee those english skyscraper renderings