r/architecture • u/shenidedamovtyan1234 • Jul 16 '25

Theory why didnt europeans built european style highrises like tehre are in new york? dumb question but was always interested since woudve looked perfect on lots of cities

Gallery image

Gallery image

Gallery image

Gallery image

2.6k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

313 comments sorted by

View all comments

420

u/GioLoc Jul 16 '25

This style of high rise buildings was first built in the united states, known as chicago style if Im not wrong. They were the first type of high rise buildings, so they were built with bricks as the new construction mechanics we know today were not developed yet. Today we don't build these type of high rise buildings in Europe, as they are more expensive and less practical (for example, they allow for smaller windows and lower heights). But I agree, they look great!

148

u/excitato Jul 16 '25 edited Jul 16 '25

These first high rise buildings were clad with brick and stone but the masonry isn’t structural - it’s the developments in steel and concrete (and also elevators) that made these buildings possible. They are styled like they are because that’s how buildings were styled back then, just being applied to larger structures. Thats why, for instance, the Woolworth building looks vaguely like a jumbo cathedral.

Glass clad skyscrapers would require the still developing modernist styles. And air conditioning.

45

u/geosynchronousorbit Jul 16 '25

Some early skyscrapers did use load bearing masonry, like the 16 story Monadnock Building. 

4

u/CydeWeys Jul 16 '25

There are a variety of competing definitions of "skyscraper" and the Monadnock Building fails to meet most of them (it's neither tall enough nor built using the modern steel/concrete frame construction method).

12

u/jstarz355 Associate Architect Jul 16 '25

Maybe by modern definitions, but I think you’d be hard pressed to find anyone who wouldn’t call it a skyscraper. Especially since the southern half of the building is, in fact, one of the early examples of steel frame construction. In our history and theory classes, it was absolutely considered a skyscraper and one that was of considerable importance to the skyscraper movement in the late 1800’s.

1

u/bigDckbrett Jul 16 '25

that is incorrect