On 3 November, the International High-Rise Award 2026/27 will be presented at Frankfurt’s Paulskirche. Five finalists from Brussels, Curitiba, Guangzhou, Sydney and Singapore offer very different answers to a question that goes beyond the skyline: how does a tower become part of the city – and for whom?
The award does not hand out medals for height alone. It assesses forward-looking design, function, technical innovation, sustainability, economic viability and integration into the city. Projects must be at least 100 metres tall. That sounds like a broad set of criteria; what matters is how these concepts hold up in everyday life. A planted terrace is not yet a public park, and a mixed-use building is not automatically an accessible place.
The existing building as a design challenge
ZIN in Brussels shifts the focus most clearly from new construction to conversion. The former World Trade Center towers in the Northern Quarter have become a 129-metre-high, mixed-use piece of the city. The practices 51N4E and l’AUC developed the concept, while Jaspers-Eyers Architects oversaw its further development and execution; the client is Befimmo. Rather than demolishing both towers entirely, the circulation cores and five basement levels were retained. A new slab building inserted between the towers connects them.
This is more than a gesture of preservation: reusing existing structural and circulation systems can reduce construction work and the resources committed to it. Without comparable life-cycle and emissions data, however, the scale of this benefit in this particular case cannot be quantified. In urban planning terms, ZIN addresses another legacy: the district was conceived as a large-scale business quarter with high-rises and broad traffic arteries. Offices, homes, a hotel, retail, sports facilities and green spaces are intended to bring life to the tower outside office hours too. Whether this produces a public benefit depends not only on the diversity of uses, but also on which areas are genuinely open to everyone.
Community – but for whom?
The other finalists reveal how widely the reach of a ‘city within a high-rise’ can vary. Tencent Tower in Guangzhou, designed by Ateliers Jean Nouvel, arranges courtyards, stairs, ramps and planted terraces around its 207-metre-high office tower. Cafés, shops, exhibition spaces and a canteen form part of the concept; routes lead from the street and waterfront to a gallery below street level. Here, the idea of the vertical city is expressed not just through office floors, but through public and communal spaces. Their actual accessibility is a matter of how the building is run, not simply how it is planned.
One Pearl Bank in Singapore takes a different approach. The 178-metre-high residential towers by Serie Architects and Multiply Architects occupy the site of a former residential high-rise. The number of homes has risen from 272 to 774; communal gardens, raised beds, pools and play areas are located mainly within the building and between the towers. The landscaping is also intended to improve access to the adjacent Pearl’s Hill City Park. The project shows how density can be combined with communal amenities – primarily for residents, however. Communal spaces and public spaces are not the same thing.
The foot of the tower matters
The other two finalists also establish different relationships with their surroundings. AGE 360 in Curitiba is a 124-metre-high residential tower by Triptyque and Architects Office. Its pale concrete exoskeleton allows for largely column-free floor plans; terraces, a planted intermediate floor and communal areas complement the homes. Yet the building stands in the affluent Ecoville neighbourhood. Its greenery and amenities say little in themselves about how far the project contributes to the neighbourhood’s social mix.
In Sydney, 88 Walker by Fitzpatrick + Partners places the tower in relation to a 19th-century fire station. From the sixth floor upwards, the 180-metre-high hotel and office tower cantilevers over its historic neighbour; a low sandstone plinth mediates between the different scales. The design preserves the fire station as a visible part of the city’s history without making the new building invisible. The spanning gesture is primarily an architectural connection – not automatically an invitation to spend time in a public space.
The comparison suggests a useful order for the questions: what is retained of what already exists? Which uses are brought together? Who is allowed to use the spaces at ground level and up above? And what resources does the building commit over its lifetime? The jury lists urban integration, sustainability and economic viability alongside design, function and technology. This establishes a benchmark, but does not yet provide a full assessment of the social or environmental consequences.
An award-winning high-rise does not have to make every floor public. It should, however, clearly demonstrate how its scale is reconciled with the neighbourhood – through conversion rather than demolition, welcoming ground floors, mixed programmes or a more accessible route into green space. On 3 November, the jury will honour one of the five projects. The more important question extends beyond the award ceremony: whether a tower creates city is determined not by its crown, but by what it preserves, opens up and makes possible over the long term at ground level.
Original reviewed by the editors · 26 October 2026
