I just thought of this there. When we talk about supertalls we're usually talking about a building taller than 300m in height but with the construction boom today there are supertalls popping up everywhere. Right now there are 31 supertalls according to emporis and according to Skyscraperpage there are about 25 under construction at the moment. We know there are probably even more not on the lists yet so soon we'll have over 100. The name "supertall" just doesn't seem to be so special anymore and I think that this name should be reserved for only a select few. What do you think?

The thing is though, that all these new tall buildings are somewhere between 300 and 350m in height but a building taller than the Empire state building is still pretty rare. So for me, the new definition of "supertall" is taller than the ESB which is 381m (ESB included :) ).

So according to this the supertalls that exist are:

Taipei 101 - 509m
Petronas Towers - 452m
Sears - 442m
Jin Mao - 421m
2IFC - 415m
Citic Plaza - 391m
Shun Hing Square - 384m
Empire State Building - 381m

The ones UC:

Burj Dubai - at least 705m
Freedom Tower - 541m
Busan Lotte Tower - 494m
Shanghai World Financial Center - 492m
Union Square 7 - 484m
Al Bait Towers - 485m
The Trump tower in Chicago - 415m
Dalian International Trade Center - 420m
Federation tower in Moscow - 420m
The Trump tower in Chicago - 415m

What do you think of this. Do you agree that a supertall (300m+) tower isn't so special anymore?


BTW I'm counting spires just to make this list a bit bigger:)

What do you think of this. Do you agree that a supertall (300m+) tower isn't so special anymore?
I don't agree at all.

I don't know. I suppose it depends on where it more than anything. I mean, if a skyline has about 10 of these, then it isn't but if there is only one which stands out from the rest of the towers in the skyline, then of course it is something impressive.

I don't agree at all.

hehe, i can't imagine why! :cheers:

mehehhe :tiasd:

In all of the entire world, there's only 32 buildings built or under contruction 300m or taller, out of the tens of millions of buildings built around the planet, and you don't think they're supertall?

What the heck are you drinking? Can I have some?

I think a supertall is taller than 400m.

No 1000ft/300m sounds about right. I think it still matters, especially. I mean, how many cities will have one or more? Still not that many in the greater context of things.

No 1000ft/300m sounds about right. I think it still matters, especially. I mean, how many cities will have one or more? Still not that many in the greater context of things.
I suppose you're right. Still not many cities will have them but we definitely shouldn't count spires then, only roof height. So no more :tiasd:

I agree with you. Antennaes shouldn't count in roof height. Spires too.

I dont quite regard Shun Hing as a supertall.

I agree with you. Antennaes shouldn't count in roof height. Spires too.

Agreed. Neither can count as counting either will inevitably lead to abuse (i.e. Freedom Tower version 2).

Anything 300m+

Any higher than that...puts a lot of tall buildings in the same league as an average 100m skyscraper.

What the heck are you drinking? Can I have some?or what intarnation are you smoking? http://www.handykult.de/plaudersmilies.de//bounce/anim-jjd.gif....errr, and no thanks, I don't wan't some.

The arguments about whether of not a scraper no matter what size, should include it's height to roof, spire, antenna/antennae etc will go on forever on this site.

To be fair to malec, I agree somewhat on his defintition on what a supertall, should/could/would be, esp. those over 400m/1296ft.

BTW Besides this emoticon already posted, :tiasd: I think this one is pretty apt too: http://www.handykult.de/plaudersmilies.de//rough/itschy.gif

BTW Let's not forget some of those "supertalls" proposed amongst others in Pakistan, India and once again Dubai.

The Al Burj proposed for Dubai will reach 750m/2461ft to its highest spire and at this stage will be a residential tower. It's named The Pinnacle (http://www.emporis.com/en/il/pc/?id=210444&aid=8) on emporis.com.

300m + for me.

Sorry I didn't mean for this to be turned into a :tiasd: debate.
I'm just saying that because there are so many 300m buildings under construction now, they'll eventually become like 200m were years ago, and 400m buildings will have the same stature as 300m ones had before.

BTW Let's not forget some of those "supertalls" proposed amongst others in Pakistan, India and once again Dubai.

The Al Burj proposed for Dubai will reach 750m/2461ft to its highest spire and at this stage will be a residential tower. It's named The Pinnacle (http://www.emporis.com/en/il/pc/?id=210444&aid=8) on emporis.com.
Noida Tower (http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=232752) the supertall planned in India.

^^ Although its status is "Vision" on emporis.com, Noida would definitely be amazing if ever built.

There is info on 11 supertall visions for Tokyo, from 550m to 4,000m @ Tokyo Supertalls (http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/ci/bu/sk/li/?id=100297&bt=2&ht=2&sro=1)

Sorry I didn't mean for this to be turned into a :tiasd: debate.
I'm just saying that because there are so many 300m buildings under construction now, they'll eventually become like 200m were years ago, and 400m buildings will have the same stature as 300m ones had before.Yeah, it's all relative. Back @ the end of the 19th C., anything around 15-stories would have been amazingly tall. I guess the word "supertall" is self-explanatory though.

...and malec, it hasn't turned into a malicious debate. All is calm, all is good. :okay:

^^ Although its status is "Vision" on emporis.com, Noida would definitely be amazing if ever built.

There is info on 11 supertall visions for Tokyo, from 550m to 4,000m @ Tokyo Supertalls (http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/ci/bu/sk/li/?id=100297&bt=2&ht=2&sro=1)

Yeah, it's all relative. Back @ the end of the 19th C., anything around 15-stories would have been amazingly tall. I guess the word "supertall" is self-explanatory though.

...and malec, it hasn't turned into a malicious debate. All is calm, all is good. :okay:
4000m is not going to happen

^^ That's why it's classified a "vision"...not a "proposal".

i think 300m+ is really tall, and 400m+ is a supertall. 400m really sorts the men out from the boys.
500m is another catorgory all together. maybe super duper talls?
and as for 600m+ , its hens teeth catorgory!

i think 300m+ is really tall, and 400m+ is a supertall. 400m really sorts the men out from the boys.
That's exactly what I've been saying. Today it's different than it was some years ago. Loads of 300m buildings are being built but not many 400m ones. The status has to change with time. Imagine 50 years from now if 300m buildings are as common as any and we still call them "supertalls". It wouldn't be a big deal now would it?

I agree with you. Antennaes shouldn't count in roof height. Spires too.
That is exactly what I think!!!!!!!!!!

:tiasd: The tower on the right should win.

^Agreed. When you include spires there are >60 300m+ towers built or under construction. Without spires, there's only 30.

That is exactly what I think!!!!!!!!!!

:tiasd: The tower on the right should win.
AGREE! The Sears Tower should be taller then the Petronas (who cheated to win the WTB title by putting a spire on top). :bash:

Tall is for me 200+
a super tall is 500+ for me
a mega tall is 800+for me

Suprtall IMO equals taller than the Library tower in LA, that's the lowest. (Library included)


Even in 10 years there will still only be a handfull of 1000 footers in the world, there are maybe 30 out there now, there will probably be 50 or 60 soon, I think the top 50 or 60 towers in the world are supertalls.


BTW CITIC and Shung are pretty cheap, ESB's roof is 200 feet past theirs and it's point is hudreds of feet above their top floors, their 2 points reach just past ESB's top floor.

I would consider the world top 100 tallest supertalls and the other skyscrapers just tall

well if a supertall is a tower taller than 300m then dubai alone would have 17 UC, approved, or finshed, for example, and imo that is just nothing special anymore.
i think a supertall should be 350+ , the idea of 381 (ESB) is ok as well... :)

thanks to trances for that list:
it shows the "supertalls" , though there might be some smaller mistakes...

#LIST: NUMBER OF TOWERS OVER 300M
List of Cities with towers at or over 300M at diff stages
Might be a little flawed and not 100% correct

But All Cites with towers over 300M

Chicago 9 - C-5 / UC-1 /A-1 / P-2
Shanghai 7 - C-1 / UC-2 /A- 3 / P-1
Hong Kong 6 - C-4 / UC-1 /A- 0 / P-1
NYC 5 - C-2 / UC-1 /A-1 / P-1
Kuala Lumpur 4 - C-3 / UC-0 /A-0 / P-0 / H-1
Moscow 4 - C-0 / UC-2 /A-0 / P-2
Busan 3 - C-0 / UC-1 /A-0 / P-2 / H-0
Shenzhen 2 - C-1 / UC-0 /A-0 / P-1
Kaohsiung 2 - C-1 / UC-0 /A-0 / P-1
Nanjing 2 - C-2 / UC-0 /A-0 / P-0
Bangkok 2 - C-1 / UC-0 /A-0 / P-1
Nanjing 2 - C-0 / UC-2 /A-0 / P-0
Taipei 1 - C-1 / UC-0 /A-0 / P-0
Riyadh 1 - C-1 / UC-0 /A-0 / P-0
Houston 1 - C-1 / UC-0 /A-0 / P-0
Alanta 1 - C-1 / UC-0 /A-0 / P-0
Guangzhou 1 - C-1 / UC-0 /A-0 / P-0
Dalian 1 - C-0 / UC-1 /A-0 / P-0
Chongqing 1 - C-0 / UC-1 /A-0 / P-0
Wenzhou 1 - C-0 / UC-1 /A-0 / P-0
Los Angeles 1 - C-1 / UC-0 /A-0 / P-0
Tianjin 1 - C-0 / UC-1 /A-0 / P-0
Gold Coast 1 - C-0 / UC-1 /A-0 / P-0
Beijing 1 - C-0 / UC-1 /A-0 / P-0
Mecca 1 - C-0 / UC-1 /A-0 / P-0
Tokyo 1 - C-0 / UC-0 /A-0 / P-1
Seoul 1 - C-0 / UC-0 /A-0 / P-1
Doha 1 - C-0 / UC-0 /A-0 / P-1
Miami 1 - C-0 / UC-0 /A-0 / P-1
Pyongyang 1 - C-0 / UC-0 /A-0 / P-0 / H-1

Plus like 10 others cites with towers proposed not all realistic proposed are mentioned here

AND Top of the top
Dubai 17 - C-3 / UC-8 / A-6 / P 3

Oh Dubai, you're building 2X your next competitor. Just make a separate category :)

Do you agree that a supertall (300m+) tower isn't so special anymore?
No, here in Europe it's still very special... ;)

Nice list...but yea it needs a bit of an update...chicago now has at least 2 approved.

Nice list...but yea it needs a bit of an update...chicago now has at least 2 approved.
Or maybe 3. :cheers:

I'm sure alot of those Dubai Towers have spires. But I bet within 20 years Cities like NY, HK, Shanghai, Chicago etc. will have at least 10 300m to roof.

Chicago will have 8 to the roof soon enough
NY will have 7 If the new planned nassau tower on long island goes through ( we have to wait for the WTC and then we'll have more!)
Hong Kong Will have a bunch, Australia is getting there, Shanghai and Korean cities are crazy, hopefully some in Japan too.


But I think the 50 top in the world to roof should be supertalls.

I'm sure alot of those Dubai Towers have spires. But I bet within 20 years Cities like NY, HK, Shanghai, Chicago etc. will have at least 10 300m to roof.







thanks to malec for that compilation.

sorry i don't see many towers which would be less than 300m without its spire.

Al Burj, Proposed, 205F?, 850m+ ?
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/6087/alburj1ya.jpg

Burj Dubai, U/C, 160F (189?), 700m+ (800?)
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/8236/burjdubai3sg.jpg

Unnamed Res Tower, Proposed/Approved?, 110F, 400m+
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/4953/110funnamed3fm.jpg

23 Marina, UC/Approved?, 90F, 380m
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/9462/23marina7fw.jpg

Emirates Towers, Built, 54/56F, 309/355m
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/3975/emiratestowersf5ni.jpg

Emirates Hotel, Approved, 70F, 350m
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/9807/emirateshotel6ch.jpg

Almas Tower, U/C, 65F, 350m
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/9283/almastower3nd.jpg

Torch Tower, Approved, 80F, 345m
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/8012/torch1sg.jpg

Princess Tower, U/C, 90F, 340m
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/439/princesstower9dj.jpg

Najd Tower, U/C, 82F, ?m
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/7774/najdtower5ry.jpg

Abbco Rotana Hotel, U/C, 72F, 333m
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/263/roserotanasuites3vj.jpg

Al Durrah 2, Approved, 78F, 330m
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/7061/aldurrah3lg.jpg

One Central Park, Proposed/Approved?, 80F, 328m
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/5615/onecentralpark9cb.jpg

Burj Al Arab, Built, 50F, 321m
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/2783/burjalarab02uw.jpg

Ocean Heights, UC/Approved?, 82F, 310m
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/4974/oceanheights9tl.jpg

Marina Gardens, Approved, 75F, ?m
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/9375/marinagardens7pm.jpg

Ahmed Abdul Rahim Al Attar Tower, U/C, 70F, ?m
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/1649/ahmedabdulrahimalattartower2tr.jpg

Concerning the Dubai towers I count 11 from that list that are almost certain to be 300m to roof.

I'll knock off one tower as there are 3 there that aren't 100% approved yet and out of the 3 one'll probably be cancelled.

The Al Burj will be reduced in height considerably is what my mind tells me, but will still be over 300m to roof for sure.

So I say 10 is the final number here.

I can see Hong Kong and Shanghai having way more than this in the future though.

i can see some more for SZR, business bay and at least 1 more 300m for the marina.

romours and an ad in local paper say that there will be a new tower development in dubai, similar to JLT or JBR or Park Square, with a tower of 140F by KM properties, who have already proposed / approved another 140F for Park Square.

this city freaks me out.. sooner or later when all these 300m+ buildings are completed the city wont have any freakin sunlight during the day!......... ahh well its their problem hahaa!

Dubai ----> No Sunshine?!?!?!
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
It's dubai!...all it gets is sunshine! I'm sure the shade provided by those 300m beauties will provide be sweet and most welcomed. However, around noon there will still be plenty of sun. m))

　 　　　 　　 　＿＿＿_
　　　　　　 ／ ＼　　／＼　
.　　　　　／　（ー） 　（ー）＼
　　　　／　　 ⌒（__人__）⌒ ＼＜GOOD JOB
　　　　|　　 　　　|r┬-|　　　　|
　　　　 ＼　　　　 `ー'´　　 ／
　　　　ノ　　　　　　　　　　 　＼
　 ／´　　　　　　　　　　　　 　　ヽ
　|　　　　ｌ　　　　　　　　　　　　　　＼
　ヽ　　　 -一''''''"~~｀`'ー--､　　　-一'''''''ー-､.
　　ヽ ＿＿＿＿(⌒)(⌒)⌒)　)　　(⌒＿(⌒)⌒)⌒))

just regard how close dubai is to the equator!

The sun is shining at a very steep angle most of the day, in contrast to cities like london or St.Petersburg, so I dont see any problems with the sunlight!!!

Another aspect is, that the sun will reflect down into the streets at the mirror facades of the buildings, an effect I recognized last time in chicago....

I guess this article applies to this thread. FYI.

http://finance.sympatico.msn.ca/savingsdebt/insight/article.aspx?cp-documentid=1391396


Quote:
Perhaps height is less important than it once was - ask someone on the street what the tallest building in the world is, and they probably won't know. They may well guess it is one of those memorable buildings, like the Chrysler or Empire State.
"How much are they able to capture your imagination and your heart?" Pelli says. "Being tall doesn't necessarily do it."

300m + is a supertall for me....and 600m+ a megatall. over 1000m a Skycity :)

I think it depends on the city. If you place a 330 building in a city that had a 170m building as its previous tallest, then it would be considered a supertall in that city, for example Q1 Tower in Gold Coast, Australia.

But my definition of a supertall would be the top 5 tallest in the world at any given time. But wait until we start getting 900m + buildings, then I am sure the term will be used a lot more.