SkyscraperCity Forum banner

MANILA | Torre de Manila | 165m | 47 fl | Com

20K views 40 replies 16 participants last post by  ArkiLurker 
#1 ·
DMCI's Torre de Manila [47F|res] @ Taft Ave., Ermita, Manila (across Rizal Park)











tORR
 
See less See more
6
#3 ·
Madrigals monetize long-idled properties
http://www.manilastandardtoday.com/insideBusop.htm?f=2011/september/26/vicagustin.isx&d=2011/september/26

FRESH from having sold a never-developed property at Horseshoe Village-Santolan to Rockwell Land, the Madrigal clan has just disposed of another piece of empty land behind the ruins of the Jai Alai complex in Manila.

As to DMCI Homes, the developer apparently plans to capitalize on the proximity of the Jai Alai site to City Hall, Adamson University and the nearby schools and the LRT station as well as the property’s still unobstructed view of the Manila Bay (without the Roxas Boulevard premium) as selling points of the planned condo complex.
:)
 
#5 ·
#6 ·
Carlos Celdran takes to Facebook to block condo project
By Jerome Aning
Philippine Daily Inquirer
11:49 pm | Sunday, June 10th, 2012



Cultural and environment activists are trying to enlist public support to block the construction of a high-rise condominium building that they claim will destroy the public’s view of the Rizal Monument in Rizal Park.
Tour guide Carlos Celdran has initiated an online petition and has even put up a Facebook page to call on DMCI Holdings to abandon its plan to build the 41-story Torre de Manila Condominium on Taft Avenue, behind the lot previously occupied by the Manila Jai Alai building.
In his posts on Facebook and another social networking site, Tumblr, Celdran said, “It is outside [the park] but it impedes on the sanctity of the heritage landscape. You think any mayor or developer in Paris would allow an ugly private condo to be built right behind the Eiffel Tower? I’m sorry. But they should find a new lot. This looks like an interesting legal battle for the new law [on national heritage sites].”
In the online petition (http://www.change.org/petitions/no-to-dmci-s-torre-de-manila-project), the condominium project was compared to the two factory chimney stacks (demolished in 2009) that had also ruined people’s view of the Rizal Monument.
Celdran called on Filipinos to speak up about the future building and for DMCI to rethink the project.
“Not only is this building offensive to our national hero, our national identity and all things good and true—but it’s also a ridiculous investment,” he said as he warned prospective buyers about traffic and the possibility of losing view of the Manila Bay sunset since the building was on “sandwich property” or in the center of the block.

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/210295/carlos-celdran-takes-to-facebook-to-block-condo-project

:eek:hno::eek:hno:
 
#7 ·
CONDO NEAR LUNETA VIOLATES NO LAW - INQUIRER NEWS

The Manila city building officer who faces charges from city councilors following his approval of a 40-story condominium defended his actions amid criticism that the building would mar the view of Rizal Park.
Melvin Balagot said he granted a building permit to the developer DMCI Homes for its Torre de Manila project on July 5 because the company had duly submitted all requirements, including an approval from the city planning office in the form of a zoning permit.
In an interview with the Inquirer Tuesday, he insisted that DMCI was clear of any violations under the national building code and other laws, and therefore had a right to a speedy approval of its application.
“Based on the building code, they have no problems. They complied with all requirements and we couldn’t sit on it. There were no grounds for delay and no reason not to issue a building permit,” Balagot stressed.
Balagot maintained that the proposed site for Torre de Manila was a kilometer away from the Rizal monument and that there were no heritage laws restricting the construction of a high-rise building within that distance.
He also disclosed that DMCI had received a height clearance permit from the Civil Aviation Authority of the Philippines, allowing the construction of the 165-meter-tall building on Taft Avenue, Ermita.
Balagot also denied disrespecting the city council by not attending its public hearings in relation to the project. DMCI officials were also invited to the hearings but did not attend and only sent a letter to the council.
“We sent them a letter requesting that they address their invitation to Manila Mayor Alfredo Lim as a courtesy. We can only go with his clearance,” Balagot explained. He invited the councilors to just see him at his office if they have any questions or requests for documents.
He noted with regret that Torre de Manila, despite having no legal infringements, had come under heavy fire. “They keep saying Manila is being left behind. Now here comes a private developer and they’re attacking it.”
“We’ll face the council’s complaints and we’ll answer them in the proper forum,” he said.
The Manila City Council last week released a committee report alleging that DMCI Homes and city officials acted “in conspiracy” to have the Torre de Manila project approved.
Cultural activist and tour guide Carlos Celdran, who has actively promoted Manila’s historical landmarks, launched an online campaign last month against the project, saying that it would mar the view of the iconic monument of national hero Dr. Jose Rizal at the park also known as Luneta.
Celdran later presented to the council a petition that had gathered more than 4,000 signatories asking DMCI to reconsider its plans.
The committee report alleged that Torre de Manila, based on plans posted on the DMCI website, would violate the city’s zoning ordinance. It recommended the filing of appropriate charges in the Manila Metropolitan Trial Court against Balagot and the company officials.
According to the council, the condominium would exceed the floor area ratio and the maximum height for buildings in that area which is considered a university zone.
In a statement Tuesday, Celdran hailed the council’s move as “a landmark” decision in Manila’s history, but maintained that it should not be taken as an attack on developers but rather as a protective measure serving the interest of its citizens.
“This decision shows that Manileños take importance in their history. Manileños will not accept the commercialization and visual desecration of its most important historical sites, but more importantly, this is a signal to people out there that if they want to do business in the historical parts of our city, they must respect that history along with its laws,” Celdran said.
For more information /inquiry about torre de manila
02 5050185 /09065407109
www.dmcipropertyexpert.com
 
#9 ·
luneta park is not the Central Park of the Philippines to be surrounded by highrises on all sides... its more like our historic National Mall of the capital city

i hope this project is cancelled & continued somewhere else ..maybe just turn the lot into some other project thats not a highrise or sell it to the nearby schools/university
 
#21 ·
Lolz I am not torre de Manila agent. I am actually an American college student who married a Filipino man. I fell in love with the Phils and we travel back several times a year. I just haven't quite got the hang of posting here, this is only my third post. I have to say in my opinion I think the building is really classy, but I always have been a sucker for art deco.
 
#27 ·
mike.gutierrez said:
the rendition is behind sta. isabel college. it should be further right.
After a mathematical analysis of the angle of elevation, given the distance of Torre from the monument and its actual height and location, I have concluded that the previous photo renderings were inaccurate. I've provided renders very close to how Torre will be seen from the Rizal Monument in Nov 2016. I can provide you my computations if you guys wanna see it.

 
#34 ·
Dinzhaper, actually, the distance of Torre De Manila from rizal's statue is 870 meters. That would mean that Torre de manila will look smaller than your render. I take your renders more accurate because it includes mathematical computations, than those other pictures showing around.
 
#29 ·
anak_mm said:
haha sales agents in defense, now your very own render is also inaccurate?

^^ it looks like torre de manila is now just a midrise :lol: ... the school building is only a couple stories tall & you can see it quite clearly torre de manila is 40+ storeys
If you wanna dispute math and my computation then you are welcome to provide some of yours. We will see how it fairs with the computations Ive posted. And for the record, I am an engineer and I work abroad and definitely I am no DMCI agent, get your facts straight dude so that you dont sound sillier than you are.
 
#31 ·
Here is the computation for my renderings.
Key Formula used: Pythagorean Theorem, Trigonometry (SOHCAHTOA), Angle of Elevation

Given :
Height of Torre = 165 meters
Distance of Torre and the monument = 789 meters
Distance of the camera from the monument = 20 meters
Height of Camera = 5'6" = 1.67 meters

1. Using the Pythagorean Theorem formula we can solve for the Hypotenuse.
Formula : C^2=a^2+b^2

= (789+20)^2 + (165-1.67)^2
C = 825 meters

2. Using Trigonometry we can solve for the Angle of Elevation using the height of Torre and Hypotenuse.
Formula : Sin (Angle of Elevation) = Opposite / Hypotenuse

Angle of elevation = Arc Sine (Opposite / Hypotenuse)
Opposite = Height of Torre - Height of the camera = (165-1.67) = 163.33 meters
Hypotenuse = 825 meters

Angle of elevation = ArcSine (163.33/825)
=ArcSine (0.1978 )
=11.4083 degrees

3. Using tangent formula (Tangent (Angle of Elevation) = Opposite / Adjacent)
Opposite = Height of Torre as seen from the camera = ?
Adjacent = distance of Camera from monument = 20 meters
Angle of Elevation = 11.4083
Tangent (11.4083) = Height of Torre as seen from the camera / 20 meters

Height of Torre as seen from the camera= Tangent (11.4083) x 20 = 4 meters

4. In comparison to the height of the monument = 12.7 meters, the height of Torre is almost half of the monument' s height 20 meters away from it.

height = 165m
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top