daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > Supertalls

Supertalls Discussions of projects under construction between 300-599m/1,000-1,999ft tall.
» Proposed Supertalls



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old September 4th, 2013, 05:28 AM   #2161
ThatOneGuy
Psst! Check my signature!
 
ThatOneGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Toronto - Bucharest - Freeport
Posts: 21,476

Yes, you are all so spoiled. You could be living in a third-world country with only 100 meter tall buildings. Imagine that.
__________________
Check out my band, Till I Conquer!

Kyll.Ing., L.A.F.2. liked this post
ThatOneGuy no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old September 4th, 2013, 05:29 AM   #2162
N.Y.C.H
Registered User
 
N.Y.C.H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: NorthEast
Posts: 352
Likes (Received): 407

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertWalpole View Post
Guys,

Let's not act like ten year olds and throw a conniption because the tower will "only" be 1,250 feet. If it's a great design, then who cares?
Yes, now lets throw jabs because some admit disappointment, rather than trying to compensate by talking about other potential sites for development. It is pretty ridiculous, considering you were the same who jumped on this thread all excited posting a permit filing for 1550 feet, to now throw jabs at others because it just went back down to the same figure.
N.Y.C.H no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2013, 06:04 AM   #2163
azn_man12345
Registered User
 
azn_man12345's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Wichita
Posts: 1,197
Likes (Received): 114

I can't say I'm not disappointed in the height decrease, but I still trust that this building will end up beautiful. I'm sure we'll have a serious proposal for NY taller than 1500 feet to the roof by the end of the decade.
azn_man12345 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2013, 06:06 AM   #2164
NYCrulz
America started it all !!
 
NYCrulz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: turku
Posts: 779
Likes (Received): 2370

Now I remember the day, when there was an article that buzzed Barnett joking about the height-reduction, and no body had ever taken it seriously. Now, it comes to this.
I just wish, the news on height reduction was nothing more than an initial let-down for an uproar of excitement later...
Designs can always be good, but this height-thing just knocks the door once in a while, IMO!
NYCrulz no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2013, 06:11 AM   #2165
Funkyskunk2
Registered User
 
Funkyskunk2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 619
Likes (Received): 808

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertWalpole View Post
Guys,

Let's not act like ten year olds and throw a conniption because the tower will "only" be 1,250 feet. If it's a great design, then who cares?
What happened to the bookends of central park as you liked to call it? I'm not angry that a tower that I've never seen is getting a downgrade, I'm pissed that New York is a city that whacks the likes of Tower Verre, is intimidated by a mere storm, and allows a box the tallest tower in the city. Again.
Funkyskunk2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2013, 06:21 AM   #2166
RobertWalpole
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,607
Likes (Received): 2508

Quote:
Originally Posted by Funkyskunk2 View Post
What happened to the bookends of central park as you liked to call it? I'm not angry that a tower that I've never seen is getting a downgrade, I'm pissed that New York is a city that whacks the likes of Tower Verre, is intimidated by a mere storm, and allows a box the tallest tower in the city. Again.
1,250 and 1,400 will still be bookends.

Once again, what first-world city comes remotely close to NY right now? None.
RobertWalpole no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2013, 06:33 AM   #2167
Funkyskunk2
Registered User
 
Funkyskunk2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 619
Likes (Received): 808

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertWalpole View Post
1,250 and 1,400 will still be bookends.

Once again, what first-world city comes remotely close to NY right now? None.
I'm not really interested in what other cities do, west side development is more than enough to convince NYC is unmatched. I just hope the the FAR boost goes through so maybe something along park ave can take attention away from 432.

And while convincing this guy could still be full of it. A green tower? Strange.
Funkyskunk2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2013, 06:34 AM   #2168
rencharles
We will never forget
 
rencharles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 579
Likes (Received): 93

Now Macklowe and CIM Group must be laughing of Barnett, who made a lot of noise, but will build a smaller tower than 432 park avenue. Well, it seems that 432 will be the tallest building in NY by roof height for a few years. Design good or not, is a big disappointment.
Funny that Bernett said that this tower would not have a crown, now going to have? Strange...

Now let's speculate about the height of 220 CPS to the end of the day be another building 1200 FT.
rencharles no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2013, 06:37 AM   #2169
sbarn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC & Bay Area
Posts: 1,222
Likes (Received): 991

While the design sounds promising, I have to say news of a possible 300 foot height reduction is super disappointing.
sbarn no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2013, 06:45 AM   #2170
RobertWalpole
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,607
Likes (Received): 2508

Quote:
Originally Posted by Funkyskunk2 View Post
I'm not really interested in what other cities do, west side development is more than enough to convince NYC is unmatched. I just hope the the FAR boost goes through so maybe something along park ave can take attention away from 432.

And while convincing this guy could still be full of it. A green tower? Strange.
I think that he's legitimate. As noted, a friend of mine who's an architect said that renderings for something very special would be released in Sept. She could not disclose anything else. Perhaps she and our new colleague on SSP were referring to the same thing.

Anyway, HK, which I love, has only four towers with roofs that exceed 1,000 feet. Shanghai has five, and Dubai has 9. As set forth above, NY has 14 supertalls planned.

Last edited by RobertWalpole; September 4th, 2013 at 02:37 PM.
RobertWalpole no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2013, 07:11 AM   #2171
Subsequence
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 198
Likes (Received): 50

.....

Last edited by Subsequence; March 8th, 2017 at 04:39 PM.
Subsequence no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2013, 09:20 AM   #2172
Jay
Registered User
 
Jay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: California to Barcelona
Posts: 4,054
Likes (Received): 1863

Quote:
Originally Posted by azn_man12345 View Post
I can't say I'm not disappointed in the height decrease, but I still trust that this building will end up beautiful. I'm sure we'll have a serious proposal for NY taller than 1500 feet to the roof by the end of the decade.

Look, I'm really not trying to be pessimistic, I love NYC as much as anyone if not more, but people need to stop hoping for a roof higher than 432 because it's never gonna happen, I don't want to be the bearer of bad news but I just don't want people to get their hopes up and be let down. I always knew 1500+ was too much for NY

ok?
Jay no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2013, 03:08 PM   #2173
RobertWalpole
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,607
Likes (Received): 2508

Can anyone state why NY is leading first-world cities by such a wide margin in terms of supertall construction? Sure, it's the financial and media capital, but London, Paris, SF, L.A., Singapore, and HK are important too, and they can't remotely compete. Singapore and HK don't even have any supertall s planned right now.

Boston and Seattle are very important second-tier gateways, and they can hardly build above 170m.
RobertWalpole no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2013, 03:13 PM   #2174
Uaarkson
Sheet Metal Sketcher
 
Uaarkson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: East Side Flint
Posts: 2,527
Likes (Received): 1028

I can't think of any cities with as many supertalls in the pipeline, developed or otherwise. Dubai maybe, if you count dead and stale proposals (i.e. every one of them)
__________________
Manhattan http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7S1MySJoFl8&hd=1 (HD)

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
Uaarkson no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2013, 03:14 PM   #2175
bozenBDJ
the World Trade Center
 
bozenBDJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: BDJ, ID-KS
Posts: 23,631
Likes (Received): 9717

Singapore (currently) has a 280m height restriction due to the Paya Lebar airbase (and Changi?).
Hong Kong, well i don't know
bozenBDJ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2013, 03:43 PM   #2176
Judgejudy123
Skyscraper
 
Judgejudy123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: London-Malaga-Barcelona
Posts: 426
Likes (Received): 185

Dissapointed about the height decrease, but I Love the design and it will still be cool to see
__________________
COME AND JOIN : GTC Eastern European Cities

LONDON
Judgejudy123 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2013, 04:39 PM   #2177
RobertWalpole
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,607
Likes (Received): 2508

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertWalpole View Post
Can anyone state why NY is leading first-world cities by such a wide margin in terms of supertall construction? Sure, it's the financial and media capital, but London, Paris, SF, L.A., Singapore, and HK are important too, and they can't remotely compete. Singapore and HK don't even have any supertall s planned right now.

Boston and Seattle are very important second-tier gateways, and they can hardly build above 170m.

1. 1 WTC
2. 2 WTC
3. 3 WTC
4. Torre Verre
5. 225 W 57th
6. 105 W 57th
7. 432 Park
8. One HY
9. Girasole
10. E Tower at HY (basically a supertall)
11. 22 Thames
12. Residential tower on West St at St. John's site
13. One57
14. 80 South St.

There are many more to come.
RobertWalpole no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2013, 04:58 PM   #2178
Kyll.Ing.
Registered User
 
Kyll.Ing.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Trondheim
Posts: 1,084
Likes (Received): 3614

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertWalpole View Post
Can anyone state why NY is leading first-world cities by such a wide margin in terms of supertall construction? Sure, it's the financial and media capital, but London, Paris, SF, L.A., Singapore, and HK are important too, and they can't remotely compete. Singapore and HK don't even have any supertall s planned right now.

Boston and Seattle are very important second-tier gateways, and they can hardly build above 170m.
I guess it's partially down to culture (anything NOT a skyscraper on Manhattan would instantly be overshadowed by practically all the rest of the city), and partially due to Manhattan's limited area. There is no room to expand the city core horizontally, but plenty of available airspace and fine ground confitions. Also, Manhattan is easiest to traverse by foot or subway. All of NYC's CBD is within that little peninsula. If you want prime estate in New York, you have to build on Manhattan where the land value is high and the plots quite small. You may find cheaper land and bigger plots in the outskirts of the city, but then customers and potential finance partners would have a harder time reaching you. Anything on Manhattan is limited to a small footprint, so if you need a large floor area, the building would have to be tall.

There is need for more business space in New York, but Manhattan is considered the only good place to build it, there's no outskirt you can develop into a new business district (unlike in many other cities). Also unlike other cities, Manhattan is so devoid of room that buildings by necessity have to be tall to justify their price, as well as to stand out from their neighbours.

Hong Kong also has limited room, but perhaps not quite the same demand for more office space. They do fine with regular skyscrapers or highrises. Then again, Shenzen "just down the road" is booming with supertalls, so I'm not quite sure why there are so few of them planned in Hong Kong.
__________________
Poe's law: You can't impersonate stupidity without somebody mistaking it for the real thing.
Kyll.Ing. no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2013, 05:57 PM   #2179
RobertWalpole
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,607
Likes (Received): 2508

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyll.Ing. View Post
...There is need for more business space in New York, but Manhattan is considered the only good place to build it, there's no outskirt you can develop into a new business district (unlike in many other cities)....
There are many peripheral business centers outside of Manhattan.
RobertWalpole no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 4th, 2013, 06:00 PM   #2180
patrykus
Registered User
 
patrykus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Poland
Posts: 3,778
Likes (Received): 1794

Bummer with the height decrease. At least we will see the renderings soon. I was a bit tired of this thread being bumped constantly for no news at all. It actually proves in a hard way that all this discussion so far was pointless speculation - the reality proved to be completely different. Maybe in future we will take dob fillings data with more reserve.

Btw, I find it really hilarious how suddenly everyone started comparing NY with cities of the world when one ny's tower got drastically reduced in height. Compensating much anyone
__________________
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CComingSoon/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C

patrykus no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
217 west 57th street, 225 west 57th street, central park south, cps, extell, new york, nordstrom tower, nyc, supertall

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 05:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu