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 16th, 2013, 10:50 PM   #2421
patrykus
Registered User
 
patrykus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Poland
Posts: 3,778
Likes (Received): 1794

Quote:
Originally Posted by N.Y.C.H View Post
The height should have never been changed to 1253 feet from a rumor, should have stayed as what we had from official sources. Most likely 1253 feet was the old design before the boost up to 1550 feet, before we all thought this would be around 1250 feet.
I think James may be telling true but he as such a new member of the board shouldn't be taken as a source for ctbuh. Unless of course guys at ctbuh knows him better than we do.
__________________
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


ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
patrykus no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old September 16th, 2013, 10:53 PM   #2422
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 patrykus View Post
I think James may be telling true but he as such a new member of the board shouldn't be taken as a source for ctbuh. Unless of course guys at ctbuh knows him better than we do.
I didn't say he was lying, most likely out dated information.
N.Y.C.H no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 16th, 2013, 10:55 PM   #2423
Hudson11
Stuck on the Cross Bronx
 
Hudson11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Empire State
Posts: 9,726
Likes (Received): 23058

james has no affiliation with the ctbuh. He has a friend who had insider information on the design. Correct? The CTBUH probably knows no more about the height and design than he does.
Hudson11 está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old September 16th, 2013, 10:59 PM   #2424
Vito Corleone
Moderator
 
Vito Corleone's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: New York - Chicago
Posts: 312
Likes (Received): 324

As far as building heights go; nothing is official until the building is topped out and section drawings have been viewed by the appropriate people. The CTBUH tries to go by the most current and reliable information available on proposed and under construction projects. Designs have changed in the past and will change in the future.

Put November 8th on your calendar...that is when the CTBUH will decide on the their interpretation of the height of 1 WTC, for what it's worth.
__________________

Kanto liked this post
Vito Corleone no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 16th, 2013, 11:02 PM   #2425
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 Vito Corleone View Post
As far as building heights go; nothing is official until the building is topped out and section drawings have been viewed by the appropriate people. The CTBUH tries to go by the most current and reliable information available on proposed and under construction projects. Designs have changed in the past and will change in the future.

Put November 8th on your calendar...that is when the CTBUH will decide on the their interpretation of the height of 1 WTC, for what it's worth.
Lets be honest, James can be great and all, but i can come here and say oh this is going to be 2000 feet, doesn't mean its all that reliable. Regardless, we will know eventually
__________________

patrykus, NYCrulz liked this post
N.Y.C.H no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 16th, 2013, 11:20 PM   #2426
patrykus
Registered User
 
patrykus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Poland
Posts: 3,778
Likes (Received): 1794

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudson11 View Post
The CTBUH probably knows no more about the height and design than he does.
That was the point I was trying to make. Ctbuh shouldn't rely on a news from guy they know nothing about. They may not be connected in any way, but it's clear to me the ctbuh got the height from here where James had posted it.
__________________
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
Old September 16th, 2013, 11:54 PM   #2427
Kyll.Ing.
Registered User
 
Kyll.Ing.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Trondheim
Posts: 1,118
Likes (Received): 3735

So... at first the thread title said 472 metres, then 417 and now "300+". Perhaps the old saying was true after all, that the height of the tower drops by one inch every time somebody asks for a render. We could go pretty fast from "supertall" to "subway station" to "fallout shelter" if it continues at this rate.
__________________
Poe's law: You can't impersonate stupidity without somebody mistaking it for the real thing.

Manitopiaaa, NYCrulz, Kanto, Swiddle liked this post
Kyll.Ing. no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2013, 12:00 AM   #2428
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 Kyll.Ing. View Post
So... at first the thread title said 472 metres, then 417 and now "300+". Perhaps the old saying was true after all, that the height of the tower drops by one inch every time somebody asks for a render. We could go pretty fast from "supertall" to "subway station" to "fallout shelter" if it continues at this rate.
300+ just means we don't know how tall it will be with all this confusion..
N.Y.C.H no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2013, 02:18 AM   #2429
L.A.F.2.
Georgia Tech
 
L.A.F.2.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 4,406
Likes (Received): 5311

Great news! Hopefully we'll get a taller, not green tower. I've a hunch we will.
__________________

ThatOneGuy, Kanto liked this post
L.A.F.2. no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2013, 02:43 AM   #2430
McSky
Registered User
 
McSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 713
Likes (Received): 1916

Let's try to identify the additional costs of building a tower to 1550' occupied versus 1217' occupied. Since Extell will probably build out to the maximum allowed square footage, the construction material costs would probably be pretty similar at either height. There might be some modest difference in the core thickness between towers of differing heights, but most other elements would be fairly consistent.

Some additional costs in a 1550' occupied tower might be:

---moving materials to a greater height (steel, concrete, cladding, interior elements) and moving waste products/trash back down. Same goes for the workers.

---additional crane jumps needed to build to 333' higher

---possible additional time of construction (additional floor jumps might add time versus fewer floor plates of larger size). This would add increases in wages, insurance, utilities,etc., and might put off some tenant payments to a later date.

---mechanical considerations (heating, cooling, plumbing, elevators) for the additional height


To me, it still seems to make sense to build higher to provide the highest number of apartments with unobstructed Central Park views. But if the 1217' figure was accurate, Extell apparently reached another decision, possibly based on the costs outlined above, as well as others.

220 CPS is the wildcard in all this. How tall will that building be? If it's a supertall, it will obstruct views of the park for all 225 W 57th apartments below its pinnacle height, wherever 220 CPS is placed on its plot. The 220 CPS plot is just too narrow for it to be otherwise. From Extell's perspective, it might actually make the most sense for 220 CPS tower to be placed as far north and as far west as possible. That would open up more of the park for a clear view, especially if 225 W 57th was placed to the east of its own plot.
__________________

Kanto liked this post
McSky no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2013, 02:55 AM   #2431
MarshallKnight
Registered User
 
MarshallKnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: From the Bay to L.A.
Posts: 2,350
Likes (Received): 3597

That's Walpole's hypothesis about this too. I'd guess (if the reduced height proves to be the case) that the profit margin for a 1550ft tower, with added construction costs and 800-1000ft of obstructed views, proves less than the profit margin for a 1217ft tower with basically unobstructed views.

Then again, if this is all in turnaround again, who knows. All I know is, I hope to high heaven that the final product isn't actually green.
MarshallKnight no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2013, 03:45 AM   #2432
addo1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 4
Likes (Received): 0

Does anyone care about 107 west 57th street the 1350 ft. tower in NYC that got approved 6 days ago... and also I would wait for extell to tell us if there was a height reduction. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...092833082.html

Last edited by addo1; September 17th, 2013 at 03:46 AM. Reason: spelling
addo1 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2013, 06:00 AM   #2433
Jay
Registered User
 
Jay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: California to Barcelona
Posts: 4,056
Likes (Received): 1864

Quote:
Originally Posted by addo1 View Post
Does anyone care about 107 west 57th street the 1350 ft. tower in NYC that got approved 6 days ago... and also I would wait for extell to tell us if there was a height reduction. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...092833082.html
Yea that tower and this one together are going to look amazing
Jay no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2013, 06:02 AM   #2434
Jay
Registered User
 
Jay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: California to Barcelona
Posts: 4,056
Likes (Received): 1864

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarshallKnight View Post

Then again, if this is all in turnaround again, who knows. All I know is, I hope to high heaven that the final product isn't actually green.

I personally think Green skyscrapers look kinda cool. We already have enought huge blue ones (WTC, Hudson yards etc.)

Shanghai tower is greenish and that looks amazing
Jay no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2013, 06:04 AM   #2435
aquablue
BANNED
 
aquablue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,750
Likes (Received): 229

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay View Post
I personally think Green skyscrapers look kinda cool. We already have enought huge blue ones (WTC, Hudson yards etc.)

Shanghai tower is greenish and that looks amazing
Eurasia tower is nice and it's green. Green is good guys! I'm interested in an orange tower though.
aquablue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2013, 06:08 AM   #2436
Subsequence
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 198
Likes (Received): 50

........

Last edited by Subsequence; March 8th, 2017 at 04:35 PM.
Subsequence no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2013, 06:08 AM   #2437
desertpunk
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
 
desertpunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ELP ~ ABQ
Posts: 55,643
Likes (Received): 53485

The city will have a new Mayor soon and some projects are being rushed forward in anticipation of either more red tape for their proposal, or a window of opportunity ahead of some uncertainty. I'm wondering if this was a factor in Extell is redoing the project....



Quote:
Originally Posted by Subsequence View Post
107 west 57th street wasn't approved yet.
That appears imminent though, since JDS has committed to preserving key portions of the Steinway Building.
__________________
We are floating in space...
desertpunk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2013, 06:13 AM   #2438
SMCYB
Registered User
 
SMCYB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,164
Likes (Received): 1714

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarshallKnight View Post
I'd guess that the profit margin for a 1550ft tower, with added construction costs and 800-1000ft of obstructed views, proves less than the profit margin for a 1217ft tower with basically unobstructed views.
What do you mean by 800-1000 feet of obstructed views? Is the building on 59th somehow contingent upon the height of 222?
SMCYB no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2013, 06:16 AM   #2439
ThatOneGuy
Psst! Check my signature!
 
ThatOneGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Toronto - Bucharest - Freeport
Posts: 21,575

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay View Post
I personally think Green skyscrapers look kinda cool. We already have enought huge blue ones (WTC, Hudson yards etc.)

Shanghai tower is greenish and that looks amazing
When I think of green glass I imagine the awful glass condos of Vancouver and Toronto, with that sickly pale colour. I'd say the Shanghai Tower is slate-coloured (blue grey)

I would be fine with a dark blue or black glass.
ThatOneGuy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2013, 06:45 AM   #2440
MarshallKnight
Registered User
 
MarshallKnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: From the Bay to L.A.
Posts: 2,350
Likes (Received): 3597

Quote:
Originally Posted by SMCYB View Post

What do you mean by 800-1000 feet of obstructed views? Is the building on 59th somehow contingent upon the height of 222?
The idea is that if Extell could get Vornado to agree to situate 220 CPS (which could be a super tall) in such a way that it didn't obstruct the views of 225 57th, it might be more cost effective for them to build the shorter version of the tower.

Or to state it differently, a 1550ft tower might only be necessary if 220 CPS is blocking those lower views. An Extell, owning a crucial part of Vornado's site, has the leverage necessary to make such a deal happen.

RW explains it better than I do, but it's definitely a reasonable possibility.
__________________

SMCYB liked this post
MarshallKnight 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 03:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

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

tech management by Sysprosium