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 17th, 2013, 07:08 AM   #2441
Jay
Registered User
 
Jay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: California to Barcelona
Posts: 4,054
Likes (Received): 1863

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThatOneGuy View Post
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.

Black glass would be awesome!
__________________

Kanto liked this post
Jay no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old September 17th, 2013, 08:52 AM   #2442
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, 10:54 AM   #2443
patrykus
Registered User
 
patrykus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Poland
Posts: 3,778
Likes (Received): 1794

Quote:
Originally Posted by McSky View Post
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.
You got that wrong sir. I don't know what was the reason to scale it back, but it is no secret towers cost rise geometrically. Two towers of 200m may very well cost the same as one 300m. Especially not tapering much towers like those typically build in new york.
__________________
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 17th, 2013, 11:08 AM   #2444
Twopsy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 70
Likes (Received): 68

How are elavator shafts counted when it come to the maximum square footage you can build with the acquired air rights? Are they counted only once or at every floor where the elevator can stop? That would make a huge difference when choosing between a low fat and a tall slim building, as tall slim buildings need more space for elevators. And of course also more space for stairs.
Twopsy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2013, 11:14 AM   #2445
patrykus
Registered User
 
patrykus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Poland
Posts: 3,778
Likes (Received): 1794

It's not only the matter of space. Even If you would build two towers with same space but with 100m difference in height the taller one would still be more expensive. In taller tower core walls at base have to stand much more load so obviously they have to be much stronger.
__________________
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 17th, 2013, 01:34 PM   #2446
Eric Offereins
The only way is up
 
Eric Offereins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Rotterdam
Posts: 68,613
Likes (Received): 28170

Elevators probably don't take much of the space here? Office towers need more. This tower will probably have 1 apartment per floor in the top section?
Eric Offereins no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2013, 03:41 PM   #2447
Kanto
Roof height crusader
 
Kanto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: S-4, Papoose Lake
Posts: 5,925
Likes (Received): 3546

Quote:
Originally Posted by patrykus View Post
You got that wrong sir. I don't know what was the reason to scale it back, but it is no secret towers cost rise geometrically. Two towers of 200m may very well cost the same as one 300m. Especially not tapering much towers like those typically build in new york.
I think he has it right. You take into consideration only 1 side of the equation, namely cost per square footage. But to a successful residential tower there is another side as well. Unobstructivness of views is a very important factor in luxurious residential towers. I'll use your example to explain it:

Let's say we are deciding whether to build 1 - 300m tower or 2 - 200m towers on a certain spot. This spot is surrounded by 150m towers. Let's say 50m of our buildings have 10 apartments in them. For an apartment with an obstructed view we can ask 10 millions, for an apartment with unobstructed views we can ask 50 millions. This would mean that with 2 - 200m we sell 20 apartments for 50 millions and 60 apartments for 10 millions, so we'll earn 1,6 billions. With 1 - 300m tower we sell 30 apartments for 50 millions and 30 apartments for 10 millions, so we'll earn 1,8 billions, which is a huge difference

Now this was a purely hypothetical example and I don't claim that this is the case of this building, I only say that things aren't as black and white as you suggest and I say that we don't have the data to truly know whether it is more profitable to build a 382m tower or it is more profitable to build a 472m+ tower. The developer has this data and he will do what will earn him the most money. What this will be remains to be seen
__________________

SMCYB liked this post
Kanto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2013, 04:53 PM   #2448
Wbino49
Registered User
 
Wbino49's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: NJ..I know...
Posts: 285
Likes (Received): 246

Could any of this uncertainty/curveball/mole:} be a block by the develpoer, until 107w showed its hand..? Good ole Chrysler, ESB rivarly...
__________________

Kanto, SMCYB liked this post
Wbino49 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2013, 05:13 PM   #2449
jconyc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 416
Likes (Received): 168

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wbino49 View Post
I have two thoughts on this tower.

2. Could the possible height reduction be a result of Nordstrom having a planed opening by set date..and an additional 300 feet would mean the tower would still be UC?

For what it's worth the opening date for the Nordstrom store is slated for 2018
Seems like they have plenty of time.
__________________

Kanto liked this post
jconyc no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2013, 05:35 PM   #2450
L.A.F.2.
Georgia Tech
 
L.A.F.2.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 4,406
Likes (Received): 5307

I'd love a green tower that looks like Imperia in Moscow, but that's one of very few successful green towers on the planet. Blue and silver tend to be far classier.
__________________

bozenBDJ, ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
L.A.F.2. no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2013, 06:12 PM   #2451
patrykus
Registered User
 
patrykus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Poland
Posts: 3,778
Likes (Received): 1794

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanto View Post
I think he has it right. You take into consideration only 1 side of the equation, namely cost per square footage. But to a successful residential tower there is another side as well. Unobstructivness of views is a very important factor in luxurious residential towers. I'll use your example to explain it:

Let's say we are deciding whether to build 1 - 300m tower or 2 - 200m towers on a certain spot. This spot is surrounded by 150m towers. Let's say 50m of our buildings have 10 apartments in them. For an apartment with an obstructed view we can ask 10 millions, for an apartment with unobstructed views we can ask 50 millions. This would mean that with 2 - 200m we sell 20 apartments for 50 millions and 60 apartments for 10 millions, so we'll earn 1,6 billions. With 1 - 300m tower we sell 30 apartments for 50 millions and 30 apartments for 10 millions, so we'll earn 1,8 billions, which is a huge difference

Now this was a purely hypothetical example and I don't claim that this is the case of this building, I only say that things aren't as black and white as you suggest and I say that we don't have the data to truly know whether it is more profitable to build a 382m tower or it is more profitable to build a 472m+ tower. The developer has this data and he will do what will earn him the most money. What this will be remains to be seen
You clearly took my last post out of context. It's obvious taller apartments are more expensive. The point is this rule doesn't work forever. Maybe you can sell a unit at 300m for $50M and at 400m for $100M. But that doesn't necessarily mean you can sell one at 500m for $200M or one at 600m for $400M. And the bottom line is - you have to sell it that expensive to pay for it's construction.
__________________
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 17th, 2013, 06:12 PM   #2452
Vertical_Gotham
Registered User
 
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,437
Likes (Received): 6488

Green is such a polarizing color especially if its for a car, furniture, house, tower, etc. I think you are going to have people that will either love it or really hate it and nothing in between. A bit risky if you ask me for this project.

If it will indeed be a green, then I hope that it will be of best quality and I may end up liking it, but there will be many who will loathe it.

I think a Adrian Smith black beauty special edition would be amazing for the curvy Nordstrom with some elements of silver cross bracing a la 3 WTC on the sides.
Vertical_Gotham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2013, 07:18 PM   #2453
Wbino49
Registered User
 
Wbino49's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: NJ..I know...
Posts: 285
Likes (Received): 246

To me a perfect looking tower would be BOA Tower 4x the height.
Wbino49 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2013, 07:36 PM   #2454
Kanto
Roof height crusader
 
Kanto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: S-4, Papoose Lake
Posts: 5,925
Likes (Received): 3546

Quote:
Originally Posted by patrykus View Post
You clearly took my last post out of context. It's obvious taller apartments are more expensive. The point is this rule doesn't work forever. Maybe you can sell a unit at 300m for $50M and at 400m for $100M. But that doesn't necessarily mean you can sell one at 500m for $200M or one at 600m for $400M. And the bottom line is - you have to sell it that expensive to pay for it's construction.
And that is why I said that I don't claim that taller is more profitable, I only claimed that we don't know whether it is more profitable, less profitable, or equaly profitable. We just don't know. And even you don't know for what a 600m apartment would have to be sold to be profitable, so without numbers at your disposal the position of your bottom line is only in the range of speculation.
Kanto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2013, 07:37 PM   #2455
aquablue
BANNED
 
aquablue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,750
Likes (Received): 229

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vertical_Gotham View Post
Green is such a polarizing color especially if its for a car, furniture, house, tower, etc. I think you are going to have people that will either love it or really hate it and nothing in between. A bit risky if you ask me for this project.

If it will indeed be a green, then I hope that it will be of best quality and I may end up liking it, but there will be many who will loathe it.

I think a Adrian Smith black beauty special edition would be amazing for the curvy Nordstrom with some elements of silver cross bracing a la 3 WTC on the sides.
I think black glass would be oppressive on a tower of this height, especially so close to the park. I'm sure many people would find it intrusive as it would just dominate the eye and look overly imposing. I would think that a pale color would be better received. Either very light green, blue or silver. I would prefer not transparent, as it will end up looking blue just like one57. This tower needs to be somewhat distinctive. A silvery or platinum tinted glass tower would look amazing here especially when the sun hits and it would look very distinctive and unique in the NYC skyline.

Last edited by aquablue; September 17th, 2013 at 07:49 PM.
aquablue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2013, 08:09 PM   #2456
Vertical_Gotham
Registered User
 
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,437
Likes (Received): 6488

You think?? I dunno.

Nordstrom in black, next to a blue One57 and White south facing 107would look great imo. The Nordstrom would still be distinctive since there are no black towers gracing the skyline in the area.

Imagine a black Nordstrom in front of Central Park.


http://www.boldminimalist.com/2013/06/monochrome.html

Forgive me about the attractive gurl , but this was the only image I could find with my favorite tower, the signature building the extraordinaire "John Hancock Center" in front of a park as example. lol

Not bad imo! Btw, the tip of the antenna of the Hancock is 1550ft.
__________________

Kanto liked this post

Last edited by Vertical_Gotham; September 17th, 2013 at 08:38 PM.
Vertical_Gotham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2013, 08:27 PM   #2457
patrykus
Registered User
 
patrykus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Poland
Posts: 3,778
Likes (Received): 1794

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanto View Post
And that is why I said that I don't claim that taller is more profitable, I only claimed that we don't know whether it is more profitable, less profitable, or equaly profitable. We just don't know. And even you don't know for what a 600m apartment would have to be sold to be profitable, so without numbers at your disposal the position of your bottom line is only in the range of speculation.
This is no speculation that 100m taller apartments simply must be more expensive. And it seems $100M penthouses at one57 or 432 park ave are already not to easy to sell.

I don't know the exact reason of this tower height reduction (assuming it was any) but I do know all build and proposed towers tops at around 400m proving this really is the economical limit for new york's skyscrapers today. Show me one 500m residential tower braking ground and I will stand corrected. Until then I'll stick to my opinion.
__________________
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 17th, 2013, 08:33 PM   #2458
scalziand
Naugatuckian
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Naugatuck, CT
Posts: 455
Likes (Received): 181

Quote:
Originally Posted by Twopsy View Post
How are elavator shafts counted when it come to the maximum square footage you can build with the acquired air rights? Are they counted only once or at every floor where the elevator can stop? That would make a huge difference when choosing between a low fat and a tall slim building, as tall slim buildings need more space for elevators. And of course also more space for stairs.
AFIK, elevator shafts aren't included in square footage calculations.
__________________

Twopsy liked this post
scalziand no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2013, 11:22 PM   #2459
aquablue
BANNED
 
aquablue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,750
Likes (Received): 229

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vertical_Gotham View Post
You think?? I dunno.

Nordstrom in black, next to a blue One57 and White south facing 107would look great imo. The Nordstrom would still be distinctive since there are no black towers gracing the skyline in the area.

Imagine a black Nordstrom in front of Central Park.


http://www.boldminimalist.com/2013/06/monochrome.html

Forgive me about the attractive gurl , but this was the only image I could find with my favorite tower, the signature building the extraordinaire "John Hancock Center" in front of a park as example. lol

Not bad imo! Btw, the tip of the antenna of the Hancock is 1550ft.
It could work fine (although the 'gurl' is nicer), however I find that something like this color would look more spectuacular and unique for NYC. NYC doesn't have many silvery tinted towers that would standout well but not be overwhelming and dominant looking against the greenery of the park.

Photo from: http://www.arabianbusiness.com/photo...1#.UjdzpMZ6b0c

__________________

Vertical_Gotham liked this post

Last edited by aquablue; September 17th, 2013 at 11:28 PM.
aquablue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2013, 11:27 PM   #2460
ThatOneGuy
Psst! Check my signature!
 
ThatOneGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Toronto - Bucharest - Freeport
Posts: 21,487

I like that
__________________
Check out my band, Till I Conquer!

aquablue liked this post
ThatOneGuy 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 09:34 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