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 August 23rd, 2016, 03:40 PM   #7301
cnbnca
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 215
Likes (Received): 235

It looks like in the first picture that they have removed the climbing mechanism for the core wall. Or maybe re-configuring?
cnbnca no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old August 25th, 2016, 11:40 AM   #7302
nyc15
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 190
Likes (Received): 159

Someone can tell me what is the height on the parapet of This Tower???
Can central Park Tower surpass entizar Tower as we still dont know the final height ???!!!!

Last edited by nyc15; August 27th, 2016 at 04:57 PM.
nyc15 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 27th, 2016, 11:15 PM   #7303
lwetli
Registered User
 
lwetli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 86
Likes (Received): 424

(8-27-16)
Untitled by lance wetli, on Flickr

Untitled by lance wetli, on Flickr
__________________
lwetli no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2016, 04:51 AM   #7304
600West218
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,734
Likes (Received): 1574

Spoke to two construction workers at the site. Some interesting info.

They say two years until it is topped out.

The still braces on the eastern side of the core ARE the beginning of the cantelever. They said the first floor of the cantalever will take 3 months to make but that after that it should speed up.

On the west side the steel continues to climb for Nordstrom. However, it will convert from steel to concrete and be just like the cantalever on the other side at that same height. It won't look like a cantalever but it will effectively be like one.

Two years? yikes. wish this would climb faster.
600West218 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2016, 11:22 AM   #7305
nyc15
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 190
Likes (Received): 159

It s the weird construction ever That i see in my life
nyc15 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2016, 03:49 PM   #7306
jogiba
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 264
Likes (Received): 434

Check this screenshot from a video shot over NYC that looks like it was shot from the north looking south with the ESB and what looks like 432 Park Ave to the south of it !


Now compare it with an image looking north .
__________________

Zaz965, LoneLiner, Леонид liked this post
jogiba no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2016, 06:43 PM   #7307
MarshallKnight
Registered User
 
MarshallKnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: From the Bay to L.A.
Posts: 2,341
Likes (Received): 3586

That first shot is looking north, it's just been flipped horizontally.

__________________

streetscapeer, airpix84, Swiddle, Zaz965 liked this post

Last edited by MarshallKnight; August 29th, 2016 at 08:32 PM.
MarshallKnight no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 30th, 2016, 12:32 AM   #7308
jzquince69
jimmy
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: orlando
Posts: 2,891
Likes (Received): 1783

Isn't it kind of odd how in Manhattan, a supertall hadn't been built since the WTC in the mid-seventies, while places like Shanghai, HK, and Dubai kept building supertalls. But then, once Freedom Tower began moving forward all of these other supertall buildings have been proposed and a few already built. Just like that there's a market for them now in Manhattan?
jzquince69 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 30th, 2016, 12:55 AM   #7309
Nyghtscape
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 43
Likes (Received): 108

Quote:
Originally Posted by jzquince69 View Post
Isn't it kind of odd how in Manhattan, a supertall hadn't been built since the WTC in the mid-seventies, while places like Shanghai, HK, and Dubai kept building supertalls. But then, once Freedom Tower began moving forward all of these other supertall buildings have been proposed and a few already built. Just like that there's a market for them now in Manhattan?
Not odd at all. A couple of issues that make NYC different from Dubai or Shanghai:

1) Hubris: The buildings in both China and Dubai really do not have any real purpose for being as big as they are other than the ego of the developers. There certainly was no need for that kind of density in Dubai (Shanghai maybe), but Burj Khalifa was basically built as a marketing stunt to help drive low-rise development int he surrounding area.

2) Lot size: The reason Chicago surpassed NYC in terms of building heights in the 70s is because the average block in Chicago is larger, and therefore more able to accommodate a higher building. NYC also had the 1960 Zoning law which said that buildings could go as high as needed provided there was a proportional amount of area left around the perimeter of the structure. This became the model for the bastardized "tower on a plaza" that overran NYC in the 1960s. It produced a kind of bland building on a concrete plaza but also dictated a cap to the overall height of buildings because the height had to be relational to the amount of plaza. Again places like Hong Kong didn't have this kind of stipulation (nor was there much of a planning committee to stand in the place of demolishing large swaths of the city to build something new).

3) Economics and vertical transportation: Most of the new super-super talls being built both in NYC and abroad are not commercial office buildings. They are residential. Office buildings are all about the amount of leasable area and the taller you go the more elevators and fire-stairs you need. This is compounded post-9/11 when redundancy is required. Combined with the small lot sizes in NYC (not an issue in China or Dubai) you pretty much are forced to do a residential building (or a hotel) where you do not need a ton of vertical transport. NYC has a tradition of large loft-like office buildings (some of those art deco floor plates are monstrous). Volume was prioritized over height especially in the 1950s and 60s, when developers didn't care so much about quality just turning out generic office stock.

The original WTC was a textbook example of all of this. It was a 200x200 tower (or towers) on a plaza, enabled by the creation of the super block. Vertical transportation was kept to a minimum with stacked shafts and minimal space allocated to fire escapes and no redundancy. It was built and designed for money making.

Almost all of NYC's supertalls are residential, with the exceptions of 1 and 2 WTC, 30 Hudson Yards and One Vanderbilt (maybe one or two others). This allows for a handful of rich tenants to cover the costs of construction (as opposed to the Middle East where Sheiks or governments are footing the bill) and almost no cost to the developer for the interior fit-outs (where typical TI's incur some cost to the developer). Combined with modern construction and design technology it is now possible for buildings like 111 W 57th to go up where 10 or 15 years ago that wouldn't have been the case.

Should also point out that Shanghai and Dubai's building boom is in the last 20 years. Really since the late 90s, whereas NYC went through a building boom in the 80s and early 90s. What is odd, though, if I might add, are the super talls popping up in places like Brooklyn where they are completely unnecessary and really are out of scale to the surrounding locale. Also I think some of these things go in spurts. Like the ridiculous epidemic of gigantic ferris wheels going up all over the place (like what city council member was like "we need a giant ferris wheel!")
__________________

Last edited by Nyghtscape; August 30th, 2016 at 01:00 AM.
Nyghtscape no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 30th, 2016, 04:36 AM   #7310
SMCYB
Registered User
 
SMCYB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,100
Likes (Received): 1629

Quote:
Originally Posted by jzquince69 View Post
Isn't it kind of odd how in Manhattan, a supertall hadn't been built since the WTC in the mid-seventies, while places like Shanghai, HK, and Dubai kept building supertalls. But then, once Freedom Tower began moving forward all of these other supertall buildings have been proposed and a few already built. Just like that there's a market for them now in Manhattan?
In addition to what Nyghtscape said so well, One World Trade Center broke through the scare barrier allowing others to do the same. After September 11, people were afraid to build tall out of fear. One World Trade Center boldly went tall and put an end to that fear.
SMCYB no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 30th, 2016, 06:55 AM   #7311
SSMEX
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 109
Likes (Received): 86

Quote:
Originally Posted by SMCYB View Post
In addition to what Nyghtscape said so well, One World Trade Center broke through the scare barrier allowing others to do the same. After September 11, people were afraid to build tall out of fear. One World Trade Center boldly went tall and put an end to that fear.
To further add to this discussion, so, so many supertalls (and pretty much all tallest record holders) are built for prestige. Even the Chrysler/ESB were driven, to some extent, by developer prestige rather than for absolutely economic sense. Buildings like the Petronas Towers, Taipei 101, and now the Burj Khalifa (and soon the Jeddah Tower) were largely financed and led by local governments to put the city on the map.

Unlike something like a container ship, where an increase in size almost linearly translates into an increase in efficiency, taller buildings actually decrease in economic efficiency because of how they scale. The width of a building is restricted by its lot size and the distance between the center of the building and its windows, so taller buildings are actually just skinnier, rather than scaled up both in height and width. The primary disadvantage of skinnier buildings, besides structural cost and limitations, is vertical circulation. In supertalls, each additional floor requires that much more elevator capacity, and even one additional elevator shaft will remove useable floorspace from all the floors below, which quickly adds up.

There are ways to mitigate this (express elevators and sky lobbies is one), but the issue can't be circumvented entirely. The supertalls that are being built in NYC largely don't have this issue because they are luxury residential units, which have much lower occupant densities than offices (think one floor per few people versus one cubicle per person).
SSMEX no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 30th, 2016, 02:21 PM   #7312
jogiba
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 264
Likes (Received): 434

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarshallKnight View Post
That first shot is looking north, it's just been flipped horizontally.

That is weird since it's in this video .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bGA_VHc73o


Last edited by jogiba; August 30th, 2016 at 02:27 PM.
jogiba no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 30th, 2016, 03:12 PM   #7313
phoenixboi08
Registered User
 
phoenixboi08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,542
Likes (Received): 791

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nyghtscape View Post
Not odd at all. A couple of issues that make NYC different from Dubai or Shanghai:

1) Hubris: The buildings in both China and Dubai really do not have any real purpose for being as big as they are other than the ego of the developers. There certainly was no need for that kind of density in Dubai (Shanghai maybe), but Burj Khalifa was basically built as a marketing stunt to help drive low-rise development int he surrounding area.

...

3) Economics and vertical transportation: Most of the new super-super talls being built both in NYC and abroad are not commercial office buildings. They are residential. Office buildings are all about the amount of leasable area and the taller you go the more elevators and fire-stairs you need. This is compounded post-9/11 when redundancy is required. Combined with the small lot sizes in NYC (not an issue in China or Dubai)...
They're economic development tools...You kind of got at this tangentially, but if you really think about most of the largest projects, many of them were greenfield, or else were built atop a large swath of a former neighborhood (bulldozed). The basic strategy is to find a large swath of cheap land (or create it) and appreciate vast amounts of it through 1-2 large-scale developments.

A lot of emerging economies (China, UAE, Saudi, etc) are also well equipped for this model, since a lot of the value appreciation is realized by the state rather than private property holders (i.e. observe the surrounding development proposals for Burj Khalifa, Kingdom Tower, etc).

The basic point isn't the towers themselves, because the value isn't to be realized in the tower itself (i.e. ROI from leases), but by its ability to drive dramatic increases in nearby, formerly "free" land, which they make a tidy profit from.

It's an investment-driven strategy that actually works quite well: developers get cheaper and more valuable land than they otherwise would (in the city center) that they can justifiably ask high rents for and the governments generate generous returns, in the short term (e.g. land that goes from being a few hundred dollars per hectare ends up at several thousand) while increasing their tax base and attracting FDI, in the long term. As an aside, this is why it's silly to think of China's economy as export-led (except for a few years in the 70s-80s), since it's very clearly been investment-led. It's also the reason why there is a bit of uncertainty (to say the least) about what they going to do since FDI has been decreasing, steadily, and more capital is flowing out of the country, than they'd like.

For what it's worth, this notion has been gaining steam, in the US, which is why we're seeing a lot of proposals like Hudson Yards District, Atlantic Yards/Pacific Station, , 30th Street Station District, and so on. In fact, the original WTC and Battery Park City also used this model...to some extent. The major difference is that cities are now working to actually implement some elements of value capture: the Hudson Yards are held up as a harbinger of this. Cuomo's 'Empire Station' project can also be though of, similarly.

In any case, the metric people should pay attention to is leasable area, rather than height, because tenants buy space by sq. ft (m). Supertalls aren't really that economical, because a developer would be required to ask very high rents to justify them; however, if there are enough tenants willing to do so - and building mixed-use helps - it can work out, handsomely. Especially, if they own a large share of the surrounding land
__________________
MCRP '16

bodegavendetta, cnbnca, Zaz965, Philly Bud liked this post

Last edited by phoenixboi08; September 1st, 2016 at 02:58 PM.
phoenixboi08 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 1st, 2016, 05:38 AM   #7314
cnbnca
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 215
Likes (Received): 235

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nyghtscape View Post
Not odd at all. A couple of issues that make NYC different from Dubai or Shanghai:

1) Hubris: The buildings in both China and Dubai really do not have any real purpose for being as big as they are other than the ego of the developers. There certainly was no need for that kind of density in Dubai (Shanghai maybe), but Burj Khalifa was basically built as a marketing stunt to help drive low-rise development int he surrounding area.

2) Lot size: The reason Chicago surpassed NYC in terms of building heights in the 70s is because the average block in Chicago is larger, and therefore more able to accommodate a higher building. NYC also had the 1960 Zoning law which said that buildings could go as high as needed provided there was a proportional amount of area left around the perimeter of the structure. This became the model for the bastardized "tower on a plaza" that overran NYC in the 1960s. It produced a kind of bland building on a concrete plaza but also dictated a cap to the overall height of buildings because the height had to be relational to the amount of plaza. Again places like Hong Kong didn't have this kind of stipulation (nor was there much of a planning committee to stand in the place of demolishing large swaths of the city to build something new).

3) Economics and vertical transportation: Most of the new super-super talls being built both in NYC and abroad are not commercial office buildings. They are residential. Office buildings are all about the amount of leasable area and the taller you go the more elevators and fire-stairs you need. This is compounded post-9/11 when redundancy is required. Combined with the small lot sizes in NYC (not an issue in China or Dubai) you pretty much are forced to do a residential building (or a hotel) where you do not need a ton of vertical transport. NYC has a tradition of large loft-like office buildings (some of those art deco floor plates are monstrous). Volume was prioritized over height especially in the 1950s and 60s, when developers didn't care so much about quality just turning out generic office stock.

The original WTC was a textbook example of all of this. It was a 200x200 tower (or towers) on a plaza, enabled by the creation of the super block. Vertical transportation was kept to a minimum with stacked shafts and minimal space allocated to fire escapes and no redundancy. It was built and designed for money making.

Almost all of NYC's supertalls are residential, with the exceptions of 1 and 2 WTC, 30 Hudson Yards and One Vanderbilt (maybe one or two others). This allows for a handful of rich tenants to cover the costs of construction (as opposed to the Middle East where Sheiks or governments are footing the bill) and almost no cost to the developer for the interior fit-outs (where typical TI's incur some cost to the developer). Combined with modern construction and design technology it is now possible for buildings like 111 W 57th to go up where 10 or 15 years ago that wouldn't have been the case.

Should also point out that Shanghai and Dubai's building boom is in the last 20 years. Really since the late 90s, whereas NYC went through a building boom in the 80s and early 90s. What is odd, though, if I might add, are the super talls popping up in places like Brooklyn where they are completely unnecessary and really are out of scale to the surrounding locale. Also I think some of these things go in spurts. Like the ridiculous epidemic of gigantic ferris wheels going up all over the place (like what city council member was like "we need a giant ferris wheel!")
Thanks for this excellent post and the work you put into it!
__________________

Nyghtscape liked this post
cnbnca no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 1st, 2016, 07:20 AM   #7315
ILNY
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 430
Likes (Received): 5303

Peeking out.




__________________
ILNY no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 1st, 2016, 08:16 PM   #7316
joshsam
JR
 
joshsam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Sint-Truiden
Posts: 7,151
Likes (Received): 5327

Quote:
Originally Posted by SSMEX View Post
To further add to this discussion, so, so many supertalls (and pretty much all tallest record holders) are built for prestige. Even the Chrysler/ESB were driven, to some extent, by developer prestige rather than for absolutely economic sense. Buildings like the Petronas Towers, Taipei 101, and now the Burj Khalifa (and soon the Jeddah Tower) were largely financed and led by local governments to put the city on the map.
If everything was build soly for economic sense, NYC and other mega cities around the world would be covered in square boxes of 50 floors high throughout. It would look like a giant concrete slab from the air.
__________________
Ceci n'est pas un pays, een bananenrepubliek ja!

cnbnca, speedy1979, Zaz965 liked this post
joshsam no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 1st, 2016, 10:08 PM   #7317
nyc15
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 190
Likes (Received): 159

We hope to see the come back of spire ,it make it so huge
nyc15 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 2nd, 2016, 04:47 AM   #7318
iiConTr0v3rSYx
Brooklyn Boy
 
iiConTr0v3rSYx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Posts: 1,343
Likes (Received): 2915

Quote:
Originally Posted by nyc15 View Post
We hope to see the come back of spire ,it make it so huge
You need to forget about the spire, it's not coming back.
__________________
Want to take a magical aerial tour of NY?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBPrNUzk1BA

Check this guy out for Monthly updates on the WTC.
http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCc3yuNST1YhPioYxJtqJWtQ

nyc15 liked this post
iiConTr0v3rSYx no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 2nd, 2016, 12:01 PM   #7319
nyc15
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 190
Likes (Received): 159

Quote:
Originally Posted by iiConTr0v3rSYx View Post
You need to forget about the spire, it's not coming back.
Can You see This last news , The rendering shows cpt with a spire .
Tell me if i am wrong or no
http://therealdeal.com/2016/09/01/ex...hattan-square/
nyc15 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 2nd, 2016, 05:25 PM   #7320
iiConTr0v3rSYx
Brooklyn Boy
 
iiConTr0v3rSYx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Posts: 1,343
Likes (Received): 2915

It also shows the old design for 220 CPW. Most likely a mistake by someone.
__________________
Want to take a magical aerial tour of NY?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBPrNUzk1BA

Check this guy out for Monthly updates on the WTC.
http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCc3yuNST1YhPioYxJtqJWtQ
iiConTr0v3rSYx 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 11:45 PM.


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