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 > General Urban Developments > DN Archives



Global Announcement

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


View Poll Results: Add a new megatall section
Yes 311 83.83%
No 60 16.17%
Voters: 371. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools
Old April 14th, 2016, 07:05 PM   #81
Nahemah
scaredy-cat?
 
Nahemah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 154

600m+!

Also, maybe this will somehow encourage developers to build higher to be 'megatall'
Nahemah está en línea ahora  

Sponsored Links
Old April 15th, 2016, 06:19 AM   #82
SMCYB
Registered User
 
SMCYB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,168
Likes (Received): 1715

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nahemah View Post
600m+!

Also, maybe this will somehow encourage developers to build higher to be 'megatall'
I expect that fully.
SMCYB no está en línea  
Old April 15th, 2016, 11:19 AM   #83
tokilamockingbrd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 133
Likes (Received): 116

Make it 500+ for now just don't call them megatall. For the sake of the forum 500 would be cleaner.

Just have a spot for supertalls 500m+ for people who only want to follow the landmark builds around the world.

I think that would have longevity. Its not like we are going to suddenly have a massive burst of 600+ over the next decade. The 500+ forum would be very exclusive for a long time. If it even got to the point there was a page worth of 600+ going up you could break them out at that point, because if there were that many 600+ logic would dictate there is even more construction going on at the 300-500 level. And alot in the 500-600 range that would still be major events.

I just don't see this happening in the next 20 years. Its just to expensive and with Kingdom tower setting the bar so high most cities will settle for a massive landmark building that is still someone economical. Which right now 500+ is that range with a few bumping over 600 here or there. Maybe the next wave will make 600m the new 400m, like this wave made 400m the new 300m.
__________________

erbse liked this post
tokilamockingbrd no está en línea  
Old April 15th, 2016, 11:32 AM   #84
Gabriel900
Super Mod
 
Gabriel900's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Dubai, Beirut
Posts: 7,978
Likes (Received): 30187

Quote:
Originally Posted by tokilamockingbrd View Post
I think that would have longevity. Its not like we are going to suddenly have a massive burst of 600+ over the next decade.
And you know that because? Wasting a section on 500m+ is not really smart or efficient, and they are already receiving a lot of attention in the supertall section.

Again we are talking about the tallest towers on earth and they deserve their own section! Quality over quantity I suppose and I'm sure the 500 - 599m range towers will be fine in the Supertall section.

And to be honest 500m towers lost their wow factors nowadays .. we are living in an era where 1000m+ are actually being built and approved.

600m+ is the smart most efficient in both short and long term planning of this forum.
__________________
"The positive thinker sees the invisible, feels the intangible, and achieves the impossible" ~ Winston Churchill

DubaiM, BinSuroor, Malahit liked this post
Gabriel900 no está en línea  
Old April 15th, 2016, 01:12 PM   #85
ZZ-II
I love Skyscrapers
 
ZZ-II's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Near Ingolstadt in Bavaria
Posts: 33,531
Likes (Received): 6562

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabriel900 View Post
And you know that because? Wasting a section on 500m+ is not really smart or efficient, and they are already receiving a lot of attention in the supertall section. Again we are talking about the tallest towers on earth and they deserve their own section! Quality over quantity I suppose and I'm sure the 500 - 599m range towers will be fine in the Supertall section. And to be honest 500m towers lost their wow factors nowadays .. we are living in an era where 1000m+ are actually being built and approved. 600m+ is the smart most efficient in both short and long term planning of this forum.
Agree
__________________
Click here to get the Worlds Supertall Lists

Gabriel900 liked this post
ZZ-II no está en línea  
Old April 15th, 2016, 01:15 PM   #86
MarkoUtr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 82
Likes (Received): 73

Please make it 500+. That's a round figure and logical if the hypertalls start at 1000m.
MarkoUtr no está en línea  
Old April 15th, 2016, 03:09 PM   #87
Ch.W
Registered User
 
Ch.W's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Heinsberg - near Cologne
Posts: 1,781
Likes (Received): 5187

The discussion convinced me to vote also for 600m as a definition of megatalls. Than please a new section with under forum for proposed megatalls.
__________________

Gabriel900, SMCYB liked this post
Ch.W no está en línea  
Old April 15th, 2016, 03:23 PM   #88
SMCYB
Registered User
 
SMCYB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,168
Likes (Received): 1715

After much discussion here's where I pan out:

600+ with one section for U/C and one for Proposed.

Rationale: there will be more and more megatalls in the future and it's best to start out with the sections that are already widely accepted as proper rather than having a 500m section get overfilled and then change the cut-off in the future.
__________________

Ch.W liked this post
SMCYB no está en línea  
Old April 15th, 2016, 08:44 PM   #89
ZZ-II
I love Skyscrapers
 
ZZ-II's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Near Ingolstadt in Bavaria
Posts: 33,531
Likes (Received): 6562

Quote:
Originally Posted by SMCYB View Post
After much discussion here's where I pan out: 600+ with one section for U/C and one for Proposed. Rationale: there will be more and more megatalls in the future and it's best to start out with the sections that are already widely accepted as proper rather than having a 500m section get overfilled and then change the cut-off in the future.
Since there are just 3 Megatalls U/C right now it's not really an option to create an own section for them.
Create a Megatall section for U/C and proposed and sticky the U/C ones.
ZZ-II no está en línea  
Old April 15th, 2016, 09:42 PM   #90
tokilamockingbrd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 133
Likes (Received): 116

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabriel900 View Post
And you know that because? Wasting a section on 500m+ is not really smart or efficient, and they are already receiving a lot of attention in the supertall section.

Again we are talking about the tallest towers on earth and they deserve their own section! Quality over quantity I suppose and I'm sure the 500 - 599m range towers will be fine in the Supertall section.

And to be honest 500m towers lost their wow factors nowadays .. we are living in an era where 1000m+ are actually being built and approved.

600m+ is the smart most efficient in both short and long term planning of this forum.
because logic. Why would we go from having just 4 pages of all towers 300m+ to a massive glut of towers 500+? Economics and trends just don't add up to that.

there are currently 14x 500+ under construction, 4x of those 600+.

there are 18 proposed 500+ proposed, 8 of those are are 600+, even if ALL of those go forward (very unlikely) in the next 5 years we are most would have no more than 25x 500+ going at any given time, and with 600+ no more than 6-8.

I am not saying we should call 500-599 megatalls either.

As far as your "long view" what point would there in making a forum that may or may not even been useful for another 10 years. Also consider this is the digital realm where things can easily be moved or realigned. Its not like the industry which we are discussing (where the long view is everything).

Last edited by tokilamockingbrd; April 15th, 2016 at 09:49 PM.
tokilamockingbrd no está en línea  
Old April 16th, 2016, 11:21 PM   #91
mitchelljb
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sydney
Posts: 512
Likes (Received): 139

Quote:
Originally Posted by Starohrabě View Post
The term "megatall" is commonly used and always means 600m+ buildings. I really think we shouldn't try to redefine it just in order to have more buildings for the new section.
Agree 100% with this.
__________________

Ch.W, pteranodon, londonfai liked this post
mitchelljb no está en línea  
Old April 17th, 2016, 11:17 AM   #92
Suwhenzetie
BriniaSona
 
Suwhenzetie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 92
Likes (Received): 14

Reading the thread, I think:

150 - 299 = Skyscraper
300 - 599 = Megatall
600 - 999 = Supertall
1000 - ??? = Ultratall

Why start Ultratall at 1K? because I think 1K is a huge sounding number and the first 4 digit height. Thus it's where Ultratall could start.
__________________

@[email protected] liked this post
Suwhenzetie no está en línea  
Old April 17th, 2016, 11:49 AM   #93
BinSuroor
Registered User
 
BinSuroor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Dubai
Posts: 253
Likes (Received): 918

600 - 1199 = Magatall
Ultratall should start at 1200
__________________

Gabriel900, jackedi07 liked this post
BinSuroor no está en línea  
Old April 17th, 2016, 12:17 PM   #94
erbse
LIBERTINED
 
erbse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: McLenBurg
Posts: 44,259
Likes (Received): 59680

It's not like this can't be changed in the future. It's easy to change a 500+ section to 600+.

But for now (and the next ~5 years to come), a 500+ section is the only thing that actually makes sense.
__________________
GET FREE!
D W F


🔥 Tradition doesn't mean to look after the ash, but to keep the flame alive! 🔥
erbse no está en línea  
Old April 17th, 2016, 12:20 PM   #95
erbse
LIBERTINED
 
erbse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: McLenBurg
Posts: 44,259
Likes (Received): 59680

@Jan: What's the status?
__________________
GET FREE!
D W F


🔥 Tradition doesn't mean to look after the ash, but to keep the flame alive! 🔥
erbse no está en línea  
Old April 17th, 2016, 01:58 PM   #96
Gabriel900
Super Mod
 
Gabriel900's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Dubai, Beirut
Posts: 7,978
Likes (Received): 30187

Quote:
Originally Posted by erbse View Post
[B]a 500+ section is the only thing that actually makes sense.
500m aren't and will never be considered Megatalls so NO IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE to make them fit just because we will see more threads in a new section! How old are we? 12?
__________________
"The positive thinker sees the invisible, feels the intangible, and achieves the impossible" ~ Winston Churchill

londonfai, Shenkey liked this post
Gabriel900 no está en línea  
Old April 17th, 2016, 11:24 PM   #97
tokilamockingbrd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 133
Likes (Received): 116

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabriel900 View Post
500m aren't and will never be considered Megatalls so NO IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE to make them fit just because we will see more threads in a new section! How old are we? 12?
it would be more about separating massive projects from big projects more than populating a forum section. This is simply a difference between how some people think.

Sensors like things to be refined and placed in an orderly fashion, which is in this case the forum sections aligning the definitions established for each class of skyscraper. There is definitely something to be said for this because one you make the initial classifications its black and white defining things after that.

Intuitives could care less about labels given somewhat arbitrary (breaking 300m in a tower is not like breaking he sound barrier) but rather focus on the idea behind the classifications which is the scope of the project itself.

Too me a 310m tower is a completely different type of project than a 590m tower. 310m projects are very important, but to me those are more regional. So if I care about a particular cities skyline I will follow its progress closely, but if it is in some city I don't follow I will ignore it. I follow any project over 500m.

Its not about a category its about impact.
tokilamockingbrd no está en línea  
Old April 17th, 2016, 11:41 PM   #98
Gabriel900
Super Mod
 
Gabriel900's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Dubai, Beirut
Posts: 7,978
Likes (Received): 30187

Exactly how I think and I mentioned something similar in previous posts. But the impact of a 500m tower is for me very similar to the the one created by a 300m and that is mainly because we live in a time where towers 600m+ are getting approved and built.

I personally stood in front of 300m, 400m. 500m, 600m and 800m towers and I can assure you that the sentiment of grandeur and humbleness you feel when you witness these giants is very much different and falls in 2 categories:

towers in the 300m range feels shorter than others. Towers in the 400m and 500m range, although there is between 100 to 199 m difference, but they "look" the same from ground level.

The impact becomes overwhelming only for towers higher than 600m, it is when they start to look like Megatalls.

My point is, 500m is closer to 400m impact-wise compared to 600m+ ... and we can't go now shoving even 400m in the megatall section just because they affect the skyline differently than 300m.
__________________
"The positive thinker sees the invisible, feels the intangible, and achieves the impossible" ~ Winston Churchill

londonfai liked this post

Last edited by Gabriel900; April 17th, 2016 at 11:48 PM.
Gabriel900 no está en línea  
Old April 18th, 2016, 12:19 AM   #99
TopoGigio
Registered User
 
TopoGigio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madrid
Posts: 447
Likes (Received): 253

My opinion is to put the mark at 600m. Nowdays thatīs logical. Maybe in 10 years, the mark should rise to 800m. Who knows.
TopoGigio no está en línea  
Old April 18th, 2016, 12:51 AM   #100
tokilamockingbrd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 133
Likes (Received): 116

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabriel900 View Post
Exactly how I think and I mentioned something similar in previous posts. But the impact of a 500m tower is for me very similar to the the one created by a 300m and that is mainly because we live in a time where towers 600m+ are getting approved and built.

I personally stood in front of 300m, 400m. 500m, 600m and 800m towers and I can assure you that the sentiment of grandeur and humbleness you feel when you witness these giants is very much different and falls in 2 categories:

towers in the 300m range feels shorter than others. Towers in the 400m and 500m range, although there is between 100 to 199 m difference, but they "look" the same from ground level.

The impact becomes overwhelming only for towers higher than 600m, it is when they start to look like Megatalls.

My point is, 500m is closer to 400m impact-wise compared to 600m+ ... and we can't go now shoving even 400m in the megatall section just because they affect the skyline differently than 300m.
true. It completely subjective person to person. For I feel 500m is a massive jump from a simply rooftop perspective. But other may not agree. That is why using the established criteria makes sense because it takes out each persons subjective point of view and makes it black and white.

If it were up to me I would use feet. So it would look like this-

<than 500 feet - depending on location, but not noticeable in a top skyline, still a big deal to the people who live near it.
500 to 1000 feet - in some cities will look mammoth in other cities they these are the towers that fill out the skyline and complement the marquee ones
1000 to 1500 feet- dominate skylines, really adding one marks a major change to the skyline
>1500 feet- with the exception of maybe Dubai these are going to be the focal point of a city and will be what people identify most with a skyline.

I would place towers based on roof height. Because while spires look pretty in some cases the superstructure of the building is really what people look at and base their perception of how impressive a building is. So to me no 1 WTC would not be in the highest category and towers like NY times and Bank of America would not be in the 1000-1500.
__________________

Ch.W liked this post
tokilamockingbrd no está en línea  


Closed Thread

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 10:31 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