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 February 24th, 2013, 03:56 PM   #2161
hunser
Steinway to Heaven |¦┆┊
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Wien
Posts: 1,837
Likes (Received): 5031

God I hope the North Tower rises by next year, as stated in the article. It could even catch up with 2WTC.

New Yorkers are really kind of spoiled now. Every year there's at least one 400m+ tower under construction.

1. 1WTC
2. 432 PA
3. 225W57th
4. North Tower
hunser no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old February 24th, 2013, 03:57 PM   #2162
tim1807
faster than buildings
 
tim1807's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Den Helder
Posts: 10,325
Likes (Received): 5334

The noth tower will start in 2014.
tim1807 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 24th, 2013, 04:03 PM   #2163
L.A.F.2.
Georgia Tech
 
L.A.F.2.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 4,406
Likes (Received): 5308

Possibly 2015, unfortunately. That's what some estimates had given if I remember correctly.
L.A.F.2. no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 24th, 2013, 04:16 PM   #2164
desertpunk
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
 
desertpunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ELP ~ ABQ
Posts: 55,648
Likes (Received): 53453

Quote:
Originally Posted by L.A.F.2. View Post
Possibly 2015, unfortunately. That's what some estimates had given if I remember correctly.
Yep, a lot depends on the leasing market but construction could begin without a firm commitment by an anchor tennant if the financing allows.

Ralph Lauren has shown interest in the North Tower.
__________________
We are floating in space...

Last edited by desertpunk; February 24th, 2013 at 05:47 PM.
desertpunk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 24th, 2013, 04:21 PM   #2165
thejacko5
SSC Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: NYC
Posts: 932
Likes (Received): 401

August 2013: Superstructure of South Tower completed


thejacko5 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 24th, 2013, 04:21 PM   #2166
tim1807
faster than buildings
 
tim1807's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Den Helder
Posts: 10,325
Likes (Received): 5334

Well, in 20 months much could have changed, and 20 months from now it's 2014. Keep positive guys.
tim1807 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 24th, 2013, 04:23 PM   #2167
tim1807
faster than buildings
 
tim1807's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Den Helder
Posts: 10,325
Likes (Received): 5334

Quote:
Originally Posted by thejacko5 View Post
August 2013: Superstructure of South Tower completed


You know they don't mean the whole tower with that right?
The whole South Tower will be completed in 2015.
tim1807 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 24th, 2013, 06:01 PM   #2168
Vito Corleone
Moderator
 
Vito Corleone's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: New York - Chicago
Posts: 311
Likes (Received): 324

I'm wondering if the 895 ft. height figure for the South Tower stated in the ASCE Civil Engineering News article was measured from sea level?
Vito Corleone no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 24th, 2013, 06:19 PM   #2169
Hudson11
Stuck on the Cross Bronx
 
Hudson11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Empire State
Posts: 9,531
Likes (Received): 22572

Quote:
Originally Posted by thejacko5 View Post
August 2013: Superstructure of South Tower completed


some time in 2014 is more likely, it's expected by Coach to be finished by 2015. Related will make sure that this one rises as quickly as possible to accompany them.
Hudson11 está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old February 24th, 2013, 06:21 PM   #2170
desertpunk
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
 
desertpunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ELP ~ ABQ
Posts: 55,648
Likes (Received): 53453

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vito Corleone View Post
I'm wondering if the 895 ft. height figure for the South Tower stated in the ASCE Civil Engineering News article was measured from sea level?
Is that something ASCE is in the habit of doing?
__________________
We are floating in space...
desertpunk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 24th, 2013, 06:23 PM   #2171
ZZ-II
I love Skyscrapers
 
ZZ-II's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Near Ingolstadt in Bavaria
Posts: 33,509
Likes (Received): 6533

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudson11 View Post
some time in 2014 is more likely, it's expected by Coach to be finished by 2015. Related will make sure that this one rises as quickly as possible to accompany them.
if the north tower won't be U/C before 2014 the thread should be splitted i think
ZZ-II no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 24th, 2013, 06:25 PM   #2172
Vito Corleone
Moderator
 
Vito Corleone's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: New York - Chicago
Posts: 311
Likes (Received): 324

Quote:
Originally Posted by desertpunk View Post
Is that something ASCE is in the habit of doing?
Not sure about that, but that kind of mistake has been made on several occasions in the past. A reporter will call a firm and ask for a building height, and someone will look at a section drawing and take the height figure at the top and not look at the height of the ground level, which is sometimes taken from mean sea level or city datum.

A good example is The Shard: It is listed as 310 m. in many publications, but that is the height taken from mean sea level. The ground level point of the building is 4.30m AOD (above ordnance datum: height above average sea level) and the highest point is 310.3 AOD. So The Shard is officially 306m tall.
__________________

spectre000 liked this post

Last edited by Vito Corleone; February 24th, 2013 at 06:36 PM.
Vito Corleone no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 24th, 2013, 08:52 PM   #2173
RandomNameTag
Skyscraper fan
 
RandomNameTag's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: rural Georgia, United States
Posts: 468
Likes (Received): 22

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vito Corleone View Post

A good example is The Shard: It is listed as 310 m. in many publications, but that is the height taken from mean sea level. The ground level point of the building is 4.30m AOD (above ordnance datum: height above average sea level) and the highest point is 310.3 AOD. So The Shard is officially 306m tall.
So that's why it's listed a different height on the CTBUH's page. I was wondering about that. They have several other buildings in London listed as heights that are different than what is mentioned on their threads at skyscrapercity. Why does Britian use AOD so much anyway?
__________________
Observatories I've been to: Empire State Building, Top of the Rock

Observatories I hope to go to in the future: Willis Tower Skydeck, John Hancock Center, At the Top (Burj Khalifa), One World Trade Center, The View The Shard, Hudson Yards
RandomNameTag no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 24th, 2013, 09:17 PM   #2174
Vito Corleone
Moderator
 
Vito Corleone's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: New York - Chicago
Posts: 311
Likes (Received): 324

Quote:
Originally Posted by RandomNameTag View Post
So that's why it's listed a different height on the CTBUH's page. I was wondering about that. They have several other buildings in London listed as heights that are different than what is mentioned on their threads at skyscrapercity. Why does Britian use AOD so much anyway?
I guess someone has to review the section drawings for every tall building in London to correct all of the height discrepancies...mission impossible.
Vito Corleone no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 25th, 2013, 02:43 AM   #2175
metsfan
Photographer
 
metsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Newtown, PA
Posts: 661
Likes (Received): 42

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZZ-II View Post
You prefer ab ugly railyard instead of a bunch of awesome new skyscrapers??
I don't find exposed infrastructure ugly at all. I find it amazing. The yard was only built in the 80's as part of a redevelopment effort for the west side. The other part was the javits center.

Just because there is no buildings there doesnt mean one should be there....
__________________
Lets Go Mets!
metsfan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 25th, 2013, 03:55 AM   #2176
Jay
Registered User
 
Jay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: California to Barcelona
Posts: 4,054
Likes (Received): 1863

The best towers are always built last...

When is the completion date for the larger one?
Jay no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 25th, 2013, 03:59 AM   #2177
Hudson11
Stuck on the Cross Bronx
 
Hudson11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Empire State
Posts: 9,531
Likes (Received): 22572

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay View Post
The best towers are always built last...

When is the completion date for the larger one?
2018.
Hudson11 está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old February 25th, 2013, 03:27 PM   #2178
HK999
University of HK / 香港大學
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hong Kong SAR / 香港特區
Posts: 3,389
Likes (Received): 336

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudson11 View Post
2018.
Same with 225 West 57th Street. This will be a very exciting decade for New York, one could say a skyline altering decade.
__________________
Sapientia et Virtus 明德格物
Industrial Organization, MSc
HK999 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 25th, 2013, 10:42 PM   #2179
L.A.F.2.
Georgia Tech
 
L.A.F.2.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 4,406
Likes (Received): 5308

No doubt about it. It'll be the first major transformation of both skylines in a single decade for the first time in 80 years.
L.A.F.2. no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 25th, 2013, 10:57 PM   #2180
desertpunk
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
 
desertpunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ELP ~ ABQ
Posts: 55,648
Likes (Received): 53453

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vito Corleone View Post
Not sure about that, but that kind of mistake has been made on several occasions in the past. A reporter will call a firm and ask for a building height, and someone will look at a section drawing and take the height figure at the top and not look at the height of the ground level, which is sometimes taken from mean sea level or city datum.

A good example is The Shard: It is listed as 310 m. in many publications, but that is the height taken from mean sea level. The ground level point of the building is 4.30m AOD (above ordnance datum: height above average sea level) and the highest point is 310.3 AOD. So The Shard is officially 306m tall.
Very interesting.

Well, nothing is set in stone as yet. If we learn the actual height is different it can be noted ASAP in the title.
__________________
We are floating in space...
desertpunk no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
30 hudson yards, hudson yards, manhattan tower, north tower, supertall, west 33rd street

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 09:55 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