SkyscraperCity banner

1 - 20 of 390 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,768 Posts
General Megatall discussion thread!

Hi there,


I created a discussion thread about Megatalls! Since all of the threads here are dedicated to an individual Megatall, there's no place to talk generally about the ongoing projects without getting off topic.
It would therefore provide a great opportunity to start general Megatall discussions! :cheers:

If I should add an up to date Megatall list to the first post, you can just tell me and I'll add it here. :cheers: Pictures are very welcome too :)

Anyway, feel free to discuss about completed, U/C, proposed or visionary projects!

I hope you like the idea!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Kyll.Ing.

Those that made it - completed projects
- Dubai | Burj Khalifa | 828 m | Completed 2010
- Shanghai | Shanghai Tower | 632 m | Completed 2015
- Makkah | Abraj Al-Bait Tower | 601 m | Completed 2012

- Tokyo | Tokyo Skytree | 634 m | Completed 2012
- Guangzhou | Canton Tower | 604 m | Completed 2010

Under construction
- Kuala Lumpur | Merdeka PNB118 | 656 m | U/C

Ongoing (prep, pre-prep) work on tower site
- Shenzen | Shenzhen-Hong Kong International Centre | 655 m | Prep machinery on site as of April 2019 A nationwide height restriction of 500 m is rumoured, but unconfirmed, to have taken effect in China

As far as I can tell, those three are the Megatall skyscrapers we have (plus two observation towers), and we can reasonably expect four one, maybe two more to be around the corner. One of them might not turn out Megatall, but that hasn't been confirmed yet.

On Hold - but not yet cancelled
- Dubai | Dubai Creek Tower | 1300 m | Foundations finished in May 2018. No news since.
- Jeddah | Jeddah Tower | 1007 m | No work on tower since 2018, developer in prison, no official news.
- Suzhou | Zhongnan Center | 729 m | Piling completed, but construction stopped in 2015. Downscaled renders (630 m) have been shown, but no news given.
- Kuala Lumpur | Tower M KLCC | 700 m | Construction postponed until "after 2030".
- Bangkok | Grand Rama 9 Tower | 615 m | New developer has taken over the project, likely to cancel or downsize tower (February 2019)


Concept proposals - Towers that exist on ongoing masterplans
- Shenzhen | Hubei Old Village Redevelopment | 700m | Masterplan shown in December 2018.
- Shenzhen | Buji Towers | 680 m | Proposed in October 2017, no formal news since
- Xi'an| Jinmao – Maike | 666 m | Proposed in December 2018, no formal news since
- Shenzhen | Baishizhou Redevelopment | 600 m | Developed in phases, phase one being smaller towers, no news in the Megatalls thread since March 2016

Note that masterplans are subject to change and may be very long term.


Long term proposals - No news for a while, but cancellation or downscaling can't be assumed just yet
- Kuala Lumpur | Tradewinds Square | 775 m | No concrete news since before 2017
- Dubai | Dubai One | 711 m | Mall construction well underway as of May 2019, but the tower is nowhere to be seen for now
- Wuhan | Hanzheng Jie Project | 666 m | No news since August 2014
- Dubai | Uptown Tower 1/Burj 2020 | 660 m | Site for the cluster under prep, but the location of the megatall is taken by the site office. No news of the megatall for now.
- Shenzhen | Shenzhen Tower | 642 m | Renders released in January 2019. Has undergone several height revisions. No statements or site updates since 2016.
- Jakarta | Signature Tower Jakarta | 638 m | Parent company of developer going through restructuring. Tower project on hold because of an oversupply in office space for rent in Jakarta (July 2018)
- Seoul | Yongsan IBD Tower | 621 m | Still on concept/masterplan level. Plan put on hold as of May 2018, no news since.


Stale proposals - serious proposals, but further news shouldn't be expected any time soon
- Wuhan | Hua's International Plaza | 707 m | Demolition in January 2017, reduction to 502 m rumoured, no news since
- San Luis | Solar Wind Energy Tower | 686 m | No news since April 2015
- Shijiazhuang | Taihang Pearl Tower | 600 m | No news since August 2012
- Shenzhen | Evergrande Center | 600 m | Concept render shown in May 2017, no news since
- Jeddah | Free Trade City | 600 m | No news since April 2011

Visions - Towers that weren't labeled as such, but probably should be
- Baku | Azerbaijan Tower | 1050 m | Was apparently canceled in late 2015, when its developer was sent to prison.
- Kuwait City | Burj Mubarak Al Kabir | 1001 m | Plans have been flouted for more than a decade, no serious news of the tower in recent years.
- Karachi | (no name) | 800 m | Fancy renders shown in March 2014, no news since
- Mumbai | Mumbai Port Waterfront Redevelopment | 800 m | No news since OP in 2017
- Dubai | Weightless Skyscraper | 800 m | No news since OP in September 2017. Actually, no posts at all in thread (except those bumping to respond to comments) since four days after OP.
- Shenzhen | Future City Project | 700 m | No news for several years. A mall supposed to be demolished for this project is still standing.
- Hanoi | VTV Tower | 636 m | No news since OP in March 2015
- Changchun | Changchun World Trade Center | 631 m | No news since OP in July 2017
- Colombo | World Capital Centre | 625 m | No land, no funding, unclear ownership, no faith in project from anyone in thread. Latest news July 2017.
- Quezon City | Philippine Diamond Tower | 612 m | Little news since OP in June 2014. Apparently held up in legal troubles too.
- Riyadh | The Blade | 610 m | No news since OP in July 2016

Downscaled - Towers that saw a height reduction, but weren't (formally, yet) cancelled
- Shenzhen | Caiwuwei Center | 693 m (other proposals: 760 m, 666 m) | Downscaled and upscaled several times, most recently to 500 m in April 2019. Still on proposal stage.
- Shenzhen | Shenwan Station Towers | 680 m | The Civil Aviation Administration of China has ordered a maximum height ceiling of 400 m ASL (2017). Downscaling not yet formally confirmed.
- Chengdu | Tianfu Center | 677 m | Height reduction to 488 m shown in November 2019, but not yet formally confirmed.
- Wuhan | Wuhan Chow Tai Fook Centre | 648 m | Downscaled to 475 m in January 2019. Still on proposal stage.
- Shenzhen | Ping An International Finance Centre | 655 m | Lost its spire and was completed at 599 m to appease aviation authorities
- Wuhan | Greenland Centre | 636 m | Ordered to be capped out at 472 m as a license to build taller apparently wasn't in order.
- Wuhan | Fanhai Centre | 600 m | Downscaled to 477 m in October 2019.

Cancelled - Formally cancelled towers
- Dubai | Nakheel Tower | 1000 m | Cancelled following the 2009 financial crisis
- Changsha | Sky City | 838 m | Cancelled 2016
- Mumbai | India Tower | 720 m | Cancelled 2015
- Seoul | Seoul Lite DMC Tower | 640 m | Seoul failed to find a buyer to develop a tower on the plot, something else seems to be built there instead, no news since December 2017.
- Moscow | Russia Tower | 612 m | Cancelled 2009
- Chicago | Chicago Spire | 610 m | Construction suspended in 2008, formally cancelled in 2014
- Hyderabad | Lanco Hills Signature Tower | 604 m | Developer went bankrupt in 2017
 

·
on the road
Joined
·
33,796 Posts
I was wondering how much extra usable space a 600m building has compared to a 300m one. I know the usable space marginal gain falls quite dramatically once total loads and wind twist become a concern, and express elevators are needed (I read somewhere a while ago that a 'standard' boxy 300m building would have only 55% more usable space than a 150m one... due to space losses to express lifts, machine floors etc).

How does this play with megatalls? I know some of them are improper references since they are 'hollow' or conical (like Burj Kahlifa). If we were to build a boxy megatall, though, what could we reasonable expect? 40% more space than a 300m?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,812 Posts
That's a good question. To clarify it would help to have the usable floor space of each megatall already build and u/c. And as far as available the data from all other projects in the megatall section.
Without knowing this we can only speculate.
Further every building in the league is so different that a comparison of usuable floor space in relation to the hight is problematic.
I will try to find exact data^^
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,812 Posts
CTBUH has data about the gross floor area (GFA). Theese includes room for staircases, elevators, mechinery rooms, lobby and so on...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floor_area_(building)
More meaningful would be the net internal area (NIA), but data about this are rare.
So i made a list to compare (interesting to know in generally) the megatalls.
Not added = no data
- Jeddah Tower - 1000m - 243,866 m²
- Burj Khalifa - 828m - 309,473 m²
- Suzhou Zhongnan Center - 729m - 500,000 m²
- Wuhan Greenland Center - 636m - 303,275 m²
- Shanghai Tower - 632m - 420,000 m²
- Merdeka PNB118 - 630m - 292,000 m²
- Rama IX Super Tower - 615m - 360,000 m²
- Makkah Royal Clock Tower - 601m - 310,638 m²

It's funny, just the tallest one has the least GFA:nuts:

And now some buildings less than 600m
- Lotte World Tower - 555m - 304,081 m²
- One World Trade Center - 546m - 325,279 m²
- Guangzhou CTF - 530m - 398,000 m²
- Tianjin CTF Binhai Center - 530m - 252,144 m²
- China Zun Tower - 528m - 437,000 m²
- Guizhou Culture Plaza Tower - 521m - 290,000 m²
- Dalian Greenland Center - 518m -287,000 m²
- Taipei 101 - 508m - 198,347 m²

This lists shows in particular one thing: the GFA in relation to the hight vary extremly. In these hights a comparison isn't reasonable. You can't even say the higher the more space.
And proofs another thing: It's more a question of reputation, building landmarks and the race for the highest building as it has an economic sense.
But to come back to the question here are 5 supertalls about 300m
- Cayan Tower - 306m - 111,000 m²
- The Shard - 306m - 127,489 m²
- Two Prudential Plaza- 303m - 130,063 m²
- Wells Fargo Plaza - 302m - 170,362 m²
- Torre Costanera - 300m - 110,000 m²

And now making an average value for megatalls and compare this for the same average value of buildings about 300m.
The result:
Megatalls ~ 342,000 m² vs. 300m ~ 129,000 m²
I know this construct is very theoretical, but when someone find out the NIA for each building we could make an exact comparison. To sum up i can say that it seens reasonable to build 600m instead of 300m but only when you take a look at the floor space. But not necessarilly to increase the height from 600m to 1000m to have more space.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
21 Posts
I wonder when the next "super-tower" that is tall not because tall, but because the massive density is necessary/cost effective, will be built. We see some of it the super high/low unit towers in NYC.

Costs will have to come down a lot. 3D printed concrete?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
271 Posts
The reason KT has so much less space than others is because of its Gigantic spire, and its big Core. (The Spire is almost one third the building's height!)
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,208 Posts
I don't want anyone to understand me wrong but Jeddah Tower is not meant to be usable in anyway .. it is nothing more than a slender version of Burj Khalifa and it adds nothing but a record breaking height to the record books, which I don't mind :lol:

I got one question in mind, am I wrong or Burj Khalifa was the first ever tower built with a buttressed core? or there was others before it?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,812 Posts
I got one question in mind, am I wrong or Burj Khalifa was the first ever tower built with a buttressed core? or there was others before it?
Indeed, Burj Khalifa was the first buttdress core tower. At least when you can trust wikipedia.
William F. Baker was the structural engineer of BK and has invented this princip to make new hight records possible.
https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_F._Baker
 

·
Smith
Joined
·
376 Posts
Wow, I thought a megatall thread is just all talk and nothing much.


It exist!!


And to see so many mega tall save me alot of time searching what are the tallest projects ongoing currently.



Its the good start to the right direction.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
91 Posts
CTBUH has data about the gross floor area (GFA). Theese includes room for staircases, elevators, mechinery rooms, lobby and so on...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floor_area_(building)
More meaningful would be the net internal area (NIA), but data about this are rare.
So i made a list to compare (interesting to know in generally) the megatalls.
Not added = no data
- Jeddah Tower - 1000m - 243,866 m²
- Burj Khalifa - 828m - 309,473 m²
- Suzhou Zhongnan Center - 729m - 500,000 m²
- Wuhan Greenland Center - 636m - 303,275 m²
- Shanghai Tower - 632m - 420,000 m²
- Merdeka PNB118 - 630m - 292,000 m²
- Rama IX Super Tower - 615m - 360,000 m²
- Makkah Royal Clock Tower - 601m - 310,638 m²

It's funny, just the tallest one has the least GFA:nuts:

And now some buildings less than 600m
- Lotte World Tower - 555m - 304,081 m²
- One World Trade Center - 546m - 325,279 m²
- Guangzhou CTF - 530m - 398,000 m²
- Tianjin CTF Binhai Center - 530m - 252,144 m²
- China Zun Tower - 528m - 437,000 m²
- Guizhou Culture Plaza Tower - 521m - 290,000 m²
- Dalian Greenland Center - 518m -287,000 m²
- Taipei 101 - 508m - 198,347 m²

This lists shows in particular one thing: the GFA in relation to the hight vary extremly. In these hights a comparison isn't reasonable. You can't even say the higher the more space.
And proofs another thing: It's more a question of reputation, building landmarks and the race for the highest building as it has an economic sense.
But to come back to the question here are 5 supertalls about 300m
- Cayan Tower - 306m - 111,000 m²
- The Shard - 306m - 127,489 m²
- Two Prudential Plaza- 303m - 130,063 m²
- Wells Fargo Plaza - 302m - 170,362 m²
- Torre Costanera - 300m - 110,000 m²

And now making an average value for megatalls and compare this for the same average value of buildings about 300m.
The result:
Megatalls ~ 342,000 m² vs. 300m ~ 129,000 m²
I know this construct is very theoretical, but when someone find out the NIA for each building we could make an exact comparison. To sum up i can say that it seens reasonable to build 600m instead of 300m but only when you take a look at the floor space. But not necessarilly to increase the height from 600m to 1000m to have more space.
Yeah, i addressed that fact somewhere last year i guess on the Pingan IFC thread, but sadly i was ignored...

I posted the Willis Tower's GFA of 416.000m² by CTBUH and asked a question why the english wiki page states the Keangnam Hanoi Landmark Tower to have 609.673m² Floor area...they state it's of the single building!? And CTBUH has no information! That would be the most spacious supertall, by far. (in the wiki list of the worlds largest buildings by floor area it is stated to have 580,000 m²)

And also, if you look at ICC of Hongkong and SWFC of Shanghai, while almost having the same tip height, ICC has a square shape till the top while SWFCs edges are cut off to the top...and also it has a big hole there, so ICC should have more volume, but some internal space is lost apparently (381.600m² GFA of SWFC v 274.064m² GFA of ICC)

So until now Ping An IFC of Shenzhen should be GFA King with 459.525m² by CTBUH (but another source states 385.918m²) with Shanghai Tower in 2nd and Willis Tower in 3d Place (and the old 1 & 2 WTC in historical 3d with 418.500m² GFA)
China Zun Tower will soon take the 2nd (or first) place with its 437.000m² GFA ;)
 
1 - 20 of 390 Posts
Top