ATLANTA | Trump Towers - Page 5

SteveD · #81 Posted **Mar 9, 2007, 12:18 AM**

Good additional input from all, above. As I said, there's hundreds of variables involved. When you go very tall, some unit construction costs rise, and just as many unit construction costs drop. The basic floor by floor structural components don't change. As others correctly noted, very tall equates to additional elevator banks, which reduces leasable or sellable per floor SF, stouter structural members with greater cross-sectional area, which also reduces leasable or sellable per floor SF, costlier admixtures for increased strength, etc. However, the complexity level of building a 40-story building is not appreciably different from that of an 80-story building. Same HVAC systems, electrical, plumbing, life safety and fire suppression, etc. For example, the construction cost of the HVAC equipment (heating and cooling) for two 40-story buildings might be greater than the cost of the HVAC equipment needed for one 80-story building. If Trump went 1,000 ft in Atlanta vs. the two 500+ proposed, I might expect the construction costs for the 1,000 footer to be marginally more expensive, but in no way would they approach twice the cost. Whether that would economic sense to do here in Atlanta, that's another issue, but that's not was I referring to in my earlier post. I'm a P.E., Civil, and my job involves (in part) assessing construction costs at commercial facilities nationwide.

Atlriser · #82 Posted **Mar 10, 2007, 10:28 PM**

I disagree and side with Steely Dan and Adrian Smith's assessment of cost vs height. An 80 story building will cost considerably more than 2 40 story towers. Yes systems are similar and so forth, but as you add height you have lots and lots of additional variables and costs increase greatly.

If that wasn't the case why do you see so many 20 story towers in suburban office markets when technically developers could build 1 40 story tower and still have a lot left for later use. Furthermore, why are supertalls limited to cities with the costliest real estate on average. Because supertall construction is much more expensive is the answer.

SteveD · #83 Posted **Mar 11, 2007, 9:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atlriser

I disagree and side with Steely Dan and Adrian Smith's assessment of cost vs height. An 80 story building will cost considerably more than 2 40 story towers. Yes systems are similar and so forth, but as you add height you have lots and lots of additional variables and costs increase greatly.

If that wasn't the case why do you see so many 20 story towers in suburban office markets when technically developers could build 1 40 story tower and still have a lot left for later use. Furthermore, why are supertalls limited to cities with the costliest real estate on average. Because supertall construction is much more expensive is the answer.

Of course you are welcome to disagree and thanks for offering your opinion. This isn't a matter of "taking sides". "lots and lots of additional variables"...such as? No. I'll just say one more time....UNIT construction costs do not go up wildly...some go up, some go down. The reason you don't see 40 story towers in the suburbs vs multiple 20 stories is NOT because it costs much more to build, it's because of other factors such as zoning and aesthetics and nimbyism. The original question referred to construction costs and my responses have been directed at construction costs.

smArTaLlone · #84 Posted **Mar 14, 2007, 5:47 PM**

There's a large rendering on this pdf of apparently some German investors for this project.

Also some pics of the site and a lobby rendering on pages 12-14.

Global State

Steely Dan · #85 Posted **Mar 14, 2007, 6:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteveD

Good additional input from all, above. As I said, there's hundreds of variables involved. When you go very tall, some unit construction costs rise, and just as many unit construction costs drop. The basic floor by floor structural components don't change. As others correctly noted, very tall equates to additional elevator banks, which reduces leasable or sellable per floor SF, stouter structural members with greater cross-sectional area, which also reduces leasable or sellable per floor SF, costlier admixtures for increased strength, etc. However, the complexity level of building a 40-story building is not appreciably different from that of an 80-story building. Same HVAC systems, electrical, plumbing, life safety and fire suppression, etc. For example, the construction cost of the HVAC equipment (heating and cooling) for two 40-story buildings might be greater than the cost of the HVAC equipment needed for one 80-story building. If Trump went 1,000 ft in Atlanta vs. the two 500+ proposed, I might expect the construction costs for the 1,000 footer to be marginally more expensive, but in no way would they approach twice the cost. Whether that would economic sense to do here in Atlanta, that's another issue, but that's not was I referring to in my earlier post. I'm a P.E., Civil, and my job involves (in part) assessing construction costs at commercial facilities nationwide.

well, adrian smith would disagree with you. i remember him specifically mentioning how costs for things like plumbing and mechanical systems begin to skyrocket once you get into the 100 story range. he said the costs of these systems in the supertall building increased exponentially, they were not linear. like i said, this was just the lecture of a guy who has actually designed some of the tallest buildings in the world, so i tend to believe him.

and for what's it's worth, adrian was not talking about total project cost such as land aquisition, legal crap, marketing, etc. he was talking solely about the construction costs of building a 100 story office building vs. 2 50 story office buildings of the same total square footage. of course there are always variables that can change the quation, butaccording to adrian smith, the construction costs of the 100 story version of the above scenario are much higher, generally speaking.

ThrashATL · #86 Posted **Mar 14, 2007, 6:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by smArTaLlone

There's a large rendering on this pdf of apparently some German investors for this project.

Also some pics of the site and a lobby rendering on pages 12-14.

Global State

Check out the rendering of Trump on the skyline for 2010, someone basically cut and pasted it over a pic of midtown. It looks 100 feet taller than OAC. The monster large rendering is ultra cool though.

Atlriser · #87 Posted **Mar 14, 2007, 7:25 PM**

LOL, I noticed that 2010 shot. I wish it'd be that height when finished it'd make the Trump statement for sure then but alas it's just overblown in the rendering but still looks really good.

Best renderings and pics I've seen yet!

Behind_Phips · #88 Posted **Mar 14, 2007, 7:39 PM**

How great would it have been if this was on the corner of 14th and Spring St.? I don't know, those condos by Trump Tower just scream old and tired. Not what you expect when paying the kind of $$$ they are asking. Still I really like the look and the base of this building will set the new standard! Just my opinion.

Atlriser · #89 Posted **Mar 14, 2007, 7:58 PM**

Well I know it's been a while and no new renderings from Novare about the 14th street site but I really think this sleek glass curve here will complement the tiered veritical smooth surface Novare was planning and is really going to blend with 1180 and make the area around 14th beautiful when all completed and contrasted against the iconic former IBM tower and the late 80's highrises from 12th to 14th.

This area is going to be Dynamite in styles and mixes in 5 years minus the condos beside Trump's site as you mentioned.

tdawg · #90 Posted **Mar 14, 2007, 9:01 PM**

that's Dutch, actually, but the renderings are very good in that PDF.

RobMidtowner · #91 Posted **Mar 14, 2007, 10:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThrashATL

Check out the rendering of Trump on the skyline for 2010, someone basically cut and pasted it over a pic of midtown. It looks 100 feet taller than OAC. The monster large rendering is ultra cool though.

It's also facing the wrong direction, how silly!

kardon · #92 Posted **Mar 14, 2007, 11:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Behind_Phips

How great would it have been if this was on the corner of 14th and Spring St.? I don't know, those condos by Trump Tower just scream old and tired. Not what you expect when paying the kind of $$$ they are asking. Still I really like the look and the base of this building will set the new standard! Just my opinion.

The building isn't even up yet...and you have this strong opinion???

kardon · #93 Posted **Mar 14, 2007, 11:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Behind_Phips

How great would it have been if this was on the corner of 14th and Spring St.? I don't know, those condos by Trump Tower just scream old and tired. Not what you expect when paying the kind of $$$ they are asking. Still I really like the look and the base of this building will set the new standard! Just my opinion.

The building doesn't exist yet...and you have this strong opinion???

Behind_Phips · #94 Posted **Mar 15, 2007, 12:23 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by kardon

The building doesn't exist yet...and you have this strong opinion???

I think you did not understand what I was saying. Look at page 14 of the pdf. The buildings on the lot next to Trump Towers look tired and old, not TT.

ATLskyline · #95 Posted **Mar 15, 2007, 1:48 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobMidtowner

It's also facing the wrong direction, how silly!

Yeah i was under the impression that the towers would be facing the new 15th street, not spring st.

smArTaLlone · #96 Posted **Mar 15, 2007, 1:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by tdawg

that's Dutch, actually, but the renderings are very good in that PDF.

My German friends would be so dissapointed.

foxmccleod · #97 Posted **Mar 29, 2007, 6:45 PM**

I received this email today. Someone should go in and see if they can get the new rendering.

The time has arrived!

We have had such overwhelming response to our website registration program, we just couldn’t wait. Since you have been so patient, we have decided it is time to give you a sneak preview of Trump Towers Atlanta.

The telephone lines are now open and we invite you to call our Preview Center to make an exclusive appointment to experience what is destined to become Midtown Atlanta’s iconic residential tower. You will understand our unparalleled location, view our newest and best renderings and get a glimpse of our beautiful design of Trump Towers Atlanta inside and out.

We have 1 and 2 bedroom residences available and priced from $400,000 to over $1,000,000. At your appointment, you will have the first opportunity to reserve your residence and secure our preview pricing. We look forward to hearing from you very soon.

Trump Towers Atlanta
Preview Center
404-351-5665
Monday through Friday 10am to 6pm
Saturday 10am to 5pm
Sunday 12 noon to 5pm

Thank you,

Trump Towers Atlanta

Stratosphere 2020 · #98 Posted **Apr 12, 2007, 1:33 AM**

Trump tower base pic. Is that waterfalls I see?

GThomas · #99 Posted **Apr 12, 2007, 7:27 PM**

Seems like someone mentioned a while back that there was a zoning issue or something for this water feature. Would love to see it though.

ThrashATL · #**100** Posted **Apr 13, 2007, 12:00 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by GThomas

Seems like someone mentioned a while back that there was a zoning issue or something for this water feature. Would love to see it though.

Issue? Like what, keeping bums from taking baths in it like COP's fountains?