SEATTLE | 701 Fourth Avenue | 1,020 FT | 91 FLOORS
 

Seattle needs more recognition on ssp. :tup:

==============================

101-story skyscraper on Seattle’s Fourth Avenue proposed

http://static.seattletimes.com/wp-co...9f-300x579.jpg

=================================
http://www.seattletimes.com/business...aper-proposed/

^^^ I also would like to see Seattle get more exposure on SSP! I don't think this will happen.... What about the FAA?

The FAA approved antennas of 192' on top of Columbia Center back in about 1990, which would have made it about 1160' tall per today's trend of including spires and antennae. This tower could most likely hit 1200' with little resistance. It is in an unlimited height zone. It would be the tallest in the west by number of floors alone.

I was thinking 1200' too. That would be sweet. Even a spire lets just say, eh, this could break the 1300' mark. :slob:

Current Site:

http://seattle.curbed.com/uploads/Sc...09.06%20PM.png
PSBJ

haha I'd be okay with that! I'll be interested to see the first EDG package submitted to the city to see what they're thinking massing wise.

The number of floors and the probable height are impressive... But what really gets me excited is 1200 residential units on a half-block! Plus hotel, office and retail! That would be great for Manhattan, but absolutely incredible for a city the size of Seattle.

1,200 units in a super tall even for Manhattan is historic. Silverstein's 520 West 41st Street has 1,400 units, and that project has the most units for a super tall in this boom. This is quite historic for Seattle and for a project outside of NYC. :cheers:

With a commercial and hotel component, hopefully a substantial base will be in order, with the remaining floors being residential.

Nice nice! Anything over 1000 feet is a win here IMO for Seattle to join the US Supertall club :cheers:

This will be an interesting one to follow. I love how they are just edging out the 1,018 foot US Bank tower in LA to grab the tallest tower on the west coast. It's definitely making an addition to the supertalls!

Nice Parking Lot.... LOL!

The initial documents for the 1111 ft. tower submitted for design review...

^ excellent!

the "preferred design" looks quite promising.

let's hope seattle can become the 8th US city to join the super-tall club.

I wish all new buildings came with as comprehensive a design review as that. About every question one could ask is answered.

Wow! Very nice. That would be just enough to surpass Wilshire Grand. What a smack in the face to LA.

Currently have Supertalls or under construction:

NYC
Chi
LA
Philly
SF
ATL
Houston

Proposed Supertalls:

Miami
Seattle
Dallas


This would match China, which currently has 10 cities with Supertalls. No other country in the world compares.

Taken from the design packet:

http://standard-discourseorg.netdna-...aee16c8c3d.png

http://standard-discourseorg.netdna-...77a094fe31.png

The nice boost from the elevation will make this really prominent. Almost 1250' ASL.

Not to be that guy, but I have to get this out...SUCK IT China. USA USA :notacrook:

Okay I'm done.

But seriously you guys, what a week. Chicago blowing up the South Loop, Salesforce showing progress in San Fran, Wilshire Grand cracking the skyline in LA, and now a proposal in Seattle backed by a Miami developer...you know those Miami guys get shit done. If only they could get one of the 478237 supertall proposals in their own city out of the ground, we'd really be on fire. :P

^^^^

Along with Seattle, Miami needs more recognition too! Have you seen the progress going down there? Its amazing. Hopefully we will get a super tall or too, but we are killing in the 150m+ category. :cheers:

Just today, 6 towers over 150m where approved by the FAA for S.Florida. Good times for the U.S.. Texas is booming, Cali is booming, NYC is just.... out there and unstoppable, Chicago is starting its boom and hopefully will exceed all, Seattle crane heaven, and it goes on. Hate to say it, but this is the age of Ramses. Which proves, that his blessing, Ramses, is not just for NYC. :yes:

I guess the Miami guys are tired of the FAA, and so, they are flocking to Seattle and Chicago. Which I don't mind. All cities matter for the motherland.

http://i.imgur.com/8mkcrLz.jpg

A perfect place for a gargantuan tower:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...TTLE%20027.jpg

Nice design!

By my count, China currently has 15 cities with supertalls (not counting Hong Kong or Taipei, because those don't count).

Shanghai
Nanching
Shenzhen
Gangzhou
Dalian
Kaohsiung
Chongqing
Wuxi
Tianjin
Wenzhou
Changzhou
Wuhan
Jiangyin
Shenyang
Jinan

Today's djc is reporting the building is officially 102 floors and 1.4 million sf, still at 1,111' high.

Nice rendering/mass with the djc article.

https://www.djc.com/stories/images/2...umbia1_big.jpg

How many 100+ floor buildings currently exist/UC/proposed in the country?

I think only 5.

ESB, Sears Tower, Hancock all have 100 floors or more. Silver steins West Side tower will a little over a 100 floors. So this being the 5th one to that group.

If the original twins where around, I'd be 7, but still, quite a rare moment to have over a 100 floors, especially with ceiling heights the way they are.

not many, according to the SSP diagrams.

existing:
1. sears tower, chicago - 108 floors
2. one WTC, NYC - 104 floors
3. ESB, NYC - 102 floors
4. big john, chicago - 100 floors


proposed:
5. 701 fourth, seattle - 101 floors
6. 520 W 41st, NYC - 100 floors

SEATTLE | 701 Fourth Ave (4/C Tower) | 1111 FT | 102 FL
 

Owner: Crescent Heights Inspirational Living
Architect: LMN Architects

The 4/C complex would total more than 1.4 million square feet, with 1,200 residential units, 151,650 square feet of office space, 150 hotel rooms and 15,500 square feet of retail. About 750 parking stalls would be located below and above ground.


Project news

More project news

http://www.djc.com/stories/images/20...umbia1_big.jpg

http://www.djc.com/stories/images/20...umbia2_web.jpg

Current thread: http://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=218929

Could a mod merge the post above to the original thread.

This would be great for Seattle, but more importantly the US. The building isn't perfect, but it *is* a perfect location for a supertall in the skyline. Empty parking lot, next to the cities next tallest building.

Not holding breath, but there are alot of midrise buildings under construction in the city right now, so maybe it happens

Yeah, this is first Supertall tower in Seattle. We don't see a supertall building. I realize that I knows other supertall tower in Chicago, New York, Miami, Dubai, Taiwan, Singapore, KUL, and Shanghai, as well.

On the news they had a segment about the tower. They talked about wind tunnel testing. It was real quick. Sorry I can't remember which channel.

4/C - 701 4th Ave
This is from the design packet (http://web6.seattle.gov/dpd/edms/Get...Docs&id=469382) showing options that they've considered.
But they are stuck on the box shape for now it seems. Hopefully someone can talk them into bowing it some.

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5728/...ff4a29bb_o.jpg
4C-shapes by Marcus, on Flickr

Proposal #1 or #2 are my picks!

Ugh! It's crazy that Miami developers are expanding & building new high
rises in other cities like Atlanta , http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/r...-flagship.html , and now a new supertall in Seattle which looks great and Miami is constantly battling the FAA over heights!
Would be nice to see this go vertical soon!

They're negotiating with the FAA on this one too.

At the other end of Downtown, their 440' twins should be easy though.

I also prefer the 1st and 2nd design. Don't know what they're talking about but I think they compliment Columbia Center better.

2nd one is stunning. :worship:

I'm probably 50/50 for the first one and 2nd one. The third one isn't bad either. It's sort of like a taller version of the Cheung Center in Hong Kong. I guess the first one is probably the best complement to the Columbia Center with the curved facade and the small setbacks. Plus it would at least have some kind of personality in silhouette. But the 2nd one would have the more interesting facade, and it might be a good contrast to the Columbia Center's non-conventional shape. Overall, I'd say the 2nd design is the best.

In the proposed/works in progress at the FAA:
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external...58387454&row=2
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external...58387513&row=4
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external...58387536&row=0
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external...58387553&row=1

This thing's a beast. Seattle certainly deserves it. I hope it happens.

Definitely prefer #2 then #1 in the proposals. the writing justifying the form of #3 is painful in my opinion. It's almost as if they realise the design is ugly, but are trying to convince you that it is artistic and signifies what this building represents.

wow what a proposal -- hmm, the 3rd one seems the most seattley to me

^Yes, and many of us wish to climb out of the "box" and stomp on it.

I like the second design the best, but I think it would be even better if it was turned upside down. So that it went from curved to box.

Proposal #1 or #2! Not liking #3 at all!

Only 1 at a time. You have picks one, but not 2.

viewguysf
 

Be very leery of Crescent Heights since they have recently built several looser towers here, one of which is particularly hideous and prominent.

"Jasper" is the scourge of Rincon Hill and most of us hate it because of its blank west side that faces the city. It is by far the worst tower of the eight others constructed in the area. http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...115515&page=21

"NEMA" started out to be promising, but is cheap, not well done, and is already not aging well. http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...128011&page=18

Crescent Heights has two other very prominent development sites in the City that are definitely a cause for concern.

Neither of those looks bad to me. And we can see the design here in detail. No blank walls.

N830MH: OK....Maybe I'd like to see both #1 & #2 built!!

This may be true for the two projects you mentioned in San Francisco, but the conditions for 701 Fourth Avenue in Seattle are not the same. The design quality may be different as a result. The same goes for the newer projects in San Francisco. As you know, projects by others, even with great designs and good reputations sometimes get value engineered with great disappointment. Large projects are typically complicated and often unpredictable. Limitations may arise that force difficult compromises. We'll just have to wait and see. Hopefully these designs for the newer towers turn out much better.

This one might probably be a bit shorter than proposed:


Proposed 102-story tower would be too tall for FAA approval
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/artic...AA-6735891.php