HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #261  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2022, 2:16 AM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,018
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper View Post
Have you seen the bananas plan proposed by the Government of Ontario for the town of Richmond Hill north of Toronto?

https://www.engagehightech.ca/wp-con..._Dec9FINAL.pdf
Look at all those 80 storey towers on page 30
Silly question... Is this the same development?

http://engagebridge.ca/wp-content/up...ale-Report.pdf
http://engagebridge.ca/wp-content/up...Drawings-1.pdf




It looks like another group of 80-storey skyscrapers at the adjacent station. Ontario really does TOD. U.S. cities could learn a thing or two as the approach is so tepid.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #262  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2022, 5:40 AM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 29,835
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCReid View Post
It seems odd, but NYC building boom impact after WTC tragedy seems to be opposite of what was expected. I recall reading and hearing comments that no one would want to work or live in very tall buildings.
Yeah, all of those "death of the skyscraper" predictions in the months after 9-11 couldn't have possibly been more wrong.
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a great middle ground for many middle class families.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #263  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2022, 1:47 AM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is online now
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 45,865
Did a quick comparison:

1990:




May 3 2021:



BTW, none of those towers along the East River (Greenpoint) existed (bottom of 2nd pic). Its a given with Midtown. A lot has changed in 22 years. And this is only a little slice of it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #264  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2022, 2:04 AM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is online now
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 45,865
^^^^

One more comparison for fun.


Older pic by me.

2003 vs June 2021

Key to note; DoBro, Midtown West, Jersey City, Downtown. LES infill. Various infill around ESB.


Reply With Quote
     
     
  #265  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2022, 7:44 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is online now
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 45,865
Official Renderings are out for a new American icon: 270 Park!



Reply With Quote
     
     
  #266  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2022, 7:54 PM
SAN Man SAN Man is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2021
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 725
^That looks like a new version of the Sears or John Hancock Tower, bulky and squared off. I like it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #267  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2022, 9:14 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is online now
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 45,865
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAN Man View Post
^That looks like a new version of the Sears or John Hancock Tower, bulky and squared off. I like it.
I agree. Lots of potential with the night lighting.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #268  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2022, 9:38 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 9,899
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAN Man View Post
^That looks like a new version of the Sears or John Hancock Tower, bulky and squared off. I like it.
Yeah, I thought that too. I think it has hints of 30 Rockefeller Center in it too.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #269  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2022, 9:41 PM
glowrock's Avatar
glowrock glowrock is offline
Becoming Chicago-fied!
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Chicago (West Avondale)
Posts: 19,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAN Man View Post
^That looks like a new version of the Sears or John Hancock Tower, bulky and squared off. I like it.
This is what happens when Sears and John Hancock have a baby.

Aaron (Glowrock)
__________________
"Deeply corrupt but still semi-functional - it's the Chicago way." -- Barrelfish
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #270  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2022, 10:55 PM
jd3189 jd3189 is offline
An Optimistic Realist
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA / West Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 5,607
That building also looks like the modern reincarnation of the MetLife proposal from the 30s. It adds mass and dominance to the skyline that many of the skinny residential towers weren’t able to do.

The fact that it has some resemblance to the John Hancock and Sears towers back in Chicago also hints back to the time NYC had supertalls that stood way above their peers in the 20th century. It will have the same dominance the ESB once held over Midtown and what the WTC did to Downtown with both the Twins and 1 WTC today. A return to the classic New York skyline dynamic.
__________________
Working towards making American cities walkable again!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #271  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2022, 11:50 PM
MAC123 MAC123 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: Deadend town, Flyover State.
Posts: 1,080
Still want the Metro North proposal to happen. Ahh pipe dream tho.
__________________
NYC - 20 Supertalls (including UC)
NYC - Future 2035 supertalls - 45 + not including anything that gets newly proposed between now and then (which will likely put it over 50)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #272  
Old Posted Apr 15, 2022, 12:16 AM
ChiSoxRox's Avatar
ChiSoxRox ChiSoxRox is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 2,496
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris08876 View Post
Official Renderings are out for a new American icon: 270 Park!

Majestic!
__________________
Like the pre-war masonry skyscrapers? Then check out my list of the tallest buildings in 1950.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #273  
Old Posted Apr 15, 2022, 7:25 AM
bobdreamz's Avatar
bobdreamz bobdreamz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Miami/Orlando, FL.
Posts: 8,132
Miami will double it's count of 800+ footers this Summer to 4 when the Waldorf-Astoria (1,049 ft.) and the Okan Tower (920 ft.) finally break ground.
There are another dozen or so towers planned above this height as well but Miami seems to be stuck in a funk around this height boundary for some reason.
__________________
Miami : 62 Skyscrapers over 500+ Ft.|150+ Meters | 18 Under Construction.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #274  
Old Posted Apr 15, 2022, 4:47 PM
Chisouthside Chisouthside is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Silicon Valley/Chicago
Posts: 498
That's a big strong looking building in NYC. Can agree with the comparisons to sears/john hancock but the diamond bracing def says New York to me. Very impressive.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #275  
Old Posted Apr 15, 2022, 5:12 PM
MAC123 MAC123 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: Deadend town, Flyover State.
Posts: 1,080
Agreed with everyone here. This building would look right at home in between Sears and Hancock. But I love where it is right now, and hope to see more big ones go up around it especially 175 Park and 350 Park.
__________________
NYC - 20 Supertalls (including UC)
NYC - Future 2035 supertalls - 45 + not including anything that gets newly proposed between now and then (which will likely put it over 50)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #276  
Old Posted Apr 15, 2022, 9:22 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 29,835
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobdreamz View Post
Miami will double it's count of 800+ footers this Summer to 4 when the Waldorf-Astoria (1,049 ft.) and the Okan Tower (920 ft.) finally break ground.
yeah, it'll be really exciting if one or both of those break ground in the coming months.

now that chicago's 850' tall salesforce tower officially topped-out earlier this year, there are only 3 towers over 800' in the US that are currently in the vertical construction phase according to the CTBUH database

1. 270 Park Avenue - NYC - 1,388'
2. 6th & Guadalupe - austin - 875'
3. 1000M - chicago - 805'


in addition to the two miami towers mentioned above, the 875' tall phase 1 of chicago's 400 NLSD project is also supposed to start construction towards the end of this year, according to a recent press release from the developer.

how about other US cities? any 800+ footers expected to officially commence construction in 2022? i know NYC probably has a bunch.
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a great middle ground for many middle class families.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #277  
Old Posted Apr 16, 2022, 12:21 AM
hughfb3 hughfb3 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 831
California has serious design guidelines on high rise construction for its major downtowns and may never want to compete with the NYC’s, Chicago’s and Miami’s of the world on the supertall and general high rise building front. What CA values/deems important are mountain/hills/beaches/bays and how the cities interact with those visually and aesthetically. If you ever visit here, there are almost "0" high rises on the entire coast.** Unlike many other places in the world where high rises are THE defining feature and are the things that people prize on visuals and postcards (NY, CHI, Florida, Brasil, China, etc), California sells the world on its natural beauty for visuals and notoriety and builds from there to keep these valuable assets in sight and prominence.

Both Los Angeles and San Francisco practice skyline sculpting where in Los Angeles, our planning commission shapes the skyline to mimic the San Gabriel Mountains, the Hollywood Hills, and other natural formations that are viewed from specific vantage points. San Francisco does it to mimic the rolling hills around the bay and lately, the new eastern span of the Bay Bridge… Transbay area plans have Salesforce tower as a new centralized peak in SF’s skyline with everything tapering down from there. San Diego and San Jose might never have tall skylines and will keep their FAA height restrictions using the immediate excuse that their airports are so close. The bigger issue aesthetically is that San Diego's backdrop mountains are so short and San Jose is surrounded by low rolling hills. They won't be too inclined in the near future to replace the airports to break their height barriers for taller buildings anytime soon.

Untitled by Hugh B, on Flickr

^^Los Angeles viewed from the Southwest is meant to mimic the San Gabriel Mountain backdrop with one central peak and multiple smaller peaks. The gap between the financial district and South Park would be where we would see a new super tall peak in the future and a true new tallest building, then they would taper down from there. Its already beginning to fill in as LA just broke ground on a new 760 footer in that gap last week and has another 800+ footer proposed the next block over.

[IMG]Untitled by Hugh B, on Flickr[/IMG]

^^LA as viewed from its most famous angles from the North west... from the Hollywood Hills, is meant to mimic the hills from this view. If you notice in the foreground there is a bit of the hollywood hills in the shot and everything (hills/skyline) is higher/taller on the left/North and gently sloped down as it goes to the right/south in the shot. In other images, if you zoom back a bit more, you will see this sculpt even more defined. From this angle, the skyline is more elongated and gently sloping, like the hills as they cascade from peak into the basin.

[IMG]Untitled by Hugh B, on Flickr[/IMG]

^^From the East, its a central peak skyline. Notice how The Grand on the right fits the slope quite well. Onni Times Mirror and Tribune tower will fill this gap and slope. Tribune tower in this case was requested to be taller by planning commission, whereas the Grand was asked to be shorter as its on Bunker Hill with a higher elevation

[IMG]Untitled by Hugh B, on Flickr[/IMG]

^^From directly north, it is another central peak skyline theme. The gap between city hall on the left and the skyline will be filled with multiple 40/60+ story residential towers from Onni times mirror, Hill st, Cresent Heights, Tribune and others to further enhance the slope down… even the Wilshire Grand's curved roof contributes to this central peak aesthetic from multiple views

Every building gets considered in how it will look on the skyline from various points. Some get upsized by request of the planning commission, some get downsized by request.

Until the Core Values of California shift, it will always be slower on tall high rise development for the foreseeable future as Natural beauty is still King/Queen here!!

**San Diego's high rises, although look like they are on the coast/beach, are actually on a protected bay... Somewhat similar rule with Long Beach but the California Coastal Commission has given them the only exemption to have high rises that close to direct ocean front, but its still on a protected bay barring any new high-rises east of Shoreline/Alamitos Ave. **

Last edited by hughfb3; Apr 16, 2022 at 5:25 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #278  
Old Posted Apr 16, 2022, 9:50 AM
kolchak's Avatar
kolchak kolchak is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 873
Chicago also has a similar guideline. As to the LA skyline - the Bunker Hill high rises were indeed built to mimic the mountains and Wilshire Grand was designed specifically to mimic the mountains but the tapering of the skyline to the left and right as viewed from the southwest is just the natural fading of the built up urban core imo. Glad to see DTLA finally start to realise some of the projects that have sat for a while.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #279  
Old Posted Apr 16, 2022, 1:43 PM
SAN Man SAN Man is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2021
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by hughfb3 View Post
San Diego and San Jose might never have tall skylines and will keep their FAA height restrictions using the immediate excuse that their airports are so close.
^Yep. The San Diego skyline has plateaued, you can almost draw a straight line and that's the 500 foot FAA cap. Currently there are 11 tower cranes up in the downtown area. Here's a good angle of that growing DT plateau:
DT from Soledad by Manuel Sanchez, on Flickr

Quote:
The bigger issue aesthetically is that San Diego's backdrop mountains are so short and San Jose is surrounded by low rolling hills. They won't be too inclined in the near future to replace the airports to break their height barriers for taller buildings anytime soon.
^ Our mountains are shorter, the highest peaks only go up 6,000 feet compared to LA's 14,000 peaks. San Diego is a much hillier place than Los Angeles in general. Here's an angle that shows one of our highest mountains in the area, often it's snowcapped during the winter, and the photo gives an idea of just how close Naval Air Station North Island is to downtown, with the airport just out of frame on the left side of the photo which is why we have a 500' cap.
Fort Rosecrans by Manuel Sanchez, on Flickr


Quote:
**San Diego's high rises, although look like they are on the coast/beach, are actually on a protected bay... Somewhat similar rule with Long Beach but the California Coastal Commission has given them the only exemption to have high rises that close to direct ocean front, but its still on a protected bay barring any new high-rises east of Shoreline/Alamitos Ave. **
Similar to SF, SD's downtown is right on the bay. The only high-rises along the ocean down here are those that were built before the Coastal Commission was established. Currently the height limit in those areas is 30 feet. Here's DT from two different angles.
DTSD Skyline from Coronado by Manuel Sanchez, on Flickr

Downtown from the Bay by Manuel Sanchez, on Flickr
^All pictures by me.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #280  
Old Posted Apr 16, 2022, 4:24 PM
MAC123 MAC123 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: Deadend town, Flyover State.
Posts: 1,080
Btw CTBUH is saying 15 for 300m + towers. Maybe one those is just slightly below 1,000? Hopefully more get proposed and built, I think Dubai has like 28.
__________________
NYC - 20 Supertalls (including UC)
NYC - Future 2035 supertalls - 45 + not including anything that gets newly proposed between now and then (which will likely put it over 50)
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:57 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.