HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Feb 10, 2011, 1:33 PM
Alpha Alpha is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,984
Massive buildings and structures which were reduced in height

It is not incommon that steel structures like lattice towers and guyed masts change their height during their lifetime, when e.g. new antennas are mounted.
For massive structures like concrete chimneys, highrises and concrete towers ( without a steel mast on the top) it is very incommon that their height is reduced during their lifetime as this is expensive and complicated.
Nevertheless, it is sometimes done: e.g. was the chimney of K+S Works ( http://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=92141 ) in 2001 reduced from 200 metres to 94 metres.
I know also that height of highrise buildings were reduced by removing upper floors ( from Germany I heard this was done at a highrise in Kassel in the late 1980ies, but I have no further information).
Which examples of height reductions of massive structures do you know?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Feb 10, 2011, 3:04 PM
harryc's Avatar
harryc harryc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Oak Park, Il
Posts: 14,004
UW Madison - Bascom Hall

Well not planned, but after a fire the dome was not replaced, and I had heard that there was another modification (at this time ?) to keep the building lower than the state capitol (straight down the street).

built in 1857

__________________
Harry C ---- My Flickr stream HRC_OakPark
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. B Franklin.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2011, 4:55 AM
Alpha Alpha is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,984
Nevertheless, there are some cases where the lower part of a structure survived a collapse of the pinnacle.
Blåbärskullenmasten, a TV mast in Sweden lost obviously according http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bl%C3%A...rskullenmasten its upper part by icing in 1979. The remaining mast stump was later equipped with the necessary antennas. The mast is still in use, but it is now 274 metres tall instead of 323 metres before 1979.
Has someone further examples?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2011, 5:10 AM
Upward's Avatar
Upward Upward is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 8,047
The Mather Tower in Chicago stood temporarily without its uppermost floors, while being renovated

Pic from Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mather_Tower

I stayed in the hotel next door in 1996, before the demolition/reconstruction, and remember looking over at this very slender tower from the then-unused restaurant space on the top floor. No pics of my own, though...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2011, 12:48 PM
scalziand's Avatar
scalziand scalziand is offline
Mortaaaaaaaaar!
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Naugatuck, CT/Worcester,MA
Posts: 3,492
Several skyscrapers in Chicago, such as Marina City, had masts that were removed. More in this thread-Marina City TV Antennas.

I faintly recall that a building in NYC was built larger than the zoning allowed, and the DOB forced the developer to demolish the top several floors to bring it into compliance. Then again, it may be small structures I'm thinking of, like this and this.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2011, 10:56 PM
Alpha Alpha is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,984
The chimney of Vojany Power Station, EVO2 was shortened in 1998. Its original height was 300 metres. Now it is just 175 metres tall ( http://www.termostav-mraz.sk/en/references ).

Surely height reduced was also one mast of the 702 kHz-antenna of Col de La Madone transmitter ( Picture: http://www.panoramio.com/photo/2476356 ).

Last edited by Alpha; Feb 23, 2011 at 10:50 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2011, 12:50 AM
Roadcruiser1's Avatar
Roadcruiser1 Roadcruiser1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,106
This is one of the most saddest buildings that wasn't completed. If it was completed it might have had become a landmark. The Metropolitan Life North Building in NYC. It would have had 100 floors, had a height of 1454 feet (taller with the spire), would have featured an NYC Subway station, and would have had been taller then the Empire State Building. The Great Depression left the building shorter then what it would have had been. Though the base is strong enough to continue construction of the building if anyone wants to finish the beautiful Art Deco building. Currently there are 30 floors, 2.2 million square feet of office space in the completed base of the building, and it is 451 feet tall. It's a mere stub compared to what it would have had been.

What it would have looked like if it was completed.


What it looks like now.


Last edited by Roadcruiser1; Feb 23, 2011 at 5:52 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2011, 1:52 AM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is offline
Remember
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Here
Posts: 52,328
That one would still be the tallest in the US at that height. 3 feet taller than the Willis Tower.
__________________
I heard we had the best mortality rate. - President Donald Trump, July 19, 2020

To be persuasive we must be believable; to be believable we must be credible; credible we must be truthful. - Edward R. Murrow
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2011, 2:00 AM
Jonboy1983's Avatar
Jonboy1983 Jonboy1983 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: The absolute western-most point of the Philadelphia urbanized area. :)
Posts: 1,721
I don't know what the original plan was specifically for the US Steel Building. All I know is that it was originally planned to be the World's tallest building at the time (if I had to guess, I think it would have been something like 1300 feet and at least 90 floors). Of course, they reached a compromise at 64 floors and 841 feet in height.

I have no idea what this building would have looked like originally. It would be neat to find out tho!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2011, 10:56 AM
Alpha Alpha is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,984
Nevertheless, Metropolitan Life North Building is not an example of a structure, which was shortened as construction work stopped when it reached a certain height.
So no engineering work was used to reduce its height!

In my definition a structural shortening is a height reduction of a structure that already exist - as in my chimney examples.

In Berlin, there is on Müggelberge a TV tower, which was never topped out as, if one would have done it, it would have been an enormous hazard for air traffic.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:50 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.