The 500 Club

[Wheelingman04]

Originally Posted by toddguy

3 out of the five in Columbus are government buildings. It is good to be the state capital! (Thanks Cincy, Cleveland, Toledo, etc. for your tax dollars at work!)

[Exodus]

That list put Detroit at 6. Actually it has 7 and one only 5 feet short, if you include the flag pole that will put Detroit right at 8.

1. Marriott Hotel Ren. Cen. - 748 ft.
2. Comerica Tower - 620 ft.
3. Penobscott Bldg. - 565 ft.
4. Ren. Cen. Office Tower #1. 506 ft.
5. Ren. Cen. Office Tower #2. 506 ft.
6. Ren. Cen. Office Tower #3. 506 ft.
7. Ren. Cen. Office Tower #4. 506 ft.
8. The Guardian Bldg. - 495 ft.

Detroit has also had at least 3 buildings over 500 feet cancelled.
The Book Tower #2 - 944 ft.
The Fisher Bldg. original plan - 840 ft.
Greektown Casino Hotel plan #2 - 558 ft.

[plinko]

Detroit has 7...

Marriott
Comerica
Penobscot
RenCenX4

[LordMandeep]

There are 5 buildings in Toronto only like 5-10 feet short of 500.

We have a ton of 300-500 feet buildings.

[Metropolitan]

Originally Posted by LordMandeep

There are 5 buildings in Toronto only like 5-10 feet short of 500.

We have a ton of 300-500 feet buildings.

According to SSP diagrams, there are 152 buildings above 300 feet in Toronto.

Surprisingly, there are more buildings over 300 feet in Paris than in a city such as San Francisco. Indeed, there are 98 of them in Paris whereas there are 88 of them in San Francisco.

Just as a comparison with other European cities. There are 38 of them in London, 32 in Frankfurt, 44 in Istanbul and 64 in Moscow (though I believe some aren't recorded on the SSP database, especially for Moscow).

[Tom In Chicago]

There are 5 buildings in Toronto only like 5-10 feet short of 500.

I don't see how that's any different than any other city. . .

We have a ton of 300-500 feet buildings.

Cool. . . but that's not what we're talking about. . . anyways the height game is just that. . . a game. . . there's no way to know for sure without accurate research that buildings are exactly what they are in height, so that number is constantly a moving target. . . given that fact, my thoughts are to measure a city based upon number of buildings over a certain number of floors. . . 35 seems to give me the impression that a building is worthy of "skyscraper" status. . . cities like Vancouver and Sao Paulo would be better represented whereas a 50 floor cutoff would almost eliminate them entirely. . . hmm. . . so many ways to slice it. . . how should I go about it next???

Anyhow if anyone thinks those numbers are in question, please feel free to PM me with some information as to what it should be and why (of course a reliable source eg. site survey of building under construction or blueprints reveal building is whatever blah blah blah is needed before I go about making any changes). . . it would also be nice to know what I'm missing for Chicago or how Steely got 87 buildings completed while I'm showing 86. . .

[vertex]

Why stop at 5 buildings? Why not just 2 buildings, or 10?

[Metropolitan]

Originally Posted by Tom In Chicago

There are 5 buildings in Toronto only like 5-10 feet short of 500.

I don't see how that's any different than any other city. . .

We have a ton of 300-500 feet buildings.

Cool. . . but that's not what we're talking about. . . anyways the height game is just that. . . a game. . . there's no way to know for sure without accurate research that buildings are exactly what they are in height, so that number is constantly a moving target. . . given that fact, my thoughts are to measure a city based upon number of buildings over a certain number of floors. . . 35 seems to give me the impression that a building is worthy of "skyscraper" status. . . cities like Vancouver and Sao Paulo would be better represented whereas a 50 floor cutoff would almost eliminate them entirely. . . hmm. . . so many ways to slice it. . . how should I go about it next???

Anyhow if anyone thinks those numbers are in question, please feel free to PM me with some information as to what it should be and why (of course a reliable source eg. site survey of building under construction or blueprints reveal building is whatever blah blah blah is needed before I go about making any changes). . . it would also be nice to know what I'm missing for Chicago or how Steely got 87 buildings completed while I'm showing 86. . .

Could you please correct the datas for Paris ? I've already given you several links proving that there are 11 completed buildings above 500 ft and 2 under construction in that city, and not respectively 7 and 1 as you've written.

By the way, I do have issues to understand how you could get those figures of 7 and 1 for Paris.

[Late1]

Tom, you're also counting buildings right at 500' and not just those *over* 500', right? If so, Philly has 11:

1. Comcast Center 975' (u/c)
2. 1 Liberty Place 945'
3. 2 Liberty Place 848'
4. Mellon Bank Center 792'
5. Bell Atlantic Tower 739'
6. IBX Tower 625'
7. 1 Commerce Square 565'
8. 2 Commerce Square 565'
9. City Hall 548'
10. Residences at the Ritz 518' (u/c)
11. 1818 Market St 500'

[JManc]

we stopped building anything over 15 stories and that is why miami is going to blow by us. at least we're not 3rd world though....

[BnaBreaker]

Wow, go Miami!

[bobdreamz]

^ good one J !!

[Tom In Chicago]

I'll have some time today to look at these corrections and see if my search criteria made any mistakes. . . I'll let you all know later. . . thanks for your input. . .

[L.ARCH]

While youre making corrections... I count 4 500+ buildings being built right now in Atlanta with at least 3 more to start in the next two or three months.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Tom In Chicago

it would also be nice to know what I'm missing for Chicago or how Steely got 87 buildings completed while I'm showing 86. . .

i think i know why we're getting different numbers tom. you're on emporis proper, while i only have access to the public version. the public version rounds all building heights to the nearest foot, so where you see a building that's listed at 499'- 8", the public version simply displays it as 500'. i think that's where our discrepancy is coming from.

[Exodus]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

i think i know why we're getting different numbers tom. you're on emporis proper, while i only have access to the public version. the public version rounds all building heights to the nearest foot, so where you see a building that's listed at 499'- 8", the public version simply displays it as 500'. i think that's where our discrepancy is coming from.

Isn't 490 something splitting hairs a bit ?

[tocoto]

Originally Posted by bryson662001

Miami has 20 500 + under construction?......that's insane....and they must all be residential.....no wonder they call it a bubble about to burst. I am surprised at Toronto and Boston. Toronto's buildings must all be 495 and Boston's 505.

Boston and its skyline are so underrated on this forum while Toronto is hyped to the max (like its the same as NYC or something). Boston has two buildings proposed over 500'. The SST is schedule to break ground in the spring of 2007 with height around 650'. 115 Withrop Sq. is planned at 1,200' with its spire and 1,000' to the roof. Like most big cities, Boston has lots of buildings in the 450 to 500 foot range.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Exodus

Isn't 490 something splitting hairs a bit ?

sure, but that's exactly what threads like this do. this is a tally of all buildings over 500', not buildings close to 500'. it's this inherent arbitrariness that means not a great deal of importance should be placed on these kinds of lists. they're still interesting to look at none-the-less.

[foxmtbr]

Hmm... Sacramento:
Current= none.
U/C= Towers on Capitol Mall (tower 1) 615'
Towers on Capitol Mall (tower 2) 615'

A few more are in the pipeline, but we'll have to wait for the housing market to pick up again.

[WhipperSnapper]

"while i only have access to the public version."

which becomes increasingly more pathetic - don't know so many volunteer for what is essentially a pay site