HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #901  
Old Posted Mar 12, 2015, 9:05 PM
Gantz Gantz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 323
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris08876 View Post
Yes approval for anything, even if its a radio tower when its at 2000 ft or greater. They simply have to have a good reason (the developer) to build one, economic purpose, extensive studies, and go through the full process with the FAA, and if the conditions are right, they will accept. 2000 ft isn't necessary a max on what someone can build, but it does require more work on the developer's part.
I think what would be good if the mayor preemptively went to FAA and negotiated some kind of special exclusion zone for Manhattan island, that allows building above 2000ft without the developer going through FAA approval.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #902  
Old Posted Mar 12, 2015, 11:44 PM
hunser's Avatar
hunser hunser is offline
don't *meddle*...
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: New York City / Wien
Posts: 4,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris08876 View Post
New project at East 37 street will be 700 feet and 65 floors.

Thread: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=216084
I can't believe it ... just when we got another height cut (450 Albee Sq), there comes along a new 200m+ project. This is crazy!!
Btw. the adress should be 8 East 37th Street.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chris08876 View Post

I think a 600m is very realistic, and I'll tell you where I can see one going up, in Midtown East. Something multi-use, with large floor plates for the commercial aspect, a hotel, and a mix of residential could be the type of 600m that would happen in NY.

Two good options for something like this are Midtown East, and the lot for Hudson Yards Phase 2.
Yes, after all those monsters at 57th Street and 1Vandy a megatall is on the horizon. I say in 4 or 5 years we will see a serious megatall proposal.
And I concure, the location will either be Midtown East (which is gaining momentum) or the Hudson Yards.

Last edited by hunser; Mar 13, 2015 at 12:04 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #903  
Old Posted Mar 13, 2015, 12:11 AM
hunser's Avatar
hunser hunser is offline
don't *meddle*...
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: New York City / Wien
Posts: 4,016
111 Murray St confirmed 845'.

DOB
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #904  
Old Posted Mar 13, 2015, 1:35 AM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
DENNAB
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NA - Europe
Posts: 4,381
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gantz View Post
Was always under the impression that 300m is a supertall and 600m is a megatall.

You need FAA approval to construct megatalls in the United States.
A megatall is over 600m and you need permission to construct over 610m (2000 feet) in the US.

So you could still build a megatall just as long as it stays between 600-610 meters
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #905  
Old Posted Mar 13, 2015, 7:32 PM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,034
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris08876 View Post
Yes approval for anything, even if its a radio tower when its at 2000 ft or greater. They simply have to have a good reason (the developer) to build one, economic purpose, extensive studies, and go through the full process with the FAA, and if the conditions are right, they will accept. 2000 ft isn't necessary a max on what someone can build, but it does require more work on the developer's part.
What's really going to wrap people's mind is the previous 2000ft provision in the federal register, imposed by the FAA to protect navigable airspace, was quietly relaxed and now reads as follows:

Quote:
If you propose construction or alteration to an existing structure that exceeds 2,000 ft. in height above ground level (AGL), the FAA presumes it to be a hazard to air navigation that results in an inefficient use of airspace. You must include details explaining both why the proposal would not constitute a hazard to air navigation and why it would not cause an inefficient use of airspace.
The previous language:

Quote:
The FAA presumption against construction of structures over a certain height is set forth in the FAA rules. A proposed structure or an alteration to an existing structure that exceeds 2,000 feet in height above the ground will be presumed to be a hazard to air navigation and to result in an inefficient utilization of airspace and the applicant has the burden of overcoming that presumption. Each notice submitted under the FAA rules proposing a structure in excess of 2,000 feet above ground must contain a detailed showing, directed to meeting this burden. Only in exceptional cases, where the FAA concludes that a clear and compelling showing has been made that it would not result in an inefficient utilization of the airspace and would not result in a hazard to air navigation, will a determination of no hazard be issued.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #906  
Old Posted Mar 13, 2015, 9:56 PM
hunser's Avatar
hunser hunser is offline
don't *meddle*...
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: New York City / Wien
Posts: 4,016
45 E.22nd (777') St is U/C!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #907  
Old Posted Mar 15, 2015, 3:06 PM
hunser's Avatar
hunser hunser is offline
don't *meddle*...
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: New York City / Wien
Posts: 4,016
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #908  
Old Posted Mar 15, 2015, 10:19 PM
fleonzo fleonzo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: New York City
Posts: 841
Quote:
Originally Posted by hunser View Post
My City truly becoming Gotham City!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #909  
Old Posted Mar 17, 2015, 1:30 AM
hunser's Avatar
hunser hunser is offline
don't *meddle*...
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: New York City / Wien
Posts: 4,016
According to the latest DOB permits, 111W57 is now 1,424ft/434m.

http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/Jo...ssdocnumber=05

Quote:
Building Height (ft.): 1424
Building Stories: 82
Dwelling Units: 60
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #910  
Old Posted Mar 17, 2015, 2:56 AM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,034
1424ft for only 60 units.

20 years from now we're probably going to have 100s of supertalls if this keeps up. Plenty of millionaires and billionaires in the world still without Manhattan real estate.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #911  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2015, 12:23 AM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
ψ Sailor of the Mind ψ
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 33,375
With the new height, is 111 Murray Street still 62 floors?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #912  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2015, 1:04 AM
hunser's Avatar
hunser hunser is offline
don't *meddle*...
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: New York City / Wien
Posts: 4,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris08876 View Post
With the new height, is 111 Murray Street still 62 floors?
DOB filing says 66: http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/Jo...ssdocnumber=01
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #913  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2015, 11:28 PM
hunser's Avatar
hunser hunser is offline
don't *meddle*...
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: New York City / Wien
Posts: 4,016
# U.S. supertalls excluding NYC: 20
# supertalls in NYC: 34

So we have 34/54 ~ 0,63. Meaning that in the near future New York will account for 63% of America's supertalls.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #914  
Old Posted Mar 19, 2015, 1:40 AM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
ψ Sailor of the Mind ψ
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 33,375
NYC has more supertalls proposed then all of the current ones in China. This being 300m completed. Once the ones u/c finish its a different story but its neat to know in the short term. Granted even if 20 of them are built, its still impressive for one city versus entire nations in terms of rankings. The United States as a whole is still doing very well in the rankings. Even if we are second, we are putting up a fight. The next nation behind us is UAE, but they are losing steam and have been for a while. It wasn't too long ago that they said after 9/11 that skyscrapers are dead. It seems that 14 years later, not just in NYC, but in every major city, towers are popping all over the place.

I do expect NYC to eclipse Dubai as the supertall capital. As a safe haven for capital, supertalls will be the norm as land is becoming ever so scarce and wealth continues to pour into this region.

Only four nations have more than 4 supertalls, and those are U.A.E, U.S., India, and China.

Even in a unprecedented global city boom, its still important to know that supertalls are still very, very rare when we look at it from a global standpoint.

In general though, if we simplify it, 250-299m is still a rarity globally. Certain nations build within this range like its going out of style, but out of the 160 plus countries, it still does not happen as frequently in many cities.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #915  
Old Posted Mar 19, 2015, 7:01 PM
Onn Onn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: The United States
Posts: 1,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris08876 View Post
NYC has more supertalls proposed then all of the current ones in China. This being 300m completed. Once the ones u/c finish its a different story but its neat to know in the short term. Granted even if 20 of them are built, its still impressive for one city versus entire nations in terms of rankings. The United States as a whole is still doing very well in the rankings. Even if we are second, we are putting up a fight. The next nation behind us is UAE, but they are losing steam and have been for a while. It wasn't too long ago that they said after 9/11 that skyscrapers are dead. It seems that 14 years later, not just in NYC, but in every major city, towers are popping all over the place.

I do expect NYC to eclipse Dubai as the supertall capital. As a safe haven for capital, supertalls will be the norm as land is becoming ever so scarce and wealth continues to pour into this region.

Only four nations have more than 4 supertalls, and those are U.A.E, U.S., India, and China.

Even in a unprecedented global city boom, its still important to know that supertalls are still very, very rare when we look at it from a global standpoint.

In general though, if we simplify it, 250-299m is still a rarity globally. Certain nations build within this range like its going out of style, but out of the 160 plus countries, it still does not happen as frequently in many cities.
Don't expect all the supertalls currently on the docket for New York to be built. Eventually the glut of foreign money is the city will flow out again and with it some of the major residential projects (whether that's Hudson Yards or 57th street..) However the major projects seem safe right now. The office market is looking rosy too, more so than it has in a awhile. I expect there will be gains coming there that are not known today.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #916  
Old Posted Mar 19, 2015, 8:30 PM
hunser's Avatar
hunser hunser is offline
don't *meddle*...
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: New York City / Wien
Posts: 4,016
^ Most of the supertalls are already in prep or have a tenant. So I expect 80 - 90% of them to get built.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #917  
Old Posted Mar 19, 2015, 9:46 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
ψ Sailor of the Mind ψ
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 33,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onn View Post
Don't expect all the supertalls currently on the docket for New York to be built. Eventually the glut of foreign money is the city will flow out again and with it some of the major residential projects (whether that's Hudson Yards or 57th street..) However the major projects seem safe right now. The office market is looking rosy too, more so than it has in a awhile. I expect there will be gains coming there that are not known today.
Of course. Best to play it safe and go with a lower limit, but as Hunser mentioned, many of them are good to go. Point being that even if we put the lower limit at 50% for sake of argument, its still an amazing feat. Also proposed as I mentioned. But overtime, Dubai will be eclipsed. If its 5 or 10 or 15 years from now, its bound to happen.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #918  
Old Posted Mar 20, 2015, 12:06 AM
hunser's Avatar
hunser hunser is offline
don't *meddle*...
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: New York City / Wien
Posts: 4,016
1 Manhattan West, 995', is U/C! Another supertall for New York.

EDIT: or maybe it's the site for 3 Manhattan West, it's a tough call ... will need to take a look at a map.

Last edited by hunser; Mar 20, 2015 at 12:37 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #919  
Old Posted Mar 21, 2015, 12:22 AM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
ψ Sailor of the Mind ψ
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 33,375
Rethinking the Tall Building: Opportunities in the 21st Century Metropolis

Video Link


Quote:
Chicago, USA. Philip Oldfield, Assistant Professor of Architecture at Nottingham University, presents at a joint CTBUH/IIT Cloud Talk in Crown Hall on the Illinois Institute of Technology campus. His presentation covered the opportunities to make tall buildings more sustainable through some forward thinking skyscrapers and examples from his studios' work.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #920  
Old Posted Mar 21, 2015, 3:07 PM
hunser's Avatar
hunser hunser is offline
don't *meddle*...
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: New York City / Wien
Posts: 4,016
^ Interesting vid, thx for posting. I've added a couple of buildings on the front page which have a SSP thread.
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 > Buildings & Architecture
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:37 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.