US skyscraper milestone: closing in on 100 towers over 800' tall

[Buckeye Native 001]

Yeah, but its one of those in the weeds things that would probably result in about a ten page SSP thread, at least

[Gantz]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

^ looking further into it, i was mistaken about the merchandize mart, at least in terms of 5-digit zip codes.

it's one of those local legend false "facts".

the sears tower is also said to be "so big it has its own zip code", but that is false as well.



if you drill down to the more fine-grained 9-digit zip codes (with the 4 digit suffix that most people don't use), then there are probably hundreds, or even thousands, of buildings with "their own zip code" around the nation.

but that's not really the same thing at all.

Lots of buildings in NYC have their own zip code, including most of the well known ones like ESB, Woolworth, Metlife, Chrysler, etc. Its certainly a flex.

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

^ looking further into it, i was mistaken about the merchandize mart, at least in terms of 5-digit zip codes.

it's one of those local legend false "facts".

the sears tower is also said to be "so big it has its own zip code", but that is false as well.

Not according to this: https://www.traveltrivia.com/buildin...gZkXU1XQAGkip2

But I guess they are wrong, because when I do a Google Map search of 60606, I get this: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Ch...!4d-87.6371461

Many blocks are clearly outlined.

[MAC123]

It’s interesting. If things played out right NYC could have had 4 buildings over 500 M with recent proposals.

1 WTC (completed)

Central Park Tower with spire (completed, but no spire)

418 11th Avenue (Currently the only known proposal for the site, though I expect others to be of similar size or taller)

175 Park Avenue (Approved, but height was cut by 20 M. I will never stop being pissed about this. But hey, it’s not built yet so the chance is technically still above 0 for 500 M still. I know I know, setting myself up for disappointment)

[chris08876]

NYC construction spending reaches all-time high of $86B

Oct. 25, 2022

Construction spending in New York City will reach an all-time high of $86 billion this year, up $38 billion from 2021, according to a new report from the New York Building Congress.

The report finds that despite numerous obstacles from the pandemic and economic uncertainty, construction spending and infrastructure investment in New York City remain positive.


However, a lack of replacement for the expired 421-a property tax exemption program for multifamily builders could dampen this outlook, according to the report. NYBC warns of an exacerbated housing shortage without a suitable program to incentivize residential construction.

Nonresidential growth in New York City over the next three years will be driven by large investments in healthcare facilities and new offices, according to the report. Office valuations in New York City are forecasted to decline by as much as 39% by 2029, but that downward trend largely affects only lower quality, less expensive office buildings.

On the multifamily side, NYBC forecasts about 71.5 million square feet of residential floor space to be built in 2022, and estimates over 30,000 units of housing will be built annually over the next three years.

The projected new square footage of residential construction built over the next two years is twice as high as projected nonresidential construction. However, NYBC warns that without a replacement for the 421-a program, the number of residential projects will likely decrease. The 421-a property tax exemption is for real estate developers building new multifamily buildings in the city.

“We need to find a suitable replacement for the expired 421-a program, streamline the land use review process, and increase as-of-right zoning capacity,” said Carlo Scissura, president and CEO of the NYBC, in the report. “Not only does the city’s economic recovery depend on it, our current housing crisis demands it.”

New York City’s population has increased by more than 625,000 in the past decade, but has added only 206,000 units, said Scissura. NYBC projects a gap of over 560,000 housing units by 2030, according to the report.

=======================
https://www.constructiondive.com/new...ngress/634872/

[Chico Loco]

Jersey City should not be in the count.

[Steely Dan]

^ jersey city has a skyscraper over 800' tall.

why should it not be included in a count of US skyscrapers over 800' tall?

[mrnyc]

unfortunately jc is locked out of anything taller by the faa. at least around the waterfront downtown area. i wonder if newark will ever get a supertall?

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by mrnyc

unfortunately jc is locked out of anything taller by the faa. at least around the waterfront downtown area. i wonder if newark will ever get a supertall?

Because of Newark Airport? Wouldn't downtown Newark have the same issue?

[Crawford]

I don't think JC or Newark could get a supertall, unless the FAA regs change. JC should be able to get pretty close, however.

I bet 900-ft towers would work along the waterfront, or even near Journal Square. Not sure about 1,000 ft towers, though.

[iheartthed]

I find it interesting that the FAA restricted Jersey City but is fine with the supertalls in Midtown Manhattan. Billionaire's row is closer to LGA than Downtown Jersey City is to Newark Airport (5 miles vs 6 miles).

[Steely Dan]

we keep creeping ever closer to 100!


the CTBUH is now listing both Waldorf Miami and Okan Tower (also in miami) as being officially U/C, so that makes a total of 96 US skyscrapers over 800' tall.


here's the updated chart:




miami with a HUGE 7-spot jump, and now slotting in with philly tied for #3, and almost certain to soon overtake it to solely own the #3 spot.

[Gantz]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

I find it interesting that the FAA restricted Jersey City but is fine with the supertalls in Midtown Manhattan. Billionaire's row is closer to LGA than Downtown Jersey City is to Newark Airport (5 miles vs 6 miles).

I believe the FAA limits over JC has to do with LGA, not with Newark airport.
Departures from LGA fly due West and then they make a turn south over Jersey City/Hoboken. They need that extra clearance because it is preferable that the planes make a wider turn as they ascend, although most of the time they try to fly over the Hudson I believe.

LaGuardia's runways are the ultimate anti-development tool. They manage to screw up Jersey City, Flushing, LIC, and even downtown Brooklyn (LGA arrivals fly over Brooklyn and Queens).

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Gantz

I believe the FAA limits over JC has to do with LGA, not with Newark airport.
Departures from LGA fly due West and then they make a turn south over Jersey City/Hoboken. They need that extra clearance because it is preferable that the planes make a wider turn as they ascend, although most of the time they try to fly over the Hudson I believe.

LaGuardia's runways are the ultimate anti-development tool. They manage to screw up Jersey City, Flushing, LIC, and even downtown Brooklyn (LGA arrivals fly over Brooklyn and Queens).

Hmm. When I've flown on that path the planes don't make the turn south until they get west of the Meadowlands and EWR. I think a plane leaving LGA would still be too low to go down the Hudson since it'd be hard to get above 5,000 feet by Jersey City, and that would be way too close to the WTC under that altitude. I think it's unlikely a plane could get that high before Midtown either.

[Gantz]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Hmm. When I've flown on that path the planes don't make the turn south until they get west of the Meadowlands and EWR. I think a plane leaving LGA would still be too low to go down the Hudson since it'd be hard to get above 5,000 feet by Jersey City, and that would be way too close to the WTC under that altitude. I think it's unlikely a plane could get that high before Midtown either.

They do not go west of the Meadowlands because they would cross Teterboro airport airspace coming out of LGA. Remember miracle on the Hudson and how Flight 1549 ditched into the river? That is because the plane was following the departure route from LGA.

The planes landing/departing from Newark go North and South and do not overfly Jersey city at all. NWA airport runways are parallel to Jersey City skyline, so there is absolutely no interference.

[ChiSoxRox]

A quick check of Flightradar24 has the LaGuardia departures atm doing a full loop over Flushing in order to reach 10,000 feet by the time they cross the Hudson, and 12,500 feet crossing right over Teterboro.

This is a flight to Houston that will pretty much follow the I-81 corridor from PA south.


The *approach* to LaGuardia though shoots right up the Hudson, but at above 5,000 feet before descending over the Bronx and Westchester. The plane directly over Jersey City in that image is JBU2088 from BNA.

Flightradar24 is so addictive to watch. DL4766 from MEM just went the length of Manhattan following 1st Avenue like an arrow at 3,225 feet (including right over the UN complex).

[mrnyc]

^ yep thats the common take off pattern from lga.

and yeah the landing at least from flights from points south like florida comes up like that plane at hoboken, then heads east following the green takeoff route, except it then turns hard south below pelham park in eastern bronx to land as you can see the other plane doing on the map. you can often seen jc as its going north before looping around to land, so its usually just west of the hudson and jc. of course not always, but that is most common in my experience.

[photoLith]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

we keep creeping ever closer to 100!


the CTBUH is now listing both Waldorf Miami and Okan Tower (also in miami) as being officially U/C, so that makes a total of 96 US skyscrapers over 800' tall.


here's the updated chart:




miami with a HUGE 7-spot jump, and now slotting in with philly tied for #3, and almost certain to soon overtake it to solely own the #3 spot.

Wow thats cool, Pittsburgh was only the 3rd city in the US to get over an 800ft skyscraper.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by photoLith

Wow thats cool, Pittsburgh was only the 3rd city in the US to get over an 800ft skyscraper.

Pittsburgh was actually the 3rd city on the entire planet to build an 800+ foot skyscraper.

US Steel Tower was the 8th tallest skyscraper ever built at the time of its completion in 1970.

And Chicago only beat Pittsburgh by one year with the dual completions of JHC and Chase Tower in 1969.

SF, LA, and Toronto were the next 3 to join the 800-footer club shortly after Pittsburgh in the early/mid '70s.

[Steely Dan]

Dp