New skyscrapers vie for West Coast's 'tallest' title
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-seattle-skyscraper-20160204-story.html
QuoteAt 1,018 feet high, the 73-story U.S. Bank Tower in downtown Los Angeles holds title to the West Coast's tallest building, a crown it is now destined to lose. Over the next few years, at least three other coastal skyscrapers under construction or on the drawing board are set to soar past the bank tower by as many as 30 stories, with the "tallest" title probably going back to Seattle. ...
... the world's tallest building, the 163-story Burj (Tower) Khalifa in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, opened in 2010. Built in large part to gain international recognition, the 2,722-foot skyscraper, shaped like pyramiding stacks of coins (it cost $1.5 billion to erect), owns all the height records one could think up, including world's highest nightclub (143rd floor), world's highest mosque (158th floor) and world's fastest elevators (40 mph). From its observation deck, you can see Iran.
West Coast developers are thinking smaller, by almost 1,700 feet, yet taller than they've ever attempted.
San Francisco is poised to take the height title from Los Angeles next year when the 1,070-foot Salesforce Tower is to be completed, topping the U.S. Bank Tower by 52 feet. Shaped like a blunt-nose missile, the glass-wall skyscraper will loom over the $4.5-billion Transbay Transit Center, the city's new South of Market transit hub. The planned site of future high-speed rail to and from Los Angeles, the Transbay is being heralded as the "Grand Central Station of the West."
But San Francisco may lose out in the height battle to L.A. before the Salesforce Tower is completed: The 1,100-foot Wilshire Grand Center (including a 100-foot-plus spire), a $1.2-billion, mixed-use office/hotel project in the Financial District, is also set to be completed next year, probably in the spring. Developed by Korean Air, the tapered, glass-walled skyscraper will be topped by a domed "sky lobby" with views of the Southland. It will reach 30 feet higher than the Salesforce Tower and become, developers say, the tallest building west of the Mississippi.
For a while.
On the drawing board in Seattle is the West's first 100-plus story skyscraper, know as 4/C. It would top the Wilshire Grand by 11 feet.
Are any of the new buildings built at or beyond earthquake Standards? a 7. or 8. + may damage or bring down the building.
Quote from: mapman1071 on February 06, 2016, 09:23:22 PM
Are any of the new buildings built at or beyond earthquake Standards? a 7. or 8. + may damage or bring down the building.
The Pacific Northwest is vulnerable to a
9+ because of the Cascadia Subduction Zone fault off the coast.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on February 07, 2016, 01:36:01 AM
Quote from: mapman1071 on February 06, 2016, 09:23:22 PM
Are any of the new buildings built at or beyond earthquake Standards? a 7. or 8. + may damage or bring down the building.
The Pacific Northwest is vulnerable to a 9+ because of the Cascadia Subduction Zone fault off the coast.
I wonder if we get to see the Space Needle falling.
Most new skyscrapers are built to withstand strong shakings. I'm not sure if a 9.0+ has ever struck a downtown area with tall skyscrapers, but I get the feeling that they'll do fine well enough.
Modern skyscrapers are already built to handle some "sway" due to wind.
Quote from: froggie on February 07, 2016, 08:15:40 AM
Modern skyscrapers are already built to handle some "sway" due to wind.
Not only that, but really tall buildings are actually exceptionally safe in earthquakes because wind usually controls their design more than earthquakes do. The seismic loads on a building are directly proportional to its weight, which in turn means they increase somewhat linearly with building height. Wind loads, however, increase much faster than linearly with height because wind speeds are higher at higher altitudes, and the force of wind on a building is proportional to the square of its speed (a 20 mph wind is four times as powerful as a 10 mph wind).
Quote from: noelbotevera on February 07, 2016, 01:58:02 AM
I wonder if we get to see the Space Needle falling.
Probably only in fiction like the horrible "10.5" miniseries movies where the Space Needle (shown onscreen as "Spaceneedle"*) collapses while un-reinforced masonry buildings nearby are undamaged. Holy crap, there was some bad science in those movies.
*this is the same movie where they had "marshal law" onscreen in fictitious newscasts; they couldn't even be bothered to get something like that right?
I understand the wind/seismic loading analysis above, however, watching video of the Tokyo high rises swaying during the 2011 earthquake was quite disturbing.
Quote from: Jardine on February 07, 2016, 05:51:29 PM
I understand the wind/seismic loading analysis above, however, watching video of the Tokyo high rises swaying during the 2011 earthquake was quite disturbing.
Thank God perceived danger and actual danger are different.
A friend of mine was in the Woodman Tower (Omaha) 80s or 90s when a tornado approached the building. Everyone hit the stairwells and as the tornado passed over/around the building, the cement block walls around the stairs were cracking and spalling. The steel frame of the building was fine, the stairwells were repaired, just something you don't want to experience very often.
I was in a rebranded 'standard' Denny's building during a 100 MPH derecho years ago and while cowering in the restrooms with the other diners, it was apparent to everyone the building was vibrating significantly. Good bless those lowest bidders that nevertheless build a quality structure.
A lot of 60+ story towers going up. All those on the West Coast, plus a new 93 story Wanda Tower in Chicago, and I saw a couple plans in NYC. Architecture at work :)
Quote from: ET21 on February 08, 2016, 07:31:46 PM
A lot of 60+ story towers going up. All those on the West Coast, plus a new 93 story Wanda Tower in Chicago, and I saw a couple plans in NYC. Cheap money at work :)
FTFY
QuoteShaped like a blunt-nose missile penis, the glass-wall skyscraper will loom over the $4.5-billion Transbay Transit Center, the city's new South of Market transit hub.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fx.lnimg.com%2Fphoto%2Fposter_768%2Fcd2c8bac35bc428b9e0f1b3035d679ec.jpg&hash=006975cc8de467fe6595d74b974c59f1d9b6f615)
QuoteBut San Francisco may lose out in the height battle to L.A. before the Salesforce Tower is completed: The 1,100-foot Wilshire Grand Center (including a 100-foot-plus spire), a $1.2-billion, mixed-use office/hotel project in the Financial District, is also set to be completed next year, probably in the spring. Developed by Korean Air, the tapered, glass-walled skyscraper will be topped by a domed "sky lobby" with views of the Southland. It will reach 30 feet higher than the Salesforce Tower and become, developers say, the tallest building west of the Mississippi.
Sorry LA, spires are cheating.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.cstatic.net%2Fimages%2Fgridfs%2F51141bb5f92ea16fcd01821f%2FA002L.jpg&hash=dfcddad40dc4fab86e2c495d7f77c98dd18febec)
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 08, 2016, 10:51:00 PM
Sorry LA, spires are cheating.
Tell it to the Chrysler Building.
Quote from: kkt on February 08, 2016, 10:58:59 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 08, 2016, 10:51:00 PM
Sorry LA, spires are cheating.
Tell it to the Chrysler Building.
I blame Chrysler for spires "counting". Their little dick-measuring contest with the Empire State Building back in the day.
At least that one matches the rest of the building. This one in LA is so tacked on for bragging rights. It doesn't even look good.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 08, 2016, 11:11:38 PM
Quote from: kkt on February 08, 2016, 10:58:59 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 08, 2016, 10:51:00 PM
Sorry LA, spires are cheating.
Tell it to the Chrysler Building.
I blame Chrysler for spires "counting". Their little dick-measuring contest with the Empire State Building back in the day.
At least that one matches the rest of the building. This one in LA is so tacked on for bragging rights. It doesn't even look good.
Not the Empire State Building, 40 Wall. ESB is much taller.
"Salesforce Tower" is the worst building name I've ever heard. It's the building equivalent of "Corporate Woods Drive."
Quote from: Pete from Boston on February 08, 2016, 11:40:23 PM
"Salesforce Tower" is the worst building name I've ever heard. It's the building equivalent of "Corporate Woods Drive."
Salesforce is a cloud computing company, their name is on the building because they will be its primary tenant. So really it's no different than "Sears Tower", "Bank of America Tower", etc.
Presumably many people will continue calling it the Transbay Tower, though, since that was its working name before any leases were signed.
Quote from: Duke87 on February 08, 2016, 11:59:16 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on February 08, 2016, 11:40:23 PM
"Salesforce Tower" is the worst building name I've ever heard. It's the building equivalent of "Corporate Woods Drive."
Salesforce is a cloud computing company, their name is on the building because they will be its primary tenant. So really it's no different than "Sears Tower", "Bank of America Tower", etc.
Presumably many people will continue calling it the Transbay Tower, though, since that was its working name before any leases were signed.
I can think of very few business names with less gravitas than "Salesforce."
Quote from: Pete from Boston on February 09, 2016, 10:44:00 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on February 08, 2016, 11:59:16 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on February 08, 2016, 11:40:23 PM
"Salesforce Tower" is the worst building name I've ever heard. It's the building equivalent of "Corporate Woods Drive."
Salesforce is a cloud computing company, their name is on the building because they will be its primary tenant. So really it's no different than "Sears Tower", "Bank of America Tower", etc.
Presumably many people will continue calling it the Transbay Tower, though, since that was its working name before any leases were signed.
I can think of very few business names with less gravitas than "Salesforce."
Then you'll love the name of their annual conference (http://www.businessinsider.com/dreamforce-shuts-down-san-francisco-2015-9).
Quote
With over 170,000 registered attendees this year, Dreamforce is easily one of the biggest tech events in the world.
"Dreamforce"; sounds like something from the movie Inception.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 08, 2016, 10:51:00 PM
QuoteShaped like a blunt-nose missile penis, the glass-wall skyscraper will loom over the $4.5-billion Transbay Transit Center, the city's new South of Market transit hub.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fx.lnimg.com%2Fphoto%2Fposter_768%2Fcd2c8bac35bc428b9e0f1b3035d679ec.jpg&hash=006975cc8de467fe6595d74b974c59f1d9b6f615)
Well, it is San Francisco.... :biggrin:
Quote from: Duke87 on February 08, 2016, 11:59:16 PM
Salesforce is a cloud computing company
Is that what they do? I worked a contract for them a few years ago, and I have never been able to explain their business. Their business model always seemed to me to be just getting more investors.
Dreamforce is the worst event of the year in SF, and I'm including the 49ers home opener even though it's now in Santa Clara. It's a lot like a giant Scientology rally.