Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Nathaniel Williams, an urban planning blogger, already created an amazing graph to show Seattle's towers under development. For anyone interested, please take a look:
The graph shows 10 buildings over 400-feet tall under construction, but the graph is a year old. Currently, that number is increased to 14 buildings over 400-feet tall under construction.
This of course doesn't capture the midrise buildings (buildings 6+ stories tall, below 400-feet tall) going up in Seattle, and there are too many for me to quickly compute. The City of Seattle has put together this really useful map for anyone who wants to see all projects in the city:
Very few buildings in Seattle add antennas or spires. Developers almost always build to the height limit to maximize habitable space. This is unlike other super talls which acquire high heights through having long spires or antennas.
The most recent and irksome example of this is LA's Wilshire Grand, which surpasses the iconic US Bank Tower simply by placing a tall pole (technically a "spire") on its roof. If it wasn't for the pole, Wilshire Grand would be 934' feet, shorter than the US Bank Tower, Seattle's Columbia Tower, and San Francisco's Salesforce Tower.
The best aspect to flat-top supertalls or office from ground to ceiling supertalls that have usable and accessible space towards the tower's top is that in several cases they maintain observation decks close to the build-out height. In most instances available to the general public, in exchange for some kind of a fee charge to see it (ticket prices). So your views from the observation space are supertall views.
Unless you're Jim Carey playing Bruce Almighty for a film, the views from the top of either a spire or antenna are not accessible to the general public (as far as I know). So when it comes from a (potential) personal experience point of view, its just not the same.
^I really appreciate the Brucr Almighty joke given that the movie was released in 2003. It's so strange to think that was over a decade ago... I used to love that movie for some reason, too.
The graph shows 10 buildings over 400-feet tall under construction, but the graph is a year old. Currently, that number is increased to 14 buildings over 400-feet tall under construction.
This of course doesn't capture the midrise buildings (buildings 6+ stories tall, below 400-feet tall) going up in Seattle, and there are too many for me to quickly compute. The City of Seattle has put together this really useful map for anyone who wants to see all projects in the city:
Nice site. I wish they let you filter by proposed/under-construction though. All of our cities have hundreds of proposals. Shovels in the ground is what I actually care about.
Since last Friday, a few pretty nice projects were announced in Chicago. A 1000 footer, a development on the river with around 1000 units, a 76 story tower (~830 feet) with a possible taller twin tower, a 48 story building, and a smaller one too all pretty close to one another.
^Wilshire Grand is definitely comical. A big pole just so the developer can claim that it's taller than the US Bank Tower.
Seattle's projected tallest will be slightly shorter than Philly's tallest point, at 1,111. However, it gets its height without any use of a spire/pole/architectural flourish. It will be 101-stories, whereas Comcast Tower will be 59-stories.
^Wilshire Grand is definitely comical. A big pole just so the developer can claim that it's taller than the US Bank Tower.
Seattle's projected tallest will be slightly shorter than Philly's tallest point, at 1,111. However, it gets its height without any use of a spire/pole/architectural flourish. It will be 101-stories, whereas Comcast Tower will be 59-stories.
I don't see agree with all the gripes about Wilshire Grand. I mean, officially, it WILL be the tallest because of that "pole". No getting around that so let's move on. Design wise, it's a much better looking and more interestig building than Salesforce anyway.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
