[Jai]

New 125 floor design by Foster & Partners

http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/6938/dbtowerw.jpg


=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=


http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/3409/81747062uy1.jpg

With official word of this project just announced last week, the 85-storey Hyatt Park Tower, India's tallest under construction building officially broke ground.

Designed by Fox and Fowle (FXFOWLE) architects as part of three-hotel luxury project being developed by Neelkamal Realtors in conjunction with Hyatt hotels, Hyatt Park tower is located at Marine Lines, Mumbai, just north of the city's historical district. It marks the southernmost point of a major region of skyscraper development that currently stretches north to under construction Parel/Back Bay skyline.

A mixed-used development totalling 882,000 sq ft, Hyatt Park tower, in the architects' own words:
...centers on creating an iconic residential mixed-use building within India's emerging new economy.

The 85-storey tower is informed by distinctive indoor/outdoor environments and the desire to optimise the panoramic views of the surrounding landscape.

The tower's rotated form emerges in response to the buildings functional requirements and its mixed-use program - which changes with each twist of the structure. This circulation pattern separates retail, 5-star hotel and serviced apartments and long lease duplex penthouse condominium apartments within a sustainable network of green roofs and hanging gardens; creating a singular, extraordinary building that, when completed, will be the tallest and greenest building in India.

Emails to the architect (thanks spyguy) reveals that the tower is currently under construction and will have a height of 301m. Whether this is roof height is not yet clear.

While currently rather seperated from the current skyscraper construction, it is located at the southern end of what will be a massive skyscraper-laden redevelopment region that will see a long skyline anchored in the north at Dharavi, west at Worli, in the middle at Parel, and in the south at Back Bay.

Though developers in Mumbai tend to be ultra-secretive about their projects until they have broken ground (it wasn't even known that this project even existed until a couple days ago when the Hyatt told the Economic Times newspaper about it (http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/Mumbais_Hyatt_The_new_Times_Square/articleshow/1999730.cms)), other developers have made known that they are planning skyscrapers at Marine Lines. Currently a 50-storey commercial skyscraper, and 2-3 other projects, including the possible supertall Mumbai International Finance Centre, are planned around the location where Park Hyatt tower is being built.


Here are some more renderings. I will update this first post as more renderings and information come out.
http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/8025/01bo2.jpg

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/2546/02vl8.jpg
^ Looking South towards Historic mumbai. Looking North will be a view of the under construction skyline around Parel

http://img518.imageshack.us/img518/2540/03vm2.jpg

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/1498/04rp0.jpg

http://img518.imageshack.us/img518/9159/05ou0.jpg

http://img393.imageshack.us/img393/7563/image4hm6.jpg

http://img71.imageshack.us/img71/2042/image5ho2.jpg

Cheers,
Jai

[mczamalek]

Thanks for the info- I've been wondering when this project would be officially announced!

[Stephenapolis]

The uneven stacked box design is getting old for me. Hopefully it will look better in reality than it does for me in the renderings.

[R@ptor]

It was about time for India to get its first supertall.

[DukeofWellington]

Awesome tower! It looks like one that Rem Koolhaus designed for Jersey City.

[EXbubba]

I read that Mumbai is having trouble getting enought electricity for the city's rapid growth. How will a new tower, with its large power demands be supplied with enough consistant power?

[Nowhereman1280]

I read that Mumbai is having trouble getting enought electricity for the city's rapid growth. How will a new tower, with its large power demands be supplied with enough consistant power?

Nuclear power. Everyone just got all on Bush's case because he decided to break the non-proliferation treaty and signed an agreement with India to help them build like 10 nuclear power plants about a year ago. India will probably be one of the world's largest users of Nuclear power within 20 years.

You are right though, they can't build power capacity fast enough to keep up with demand in India. That's because its becoming one of the world's most powerful economies, just like China, except India is much farther ahead when it comes to democracy and education. Actually India and China's soaring demand for electricity is one of the reasons our electricity and gas prices keep getting higher. Also why our construction materials prices keep getting higher...

[Jai]

Yeah, and moreover, a lot of the major new towers coming up in India have their own generators as a redundant source of power. Indeed, especially for the residential towers, the continuous supply of electricity is one of their major selling points.

Mumbai is facing a power crunch, and lately there have been rolling blackouts. There is also news that, owing to Mumbai's growth and demands, power requirements for Mumbai will soon be supplied by other areas of India, so there's good news ahead.


The local, state and even national government is starting to promote Mumbai for commercial high rises in a big way. In addition to this project, two other supertall commerical/hotel skyscrapers have been announced in Mumbai last week: the 72 storey India International Trade Tower in Dadar, and the Mumbai International Finance Centre, which has been shortlisted to be built on three sites. Apparently designs for both towers are more or less finalized, but they haven't been released, and not much elese in terms of height is known about them, hence I didn't create a thread for them.

Anyway, meeting infrastructure requirements needed to support such towers has become a top priority. That's why you have projects like the Bandra-Worli Sealink, various freeways, bridges, airport, Mumbai Metro, etc. fastracked, and issues like height restriction and power becoming resolved.


Cheers,
Jai

[StatenIslander237]

This is a fantastic proposal IMO. It's the first proposal for an Indian city that has universal appeal and not all India'd up, at least the first that I've seen. Also I am impressed that while they are certainly reaching for new heights, they are not unrealistic Burj-Dubai caliber heights. Modesty is what it is.

[Jai]

Here's another rendering of the tower, and a blurb from AIArchitect Magazine:

http://img393.imageshack.us/img393/7563/image4hm6.jpg

...
FXFowle is one such international player. They established a representative office in Dubai about a year ago. Peter Weingarten, AIA, FXFowle’s director of international architecture, says many of his clients are interested in the energy-efficient aspects of high-density vertical development. One such project is FXFowle’s India Tower in Mumbai, which uses a solar chimney to generate electricity, provides on-site wastewater reclamation, and is LEED®-Gold certified. Without the current climate of rampant and volatile high-rise development, the silver 85-story tower would be universally recognized as India’s next tallest building, but now, Weingarten says, not even this visionary project can claim the subcontinent with any great certainty.

Weingarten’s vision of India Tower’s transformative potential is emblematic of developers in many emerging nations. “It will have a much more intangible effect than just another big building, and then it will spur more development around it,” he says. “It becomes a magnet and a center, and if enough of these dots start to get created and they start to become connected into a network, you can really start to see some dramatic changes in the landscape of Mumbai and India.”...
Also helps answer the power generation question

[Jai]

And another ;)
http://img174.imageshack.us/img174/1939/45688655qn2.jpg

[Sol_Invictus]

I kinda like it, though it looks like someone stacked 4 toy building blocks irregularly and decided to make a full skyscraper out of it.

[starvinggryphon]

The uneven stacked box design is getting old for me. Hopefully it will look better in reality than it does for me in the renderings.

I'll be the first to agree, yet for some reason I really like this design.

[Raraavis]

I like the design.

India has major infrastructure problems that will need to be sorted out if they are going to continue to grow their economy at it's present rate. Power, transportation, water, etc. all need major upgrades. It is going to make an interesting next few decades as the United States, China, India, and the EU are competing for energy resources and raw materials.

[Dale]

Wow! That'll catch your attention. Good for Mumbai. Love to visit someday.

Question: is Mumbai getting a subway or lightrail ?

[aluminum]

Love to visit someday.


Ha ! :jester: are u kidding ? Use Oxygen Mask if really want to go ....

[Stu]

^Someone ban this asshat.

I'm not that fond of the design but congrats go to Mumbai.

[aluminum]

^Someone ban this asshat.

I'm not that fond of the design but congrats go to Mumbai.

Have YOU ever been there ? Well, I Have.....
(I m talking about the downtown core)
Stop daydreaming and accept the reality.

Anyways the design looks really good...
It may hold this city's first observation deck, correct me if there's already one...

[Arunava]

Wow! That'll catch your attention. Good for Mumbai. Love to visit someday.

Question: is Mumbai getting a subway or lightrail ?
There's a metro under construction (I think). I'm fairly sure it's mostly elevated, but someone like Jai or Suncity would be able to tell you more.

[Rise To The Top]

I like it, but there are sooo many box towers poping up. I hope this one comes out good, it would look nice as a centerpiece to a skyline.

[Dale]

There's a metro under construction (I think). I'm fairly sure it's mostly elevated, but someone like Jai or Suncity would be able to tell you more.

Thanks.

[Aleks]

its nice but im not sure i like it from some ponts of view...
idk i dont think its nice enough for india...

[Jai]

Yeah, as Arunava said, the Mumbai Metro is currently under construction. It's comprised of both subway and light rail. Here's the first few phases shown with main nodes:
http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/2181/mumbaimetro1kh5.jpg

More detailed map of line 2:
http://img70.imageshack.us/img70/4554/colaba20charkop20metro2mm4.jpg

The stations will be developed and run by private developers who will also use them as malls and transportation nodes. An example station:
http://img83.imageshack.us/img83/2953/facilitiesct1.jpg

Really, there's a massive upgrading of Mumbai's infrastructure underway. Apart from the Metro, there are upgrades in the works for the rail system to increase capacity, revamping train stations, expansion and modernization of bus lines, stations and grid, major highway/flyover projects to decrease congestion and cut travel time, the construction of up to two more international airports, as well as the modernization of the Chhatrapati Shivaji International Airport

http://img86.imageshack.us/img86/6844/m1mx0.jpg
http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/2667/m3mo4.jpg
http://img50.imageshack.us/img50/4017/mumbaiairport4cnn4gg1.jpg

You can check out the Mumbai -- Project News and Developments (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=126768) thread in the India section for a a more detailed rundown.

Cheers,
Jai

[Jai]

Location of plot:
http://img294.imageshack.us/img294/5649/image7gn4.jpg

[Sacto]

Hmmm...I don't know about that design, doesn't look too appealing to me.

[Jai]

That they've officially announced that they started construction on the project!!


Main points:
1. Construction started -- to be completed by 2010
2. They're reporting a total height 301m, but only 60 stories(??!) Fxfowle's website (http://www.fxfowle.com/) confirms:
http://img292.imageshack.us/img292/6082/image5dk5.jpg
3. It is to be named "India Tower"

From WorldArchitectureNews.com:

FXFOWLE Architects' India Tower in Mumbai is under construction (http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/index.php?fuseaction=wanappln.projectview&upload_id=1245)
Greenest Skyscraper in India?

Tuesday 17 Jul 2007

Construction has started on India Tower, a new 60-storey (301 meters) world-class Park Hyatt hotel, retail, and residential tower located in South Mumbai, India. The developer is committed to making India Tower a United States Green Building Council (USGBC) LEED Gold-rated project. Construction is expected to be completed in 2010.

India Tower is located in the prestigious South Mumbai coastal area fondly referred to as the Queens Necklace. The tower’s rotated form emerges in response to the 3-acre site (1.2-hectares), the building’s functional requirements, and its mixed-use program that changes with each rotation of the tower. This circulation pattern separates retail, a custom-designed residential-style Park Hyatt hotel and serviced apartments, and long-lease and duplex penthouse condominium apartments.

The design concept for India Tower was informed by Mumbai’s climate, the site, and the desire to create distinctive indoor and outdoor spaces with optimum views, inspirational settings, and personalized contemporary accommodations for all users. Designed to have the least possible impact on the environment, the tower will integrate current innovative sustainable systems and technologies throughout the building – solar shading, natural ventilation, daylighting, rainwater harvesting, and green interior finishes and materials – to make it one of the greenest skyscrapers in India.

India Tower’s 3-story podium will include restaurants and cafés, luxury-brand retail stores, a health/fitness club with a swimming pool, and a nightclub/lounge. When arriving at India Tower, Park Hyatt guests will be directed to the Sky Lobby (levels 30-35) to check-in, then descend to levels 14 through 28 to their hotel residences.

India Tower’s long-lease apartments will be located on levels 38 through 50, and will feature stylish and spacious two-story living spaces that have been specially designed to take full advantage of the expansive views from this height. Levels 52 to 59 of the tower will house one-of-a-kind duplex penthouse condominium apartments with unparalleled panoramic views.

New renderings:
http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/8117/01aw4.jpg (http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/733/12455fxfowlemumbaihotelar9.jpg)

http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/2401/05tb8.jpg

http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/4904/03wd2.jpg (http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/3801/12452fxfowlemumbaihotelmw9.jpg)

http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/4647/04xs3.jpg

http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/1332/02lx5.jpg

[M II A II R II K]

I think this may even have even newer renderings by now.

[Dalton]

Nuclear power. Everyone just got all on Bush's case because he decided to break the non-proliferation treaty and signed an agreement with India to help them build like 10 nuclear power plants about a year ago. India will probably be one of the world's largest users of Nuclear power within 20 years.



Meanwhile, a minor incident in 1979 and a Jane Fonda movie have kept us from building a single new nuclear power plant for decades.

[skellergroup]

I like this. A lot.
What is the public opinion about it?

[Surrealplaces]

I don't really like the design of the building that much, but I'm glad to see some more high rises going up in Mumbai. Mumbai is really changing.

[Jai]

The design and name of this building has changed. The new name is DB Tower (short for Dynamix-Balwas, the name of the developer consortium.) Several India forum members have contacted architects FXFowle, and confirmed that they are the architects of the new design as well.

Here is the new design:
http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/9248/db01ed9.jpg

The tower will have the same height as the former Park Hyatt/India Tower proposal. The tower remains mixed residential and hotel use.

[Lecom]

Yep, FXFowle's hand is easily recognizable. When I saw this example of clean deconstructed Modernism, the first building that popped into my head was the Bank of America tower in NYC, another sliced up FXFowle glass box.

[vart]

I want to draw this tower
anybody know is this a finally design
http://img225.imageshack.us/img225/5173/a01nw4.jpg

[Jai]

^ No, it is not. Please read the 2 posts above, the design has changed..


Anyway, some awesome news!

The tower's height has officially been confirmed to be over 400 meters in height :banana:

http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/4507/image1gt8.jpg


Also, here's a layout plan, which gives a better perspective of the shape of the tower:
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/5101/layoutplan1yt0.jpg


Cheers to the Indian Skyscraper Blog (http://indianskyscraperblog.wordpress.com/2008/10/07/mumbai-dynamix-balwas-tower-db-tower-400m-75-floors-an-update/) for the heads up!

-Jai

[NYC4Life]

Move it over to the supertalls thread.

[mannu12]

any more updates on this project?

[shakman]

Move it over to the supertalls thread.

Has foundation work commenced for this highrise? If no then move this thread to the "Proposals" sub-forum".

By the way, nice design.

[arlekin_m]

I liked the original proposal so much better. This latest one seems so contrived and gimmicky... :(

[Surrealplaces]

I like the new design better.

[RobertWalpole]

This is great. I love Mumbai.

[sammyg]

Jai always posts designs but never pictures of the projects under development. I think he lives in the "suburbs" (part of the city but north of Mahim) and can't get down to the sites very often.

[spyguy]

Those renderings above are all of the old FXFOWLE design. According to a press release issued by Hyatt, the new building (DB Tower) will be 125 floors and designed by Norman Foster.

Possible design - posted by IndiansUnite on SSC
Finally the design is out on the web. Presenting the Norman Foster designed DB tower -

http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/6938/dbtowerw.jpg
It's from an investor presentation on DBR's website (http://dbrealty.in/investors/investorpresentation.php)

Larven - our tower teaser http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/8495/11371342.gif has confirmed that this IS the Foster tower and it'll consists of about 100 floors while rising upto a height of 550 meters. The original tower was supposed to be around 700 meters tall.

[plinko]

Oh damn! That thing is pretty slick!

[Innsertnamehere]

jeez! thats amazing! though this one really needs to be moved to proposals......

[shakman]

:previous: I thought I mentioned about this thread being in the proposal sub-forum.

[Jai]

Jai always posts designs but never pictures of the projects under development. I think he lives in the "suburbs" (part of the city but north of Mahim) and can't get down to the sites very often.
I'm not in India, hence can't get to the sites at all :)


Anyway, some more renderings, starting with a slightly larger version of what was originally posted:
http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/6840/image3mg.jpg

http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/7748/indiatowerinmumbai001.jpg


Also, I was curious to see just how tall this tower compared to the current tallest u/c (but topped off) buildings in Mumbai: the Imperial Towers. They're going to look downright dinky when construction of all of Mumbai's other towers catch up in 2-3 years...

http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/348/90940879.png

The buildings are to correct scale: with the foreground twin 260m to India Tower's 700m


Thanks to all the dataminers in the SSC India forum for the info

[brian.odonnell20]

whats the spire, like 1/2 of the total height? Wouldn't totally be a bad design for nyc or chicago, but is there honestly only two other buildings going up in the city besides this above 100 feet? Modern architecture just keeps getting uglier with less and less thought behind it. Especially with that other Hyatt Park tower going up. Oh no, as long as its eco friendly it doesn't matter what it looks like. It just gives me the chills what these developing cities are going to look like in 10 years.

[Jai]

whats the spire, like 1/2 of the total height? Wouldn't totally be a bad design for nyc or chicago, but is there honestly only two other buildings going up in the city besides this above 100 feet? Modern architecture just keeps getting uglier with less and less thought behind it. Especially with that other Hyatt Park tower going up. Oh no, as long as its eco friendly it doesn't matter what it looks like. It just gives me the chills what these developing cities are going to look like in 10 years.

There are well over twenty supertall (300+m) projects that have been approved in the last three months alone by the Mumbai Area Development Board. Most new launched capital projects are minimum 60 stories tall. Just because I don't have the time to post all of Mumbai's approved and u/c buildings hardly means they don't exist. :rolleyes:

The (highly litigious) anti-skyscrpaer nimby culture in Mumbai is a well entrenched and highly vocal, though now, thankfully, increasingly sidelined, interest group. After the publicity fiasco with Ambani's vertical home ("http://indianskyscraperblog.wordpress.com/2007/07/30/mumbai-residence-antilia-173m-27-fl-tallest-single-residence-tallest-living-wall-and-tallest-garden-and-a-revolution-in-skyscraper-design/), all developers have gone completely silent. There are over fifty 50+ story buildings in various states of site prep and construction in Central Mumbai right now, though you wouldn't know it from the complete lack of publicity that developers aim for.



Anyway latest 'leaked' roof height is 550 m, spire height at 700+m. But final height hasn't been decided/released. Its a project that can easily be scaled vertically in height.

[SkyscrapersOfNewYork]

whats the spire, like 1/2 of the total height? Wouldn't totally be a bad design for nyc or chicago, but is there honestly only two other buildings going up in the city besides this above 100 feet? Modern architecture just keeps getting uglier with less and less thought behind it. Especially with that other Hyatt Park tower going up. Oh no, as long as its eco friendly it doesn't matter what it looks like. It just gives me the chills what these developing cities are going to look like in 10 years.

ya i would agree modern architecture and its architects seem to be running out of ideas and lately have been proposing garbage. no offence but just look at many of the towers in Dubai's marina project...just horrible....

[scalziand]

whats the spire, like 1/2 of the total height? Wouldn't totally be a bad design for nyc or chicago, but is there honestly only two other buildings going up in the city besides this above 100 feet? Modern architecture just keeps getting uglier with less and less thought behind it. Especially with that other Hyatt Park tower going up. Oh no, as long as its eco friendly it doesn't matter what it looks like. It just gives me the chills what these developing cities are going to look like in 10 years.

Roof height is 550m, so the spire is still large, but not that large. This is the Park Hyatt tower, BTW. That stack of cubes is the old design.

[brian.odonnell20]

Roof height is 550m, so the spire is still large, but not that large. This is the Park Hyatt tower, BTW. That stack of cubes is the old design.

oh okay so you thought i wasn't exaggerating... great... but thanx for the update, so now its a stack of unidentifiable objects instead of cubes. :tup:

[JayPro]

I mean no offense here; but India does not deserve this in its newer design.
Would I be out of order (as it were) to suggest that the Foster model is being scrutinized but for of its location geographically? I suspect so.

Why American and European developers aren't smashing down Lord Foster's front door to snatch a totally choice design such as this eludes me just as much. And how, if I may respectfully inquire, is this new render a stack of unidentifiable objects? This lovely thing positively *shrieks* symmetry, unlike the previous rendition...and, as long as we're dropping names, Koolhaus's outrage planned for Jersey City. IMO, *ordered*, yet soothingly abstract geometry is precisely where the beauty of this design makes the whole a FTW deal, *location aside*. Which leads me...

...to my point about India: It has been suggested in this thread that Mumbai is having problems harnessing enough electric power simply to keep up. This is one salient point among many that can be legitimately broached in argument against foisting ultra-modernity upon a hodgepodge of traditions that still seem to languish in the Industrial Revolution era.

IMO Mumbai is simply trying too hard to be like Dubai and Shanghai (rhyme + apropos analogy = :haha: ). Designing supertalls, however subjectively pleasing or nauseating, ought not to be the measure of how any mega-city awash in technological bounty stakes its claim on the global stage. Nor should it be any sort of indicator of how a still-underdeveloped country's culture and society reconciles their ancient, storied past with their legitimate struggles to conform to the 21st Century.

Long Story Short: Amazing render...completely wrong location for many honest reasons.

[brian.odonnell20]

Would I be out of order (as it were) to suggest that the Foster model is being scrutinized but for of its location geographically? I suspect so.

Why American and European developers aren't smashing down Lord Foster's front door to snatch a totally choice design such as this eludes me just as much. And how, if I may respectfully inquire, is this new render a stack of unidentifiable objects? This lovely thing positively *shrieks* symmetry, unlike the previous rendition...

IMO Mumbai is simply trying too hard to be like Dubai and Shanghai (rhyme + apropos analogy = :haha: ). Designing supertalls, however subjectively pleasing or nauseating, ought not to be the measure of how any mega-city awash in technological bounty stakes its claim on the global stage. Nor should it be any sort of indicator of how a still-underdeveloped country's culture and society reconciles their ancient, storied past with their legitimate struggles to conform to the 21st Century.

The new render is a stack of unidentifiable objects how? well, because the building (if you even want to call it that) is an unidentifiable object placed on top of another one and another one and another one. Not sure how you don't see that. And yes, unfortunately every supertall completed or planned nowadays, especially this one, is an ego trip of some third world country attempting to stake a claim on the global stage.

The negative reception of this building has almost nothing to do with the location. It's just ugly, and that's the end of it.

And may I respectfully project to you, dear sir, that you are the epitome of the collapse of modern architecture as we know it. you think that new ideas, as bad as they are, can replace aesthetics, and likely take favor in foreign starchitects who care more about their style and brand than producing good, contextual architecture. Having a well designed, livable city is a way more important feature of architecture than this international pissing contest, this absolutely disgraceful and pathetic excuse for innovation and cohesiveness. These supposed "world renowned architects," namely Lord Foster, are some of the most middling, mediocre designers on the planet, and to support this, this brand-over-aesthetics style of modern architecture is not "innovative" or "revolutionary," but detrimentive and absolutely sickening.

You are all but lost if it seriously "eludes" you as to why american and european developers aren't knocking down Foster's door. He is awful. Almost all of his designs are visually unappealing and unharmonious, and have zero cohesiveness with surrounding buildings and environments. Unlike these wannabe cities, nyc or london or chicago or la or philly or houston don't care about height. they care about aesthetically pleasing, contextual, cohesive architecture, which is why they are and always will be 10 times better cities, from their history to their culture to their skyscrapers than ones from southeast asia, india, and the emirates.

Give me a break.

[Infernal_Elf]

cool dubai watch out this is going to get ugly it will be looking so immense if it is boxy all the way to the top

[JayPro]

The new render is a stack of unidentifiable objects how? well, because the building (if you even want to call it that) is an unidentifiable object placed on top of another one and another one and another one. Not sure how you don't see that.

I very much appreciate respect your observations in this regard. My way of viewing it was to take each shape/mass/whatever as if it were a tier of a large wedding cake and then to extrapolate each element to the whole form. My particular view of each segment was a symmetric, complex geometric shape that's forced to change dimension as the bulk of the structure decreases skyward. To my eye, it seems that the task of maintaining each individual element's symmetry was faithfully executed.

In no way was I, or am I now actively attempting to convert you or any other Foster critic out there in cyberspace to subscribe to, or even appreciate my chosen method of evaluation.

The negative reception of this building has almost nothing to do with the location. It's just ugly, and that's the end of it.

Again, you're most welcome to your assessments. Indeed, I've seen some of Foster's other proposals., the dreaded "2002 Kissing Siamese WTC Proposal", for example.
To foist upon a then still-nervous and outraged public a replacement for two collapsed iconic monoliths...one that itself looked ready to implode like a house of cards...was IMO an unwise PR strategy. The structure's overwhelmingness alone was perhaps a misguided attempt to fill a gaping wound in national pride with something grander than what had stood there before. Hindsight = 20/20.

Believe you me, if I had joined this forum at the time that monstrosity was unleashed for the first time, you would never have heard the end of it from me.

And may I respectfully project to you, dear sir, that you are the epitome of the collapse of modern architecture as we know it. you think that new ideas, as bad as they are, can replace aesthetics, and likely take favor in foreign starchitects who care more about their style and brand than producing good, contextual architecture.

To which I respond thus: Look at the new WTC Master Plan, *especially* in regards to Foster's IMO *awesome* 200 Greenwich tower. Infinitely more important than whether it jibes or not with the structures within its own planned environment is the $64 Million Question:

Does it come off as a slap in the jowls of Lower Manhattans venerable Art Deco beauties?

My answer? 200 G looks nothing like an ultra-slick, self-congratulatory homage to a man whom you seem determined to to present as utterly clueless in dealing with the people and politics that permeate the city he's building it in.

That said, let me try to bring the same logic to bear on other approved/UC projects in the Big Apple: Gehry's Beekman, De Potzamparc's Carnegie 57, and especially Nouveau's Tower Verre. And this is to say nothing of Chicago, which, to my grave disappointment BTW, inexcusably dropped the ball with Calatrava's Spire...and quite a few others impertinent to this thread.

In all the above instances, what I see as the relevant question is this: Is the "(st)architect" succeeding in generating a visually elegant focal point that at the same time creates a potential landmark and...to your point... makes the town it's in a better place to live and do business? . I for one humbly submit that in all these cases, as with 200 Greenwich (as well as 150, 175 and Freedom Tower), the answer seems to be a resounding "Yes". You say otherwise; and that's truly fine by me.

I believe that "Starchitects", for all the bad press they've received in some of these forums, have, *greatly* sublimated their egos and dumbed down their original plans to cater to the shocking banality of many Western metropolises, whose vocal NIMBY-based hyperconservative bitching creates a general social atmosphere that keeps skylines that truly deserve to stand out from doing just that. But maybe eight times out of ten--or nnine if you're lucky--whatever compromises do materialize can--depending on opinion, of course--make for quite an interesting architectural "curveball" without being overbearing or chintzy.

Having a well designed, livable city is a way more important feature of architecture than this international pissing contest, this absolutely disgraceful and pathetic excuse for innovation and cohesiveness.

You're 100% right in your off-the-bat assertion...and I think you've reiterated the basic point that I was trying to make in the first place...albeit from your bluntly sincere POV.

Both figurative and literal blueprints and the essential services needed to make them come alive have to be firmly established to at least assure any municipality's long-term viability. Obviously. Without these, mammoth structures like the one discussed in this thread---subjectively beautiful, ugly or otherwise---are not only extravagant but totally useless.

I mean, look at that ugly POS they cancelled and are trying to resume construction with in North Korea. Hell, I've seen night-time pics of the earth from space showing lit urban areas. North Korea is literally pitch dark...and they wanna build a gargantuan hotel there? Talk about out-of-place.....

These supposed "world renowned architects," namely Lord Foster, are some of the most middling, mediocre designers on the planet, and to support this, this brand-over-aesthetics style of modern architecture is not "innovative" or "revolutionary," but detrimentive and absolutely sickening.

Read again the examples I cited about the things happening now in NYC. IMO what you cite as Foster's "middling mediocrity" is the result of firmly entrenched voices in planning boards and even in the City Council who use "open space", "landmarking" and other buzzwords as sorry excuses to preserve a maddening status quo. The hardcore-schizophrenic McSam condos that emerge like weeds are casually accepted; yet something as bold and AFAIC situationally apropos as Tower Verre near the Museum of Modern Art is pissed on by self-anointed "urban experts" who *lie* unabashedly and resort to frivolous litigation just to make their retarded points that much more annoying.

You are all but lost if it seriously "eludes" you as to why american (and european) developers aren't knocking down Foster's door.

With all due respect, 200 Greenwich is a good enough reason for me to feel that way. But again, that's me. I'll throw in the Index in Dubai, the Bow in Calgary, Torre Caja in Madrid and Aldar Central Market in AbuDhabi for good measure. In fact, AbuDhabi, Stockholm and Duissen, Germany have proposals from this man to modernize and upgrade whole sections of town. He'll have a dick of a time with Stockhom, tho. The NIMBYs there crouch in wait for his presence as I speak, hoping to close in for the metaphorical kill.

He is awful. Almost all of his designs are visually unappealing and unharmonious, and have zero cohesiveness with surrounding buildings and environments.

Here you compelled me to check his website for renderings et al. I will grant you the point that the term "hit-or-miss" is applicable here, although for both of us it's a subjective one: what constitutes hit or miss? I gave you what I thought were definite hits an answer I gave a couple of quotes back. As a rule, any developer should expect a proposal of his in one country/city vs. another to be either noodled around with intensively or simply greenlighted.

To the point of this exact thread, this Tower in India will be given carte blanche without revision, most likely to placate the alleged demand for tourist venues and the anticipated income produced therefrom. I just think that the whole thing--regardless of architectural merit or perceived lack thereof-- just isn't right for its overall milieu.

] Unlike these wannabe cities, nyc or london or chicago or la or philly or houston don't care about height. they care about aesthetically pleasing, contextual, cohesive architecture, which is why they are and always will be 10 times better cities, from their history to their culture to their skyscrapers than ones from southeast asia, india, and the emirates.

First of all, I hope we can agree that the skyscraper was born in Chicago and raised to strapping maturity in New York...one can even say that the nearly century-old rivalry between the two is just like a marriage made in Heaven itself. Thru the years, the other US cities you mentioned, and others in especially recent years (Miami, Atlanta, Bellevue WA) have carried the torch, sometimes allowing a handful of the *starchitects* we've namedropped to showcase their unrestrained capabilities, at least in the drawing-board phase if nothing else. Alas, it seems, though, that American urban tastes don't yet seem to be 100% prepared to swallow that kind of pill whole.

And for the record: I do think that *many* American cities are indeed interested in height...almost to the point of fanaticism. I'm almost afraid to find out how many SSP posters who live in substantially middle-sized US cities stand at the ready to bust a Snoopy Happy Dance over the news of an approved 600-footer straight out of the International Style/Corporate Modernism Crackerbox Factory. And I don't think I'm exaggerating...at all.

It's just that in some places like L.A. (skyscraper-unfriendly geology) and Miami and Phoenix (FAA-imposed height restrictions), the race to the sky is oftentimes slowed down to a crawl. BTW, Did you know that a legally non-enforceable "gentleman's agreement" made sure that what would become Philadelphia's now-second tallest wouldn't be a reality until...you guessed it... 1987???(!!!)

In the end, you and I simply have an honest disagreement in a matter that can be distilled to one burning question...especially in terms of the proposal in this thread: How is visually stimulating, yet *economically viable* urban (read: skyscraper) art defined, especially in regards to project location? However, I think we can both agree that urban culture and its many possible visual expressions cannot be separated...but by the same token, payment of attention needs to happen as to how achieve stylistic balance and real-life practicality in furtherance of the goals being set.

Simply put: IMHO this proposal or one like it would score bigger in any Western metro area of one's choosing than, say, in any second-tier Asian city in a geographical swathe from Tel Aviv to Shanghai that would wish it in their proverbial back yard.

[Troubadour]

Clearly a shot across the bow of the Burj. Too bad they're not going straight for the gold with this one. Mumbai is far worthier than Dubai of such an honor.

[koops65]

The new render is a stack of unidentifiable objects how? well, because the building (if you even want to call it that) is an unidentifiable object placed on top of another one and another one and another one. Not sure how you don't see that. And yes, unfortunately every supertall completed or planned nowadays, especially this one, is an ego trip of some third world country attempting to stake a claim on the global stage.

The negative reception of this building has almost nothing to do with the location. It's just ugly, and that's the end of it.

And may I respectfully project to you, dear sir, that you are the epitome of the collapse of modern architecture as we know it. you think that new ideas, as bad as they are, can replace aesthetics, and likely take favor in foreign starchitects who care more about their style and brand than producing good, contextual architecture. Having a well designed, livable city is a way more important feature of architecture than this international pissing contest, this absolutely disgraceful and pathetic excuse for innovation and cohesiveness. These supposed "world renowned architects," namely Lord Foster, are some of the most middling, mediocre designers on the planet, and to support this, this brand-over-aesthetics style of modern architecture is not "innovative" or "revolutionary," but detrimentive and absolutely sickening.

You are all but lost if it seriously "eludes" you as to why american and european developers aren't knocking down Foster's door. He is awful. Almost all of his designs are visually unappealing and unharmonious, and have zero cohesiveness with surrounding buildings and environments. Unlike these wannabe cities, nyc or london or chicago or la or philly or houston don't care about height. they care about aesthetically pleasing, contextual, cohesive architecture, which is why they are and always will be 10 times better cities, from their history to their culture to their skyscrapers than ones from southeast asia, india, and the emirates.

Give me a break.

Hey, if you dont like it, that's fine. Feel free to express your views on the matter. But to suppose EVERYONE else SHOULDN'T like it, then you are trying to be some sort of egomaniac.
Give me an even bigger break!
I think it's an awesome looking skyscraper, and I look forward to seeing it in the Mumbai skyline some day, possibly in person.
Trying to explain to us why this proposal sucks is an excercise in futility, because there are LOTS of people who disagree with you. Thats life...

[mannu12]

Another render of the India Tower
http://a.imageshack.us/img72/7748/indiatowerinmumbai001.jpg

[mannu12]

Mumbai forumer Coolguyz of ssc shows the site of India Tower
http://img688.imageshack.us/img688/4545/31973fe66c.jpg

[Dylan Leblanc]

Here is it's map location - http://www.google.com/maps?q=18.950352,+72.821060+(India+Tower)&ll=18.950352,72.821060&z=17&t=h

[mannu12]

:banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana:

India Tower is U/C
But we still have to wait for an official announcement...
cc Simba404
http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/3049/siteprogress.jpg

[OneWorldTradeCenter]

:previous: That is simply not true... at SSC there are a lot of mistakes. We should wait until that is officially confirmed. There might happened some site preperation work in the area... but likely not U/C.

[mannu12]

^^That's why I said that we have to wait for an official announcement

[Infernal_Elf]

any more news on this? would be way cool if they have started on the actual tower

[OneWorldTradeCenter]

No they haven't started and there are no news. There is also no page at the architects (Foster) website. Very mystery..

[kiwi4life]

still would be pretty sweet to see this one go ahead and rise like the other supertalls in the world, would be great to see India get this one on the road

[mannu12]

More evidence that this is U/C
cc Master of Disguise
http://i787.photobucket.com/albums/yy153/indianrockstars10/Mohit2.jpg

http://i787.photobucket.com/albums/yy153/indianrockstars10/Mohit8.jpg

http://i787.photobucket.com/albums/yy153/indianrockstars10/Mohit7-QualityLow4-in-1.jpg

[mannu12]

No they haven't started and there are no news. There is also no page at the architects (Foster) website. Very mystery..

Here you go
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9NDAyMTg0fENoaWxkSUQ9NDA5OTEyfFR5cGU9MQ==&t=1

http://www.pozzocrete.co.in/index.php?id=69&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=148&tx_ttnews[backPid]=4&cHash=95ebc8b5da

http://thestar.com.my/columnists/story.asp?file=/2010/10/31/columnists/onthebeat/7334449&sec=onthebeat

[OneWorldTradeCenter]

Such small hole for that tower. Are sure that this is the main site.

Those links to not prove that construction has started. I would like to see an official statement by the architect or the developer. I also miss a page at Forsters website. Mystery project...

[mannu12]

100% sure. Visit this thread for more info.You might get an answer to your question
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=471040&page=36

[kiwi4life]

im suprised nobody has tried to find a newspaper article on the construction of this thing, i believe it is, just because the hole seems small doesnt really mean a lot, they also may have different ways and methods of how they go about building such structures

[kiwi4life]

no news on this one, almost been a month?

[Infernal_Elf]

are there absolutely no one from India here on the forum ?

someone looking for an exotic holiday please go to Mumbai and check the site :D

[scalziand]

India101 had an update a week ago. It's a bit easier to see the outline of the building in this update.

November 25
Copyright India101 (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=68051723&postcount=871)
http://i51.tinypic.com/2rd9jk4.jpg

http://i53.tinypic.com/28mha9y.jpg

http://i56.tinypic.com/jtou8o.jpg

http://i51.tinypic.com/2ee9czr.jpg

There's also some floor plans that have been dug up.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5087/5229826235_29df2ea754_b.jpg
slide 52
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5084/5229837211_89963c1007_b.jpg
slide 56
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5004/5229880943_3fc152cf85.jpg

Source: http://www.slideboom.com/presentations/254073/Pankaj-Dharkar--Tall-Building

[Infernal_Elf]

Ahh very cool thanks for finding that scalziand seems like the India tower will have a base very similar to the Burj khalifah where one side can take up the wind load from the two others. kinda almoust like an Y shape really

[kiwi4life]

sweet!!! thanks for the pics! great to hear, just what we wanted to see

[scalziand]

New update from desiguy66 (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=69512449&postcount=1021)

Update: December 25 2010 - Saturday 4:00pm
There were soo many people working on saturday at 4pm on christmas. I can't imagine how bustling this probably is during a weekday. Merry Xmas....
Also, sorry for the image quality, my camera was not working so had to take pics using my cell phone

Outside the site

http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/7170/dsc00476yd.jpg (http://img189.imageshack.us/i/dsc00476yd.jpg/)

Outside the site...as soon I walked close the secuirty gaurd arrived to make sure i did not get any closer. all security personnel were in black uniforms as seen in this pic

http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/3909/dsc00477nr.jpg (http://img149.imageshack.us/i/dsc00477nr.jpg/)

http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/5333/dsc005070.jpg (http://img33.imageshack.us/i/dsc005070.jpg/)

The Site

http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/5216/dsc00478l.jpg (http://img137.imageshack.us/i/dsc00478l.jpg/)

http://img442.imageshack.us/img442/741/dsc00479s.jpg (http://img442.imageshack.us/i/dsc00479s.jpg/)

http://img815.imageshack.us/img815/5765/dsc00480g.jpg (http://img815.imageshack.us/i/dsc00480g.jpg/)

on the top is the main entrance to the site, where the white cement truck is

http://img683.imageshack.us/img683/2103/dsc00481ml.jpg (http://img683.imageshack.us/i/dsc00481ml.jpg/)

http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/1567/dsc00482h.jpg (http://img821.imageshack.us/i/dsc00482h.jpg/)

http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/3530/dsc00483o.jpg (http://img441.imageshack.us/i/dsc00483o.jpg/)

http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/9626/dsc00484dz.jpg (http://img338.imageshack.us/i/dsc00484dz.jpg/)

http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/8176/dsc00485dx.jpg (http://img266.imageshack.us/i/dsc00485dx.jpg/)

http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/3330/dsc00486u.jpg (http://img214.imageshack.us/i/dsc00486u.jpg/)

http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/6342/dsc00487v.jpg (http://img253.imageshack.us/i/dsc00487v.jpg/)

http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/9922/dsc00488pe.jpg (http://img26.imageshack.us/i/dsc00488pe.jpg/)

http://img696.imageshack.us/img696/2391/dsc00489ea.jpg (http://img696.imageshack.us/i/dsc00489ea.jpg/)

http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/6725/dsc00490m.jpg (http://img525.imageshack.us/i/dsc00490m.jpg/)

On the left is one of the entrances. the white booth is one of 2 security offices

http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/3509/dsc00491io.jpg (http://img534.imageshack.us/i/dsc00491io.jpg/)

http://img689.imageshack.us/img689/5408/dsc00492tp.jpg (http://img689.imageshack.us/i/dsc00492tp.jpg/)

http://img689.imageshack.us/img689/5408/dsc00492tp.jpg (http://img689.imageshack.us/i/dsc00492tp.jpg/)

http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/440/dsc00503z.jpg (http://img153.imageshack.us/i/dsc00503z.jpg/)

As you can see in the pics below, 3 backoes are exavating for the 3rd base

http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/8666/dsc00504n.jpg (http://img529.imageshack.us/i/dsc00504n.jpg/)

http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/6615/dsc00505wj.jpg (http://img26.imageshack.us/i/dsc00505wj.jpg/)

http://img844.imageshack.us/img844/3562/dsc00506v.jpg (http://img844.imageshack.us/i/dsc00506v.jpg/)

You can see the reinforcement for the foundation slab going in. It looks to be about 2 meters thick.

[mannu12]

Such small hole for that tower. Are sure that this is the main site.

Those links to not prove that construction has started. I would like to see an official statement by the architect or the developer. I also miss a page at Forsters website. Mystery project...

Btw, the site of India tower is larger than that of Shanghai tower.
Nevertheless, when completed this is how India Tower will stand in the skyline

cc b3ta

http://img560.imageshack.us/img560/3713/indiatower.jpg

[mannu12]

And those who think that the tower won't fit in the site. Here's something for you

cc amalfi
http://img834.imageshack.us/img834/5428/uploadu.png

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5045/5230396526_d1f10fc494_b.jpg

[patriotizzy]

The tower looks like it's in the middle of the slums.

[Roadcruiser1]

Then it might be a massive slum clearing project. America had a lot of these projects in the 1950's. It's called Urban Renewal. Though it is proven that it doesn't work, because it destroys the culture of the original neighborhood.

[scalziand]

Finally another update. The raft slab looks to be nearly complete, the tower cranes are being installed, and the rebar is starting to reach skyward.
http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/0deb479ddd.jpg
Coolguyz (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=75581563&postcount=877)

[mannu12]

Surprised to still see it in the proposed section

[colemonkee]

Moved this to the Under Construction thread.

[scalziand]

Thanks colemonkee. :cheers:

[Onn]

I'm very skeptical this is even a real project, why would they build it in such a dumpy neighborhood? Who's funding this in India?

[AndyT99]

Im wondering the same thing, that definitely seems like not your typical skyscraper neighbourhood..

[DigitalNinja]

So id it wasn't a real project what would they do with the hole?

[Onn]

So id it wasn't a real project what would they do with the hole?

An apartment building.

[Troubadour]

Here's a radical thought, fellas: If you're really curious whether this is India Tower, pick up a phone, call the architect, and ask. Or failing that, find out what institution in Mumbai is handling the paperwork and call them. This isn't Kremlinology, just talk to the people who would know what's going on.

[O-Town Hockey]

Here's a radical thought, fellas: If you're really curious whether this is India Tower, pick up a phone, call the architect, and ask. Or failing that, find out what institution in Mumbai is handling the paperwork and call them. This isn't Kremlinology, just talk to the people who would know what's going on.

Hold on, let me dial that 36 digit phone number to possibly (but probably not) get any potentially (but probably not) useful info on this project....:koko:

Unless we start getting some serious forumers in these far off places (Mumbia, Pyongyang, etc.) then we will be left speculating until something substantial is in place and photographed.

[SkyscrapersOfNewYork]

Or we could just look at whats posted on SSC....just sayin.

[The Chemist]

An apartment building.

Because 30 storey apartment buildings have the same depth and size of foundations as 700m tall supertalls, right? :rolleyes:

I remember you questioned whether the Shanghai Tower was real project when it was already above grade, so I'll advise everyone to take your scepticism with an extremely large grain of salt.

[Troubadour]

Hold on, let me dial that 36 digit phone number to possibly (but probably not) get any potentially (but probably not) useful info on this project....:koko:

Ooooo, international codes...scaaaaaaary! :sly:

[djlx2]

Finally another update. The raft slab looks to be nearly complete, the tower cranes are being installed, and the rebar is starting to reach skyward.
http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/0deb479ddd.jpg
Coolguyz (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=75581563&postcount=877)

I like the Foliage though: it would be better with geraniums or violets or slipper orchids.

[Spocket]

Then it might be a massive slum clearing project. America had a lot of these projects in the 1950's. It's called Urban Renewal. Though it is proven that it doesn't work, because it destroys the culture of the original neighborhood.

Seriously , don't make any comparisons here because there are none to be made .
Urban renewal in the new world is far different from urban renewal in the rest of it . Until you've seen it for yourself (and I'm not talking about in person necessarily but at least in pictures) you should have no comment about how terrible a thing it is to replace what's on any given parcel of land with something different .

I should point out though that what doesn't work is the "renewal" part of urban renewal in America . Even that's misleading to state because the problem isn't that it doesn't do what it was supposed to do , it's that it doesn't fit with what's nearby . People can make a "neighbourhood" out of any place they live . The American concept of a neighbourhood is somewhat unique to Western thought . In the rest of the world , a neighbourhood is just the area you live in , not the people there. What matters is not the style of housing but the people themselves .

[OneWorldTradeCenter]

I'm very skeptical this is even a real project, why would they build it in such a dumpy neighborhood? Who's funding this in India?

I agree. I doubt that there is enough need and enough money. It's not China...

[Troubadour]

I like the Foliage though: it would be better with geraniums or violets or slipper orchids.

In the tropics, you don't choose the foliage - it chooses you.

[Onn]

Because 30 storey apartment buildings have the same depth and size of foundations as 700m tall supertalls, right? :rolleyes:

I remember you questioned whether the Shanghai Tower was real project when it was already above grade, so I'll advise everyone to take your scepticism with an extremely large grain of salt.

It's being built into a uneven mountain side, what kind of base would you think it needs? And I NEVER questioned whether the Shanghai Tower was a real project, just where the funding was coming from.

[The Chemist]

It's being built into a uneven mountain side, what kind of base would you think it needs? And I NEVER questioned whether the Shanghai Tower was a real project, just where the funding was coming from.

In fact I wouldn't be surpised if the Shanghai Tower is delayed or even never built.

:rolleyes: