SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/index.php)
-   Supertall Construction (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/forumdisplay.php?f=323)
-   -   MECCA | Abraj Al-Bait | 601m | 1972ft | 95 fl | T/O (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=129985)

leftopolis Dec 20, 2007 4:32 AM

Um, does anybody read other people's posts anymore? Not to beat a dead horse, but in posts 87 & 88 I posted links to the developer's website as well as the official website for Abraj Al-Bait towers. There is no giant clock feature, yet people seem to be discussing it as if it is still part of the plan. The clock rendering on page 1 of this thread is nearly a year old--current renders are sans clock. Does anybody have an opinoin on the latest design?

M II A II R II K Dec 20, 2007 3:24 PM

The latest design on the first post did have the clock which is why we assumed that was the latest design, and plus the diagram of this building still has the clock.

Xeelee Dec 20, 2007 11:01 PM

not bad

Tom In Chicago Dec 21, 2007 4:44 PM

This is the current rendering from the developers Website. . . I lifted it from the PDF document and uploaded it to my online gallery. . .

http://www.pbase.com/temper/image/90610551.jpg

StarScraperCity Dec 23, 2007 3:23 AM

I am so glad they got rid of the clock. This one sure is a beauty now.:)

ThreeHundred Dec 23, 2007 4:53 AM

It looks almost Stalinist. Like one of the 7 Sisters in Moscow.

verticalextropy Dec 23, 2007 5:07 AM

my eyes still hurt

delts145 Dec 23, 2007 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ute_City (Post 2792086)
Looks like a mix of the Venetian in Las Vegas and Big Ben.

I immediately thought the Strip in Vegas. I'm thinking a new Aladdin Hotel/Casino.

FlyersFan118 Dec 23, 2007 12:41 PM

jeez, that's crazy!

alphawolf Dec 23, 2007 5:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by delts145 (Post 3242794)
I immediately thought the Strip in Vegas. I'm thinking a new Aladdin Hotel/Casino.

Exactly what I was thinking. I can smell the outcry.

Tom In Chicago Dec 23, 2007 5:28 PM

Yeah. . . it isn't really all that groundbreaking outside of its height, but the design is somewhat common for modern buildings on the Arabian Peninsula. . .

harryc Dec 23, 2007 5:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alphawolf (Post 3242990)
Exactly what I was thinking. I can smell the outcry.

Somebody pointed out here or on SSC that - at the time - St Paul's cathedral was THE architectural feat.

http://www.greatbuildings.com/buildi...s_of_Rome.html

alphawolf Dec 23, 2007 5:54 PM

Yeah, very curious of how the internal features are going to come out in comparison to lets say, St Paul's. I hope its something noteworthy.

Alliance Dec 23, 2007 6:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom In Chicago (Post 3242999)
Yeah. . . it isn't really all that groundbreaking outside of its height, but the design is somewhat common for modern buildings on the Arabian Peninsula. . .

Its location is what's groundbreaking...

as tho height, a good potion of the bulding is still spire.

firulais Dec 23, 2007 6:36 PM

How does a building 1952 ft pinnacle only have 76 floors?

leftopolis Dec 23, 2007 10:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by firulais (Post 3243065)
How does a building 1952 ft pinnacle only have 76 floors?

From the Dar Group (the developer) website which I hotlinked to in post #87 of this thread:

"The tallest tower with over 100 floors - a 2,000-room, 5-star hotel..."

Also from that site, a bit of information on the spire:

The hotel's top levels are crowned with the project's "Jewel" the 4-storey Lunar Center housing a museum, library and telescope dome, along with helicopter control tower, and a spire with telecom tower and upper viewing deck

John Hinds Dec 23, 2007 11:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom In Chicago (Post 3240000)
This is the current rendering from the developers Website. . . I lifted it from the PDF document and uploaded it to my online gallery. . .

As the first post in this thread said, that's the 2005 design.

They just haven't got around to updating their website with this monstrosity of a design that was released a few months ago.

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/3158/dokaaeua3.jpg

It's a disgrace that UNESCO has allowed them to build a smegging Vegas x10 sized hotel next to such a religious site demolishing hundreds of ancient buildings in the process.

Anyone know what they are building on the site in the bottom right of this picture?

M II A II R II K Dec 23, 2007 11:33 PM

Funny

That they can go to the trouble to build such a thing but can't update their website.

So does this have the clock or not...

Tom In Chicago Dec 24, 2007 12:40 AM

Yeah. . . I'd like to know too. . .

Dr. Taco Dec 24, 2007 2:20 AM

well, it might as well have a clock, i guess

navyweaxguy Dec 24, 2007 4:35 AM

The clock would make sense for ensuring people know how close they are to call to prayer.

1ajs Dec 24, 2007 5:32 AM

so any construction updates?

... the latest thing on flickr i can find is this posted november 13th
http://www.flickr.com/photos/chinx786/2000596661/
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2355/...73515145_b.jpg

Brian. Dec 24, 2007 6:12 AM

Wow...that just doesn't belong. It's interesting as a structure but seeing it in its environment is just out of place.

1ajs Dec 24, 2007 6:30 AM

why? i think it fits in also if your heading there to worship and get lost all yea gota do is look up and see what orientation to it you are... :P

Scruffy Dec 24, 2007 6:47 AM

As a guiding landmark its good. but i too think it doesn't fit in with the landscape. reminds me of how that unfinished hotel in Pyongyang sticks out in its surroundings. this ofcourse being much nicer

leftopolis Dec 24, 2007 8:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1ajs (Post 3243730)
so any construction updates?

... the latest thing on flickr i can find is this posted november 13th

That's more recent than anything I could find. It looks like we'll know soon enough about the final design--judging by the pic you posted, they're just about up to the part in question. Another apparent irony is the lack of any non-conflicting or current documentation wrt this maligned monolith.

1ajs Dec 24, 2007 9:22 AM

its a shame its not geting any publicity for its sheer size realy outside this thread :(

but not knowing how tall it was supost to be you would sware thats the burj dubi lol

John Hinds Dec 24, 2007 5:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonny 5 (Post 3243362)
Anyone know what they are building on the site in the bottom right of this picture?

Yuk... please tell me it's not this!

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/145/4...157b7898_o.jpg

:yuck:

firulais Dec 24, 2007 5:50 PM

Those are fugly!

Aleks Dec 24, 2007 11:31 PM

Looks like those buildings you posted Johnny are the ones that are going to be built there. I had no idea Mecca had hills, I thought it was flat!

What I really don't get is the hole top thing. We'll have to wait, or e-mail the developers. Burj Dubai doesn't update too often either. Also, does anybody know how wide does roads are? A project this big must need a freeway as an entrance for tall the people leaving Mecca and arriving to Mecca.

sfguy Dec 25, 2007 12:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1ajs (Post 3243945)
its a shame its not geting any publicity for its sheer size realy outside this thread :(

but not knowing how tall it was supost to be you would sware thats the burj dubi lol

yeah, except Dubai doesn't have any hills like Mecca does, but I see your point given that it does look way out of place like the BD does.

leftopolis Dec 25, 2007 5:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aleks0o01 (Post 3244636)
...What I really don't get is the hole top thing. We'll have to wait, or e-mail the developers....

If you or someone else is so inclined, here's some contact information I found for the Dar Group in Saudi Arabia:

khobar@dargroup.com
Al-Babteen Bldg., 6th Fl., Apt. 3/6
Al-Dhahran St.
P.O. Box: 182
Al-Khobar 31952

Tel: +966 (0)3 896 0599
Fax: +966 (0)3 896 1612
Al-Khobar
Makkah Road
P.O. Box: 1231, Khafje 31971

Tel: +966 (0)3 7662971
Fax: +966 (0)3 7671823
Khafji
riyadh@dargroup.com
King Fahd Road, Olaya
Al-Mass Centre No. 802
P.O. Box: 612, Riyadh 11421

Tel: +966 (0)1 201 3001
Fax: +966 (0)1 201 2827
Riyadh
jeddah@dargroup.com
Al-Andalos Street
Al-Ruwais
Beside SAMBA Bank
P.O. Box: 910
Jeddah 21421

Tel: +966 (0)2 653 3416
Fax: +966 (0)2 653 3364
Jeddah
Al-Aziziyah
P.O. Box: 6310

Tel: +966 (0)2 556 6564
Fax: +966 (0)2 550 3629
Holy Makkah
Villa No.3, Al-Jameat Road
Al-Jurf Suburb
P.O. Box: 4648

Tel: +966 (0)4 847 4403
Fax: +966 (0)4 847 4248
Madinah

1ajs Dec 27, 2007 9:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aleks0o01 (Post 3244636)
Looks like those buildings you posted Johnny are the ones that are going to be built there. I had no idea Mecca had hills, I thought it was flat!

What I really don't get is the hole top thing. We'll have to wait, or e-mail the developers. Burj Dubai doesn't update too often either. Also, does anybody know how wide does roads are? A project this big must need a freeway as an entrance for tall the people leaving Mecca and arriving to Mecca.

i think you come in on foot gota remeber theres like 2 or 3 million people that show up for his single event... and people from all corners of the word show up there so imagin the cayos... its crazzy

Aleks Dec 27, 2007 11:59 AM

Yeah, but I mean the roads leaving the parking of the building. How wide are they? I assume the roads leave the buildings on the opposite side of the temple. And I assume rich people who drive go there too since they're building a luxury hotel.

skymetalscraper Dec 27, 2007 9:15 PM

this buildning look completely out of place

M II A II R II K Dec 31, 2007 4:18 AM

At least it will stand out.

Spocket Dec 31, 2007 10:23 AM

I think it's good every now and then to have a building that initially makes you go "Ewwww...what IS that ?" Once this thing is complete, I have a feeling that it will become iconic and I mean that in a good way. It IS unique because of it's scale, it's situation, even it's raison d'etre. It's so ugly it's beautiful. It's so out of place that it's going to define the place that it's in.

bassem Dec 31, 2007 2:13 PM

i think that there is no need for wide roads in mecca as i guess that u might rarely find a car there as there are very few inhabitants in mecca and all pilgrims arrive either by planes or through the red sea
they only need more hotels there rather than any other thing, i heard that most of pilgrims stay in tents there

br.reese Dec 31, 2007 3:48 PM

It already stands out at 300 ft.

Alliance Dec 31, 2007 4:01 PM

I disagree that ugly architecture can be considered beautiful.

firstcranialnerve Dec 31, 2007 8:30 PM

I agree, this is quite an ugly, backward design. Were they limited to something uninspiring because it would distract the people praying in the grand mosque?

Alliance Dec 31, 2007 9:09 PM

I think the Mosque itself is practically indomitable. I think its jsut a case of uninspired, if not poor design.

Lecom Dec 31, 2007 11:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spocket (Post 3252849)
I think it's good every now and then to have a building that initially makes you go "Ewwww...what IS that ?" Once this thing is complete, I have a feeling that it will become iconic and I mean that in a good way. It IS unique because of it's scale, it's situation, even it's raison d'etre. It's so ugly it's beautiful. It's so out of place that it's going to define the place that it's in.

The Eiffel Tower rationale. Good point.

zerokarma Jan 21, 2008 4:11 PM

So is the clock in the final design or not

kenratboy Jan 22, 2008 5:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1ajs (Post 3243730)
so any construction updates?

... the latest thing on flickr i can find is this posted november 13th
http://www.flickr.com/photos/chinx786/2000596661/
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2355/...73515145_b.jpg

Just on its own, that is an awesome picture, the whole city looks very interesting (but I don't think they would take kindly to my kind).

Oh well, its theit city, who are we to judge them :cool:

Surrealplaces Jan 23, 2008 4:23 AM

Those are some pretty ugly buildings. Who designed those, and got paid for it??

Surrealplaces Jan 23, 2008 4:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1ajs (Post 3243730)
so any construction updates?

... the latest thing on flickr i can find is this posted november 13th
http://www.flickr.com/photos/chinx786/2000596661/
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2355/...73515145_b.jpg

Well, the buildings may be ugly, but this shot of the city is great.

johnandahalf Jan 23, 2008 4:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1ajs (Post 3243730)
so any construction updates?

... the latest thing on flickr i can find is this posted november 13th
http://www.flickr.com/photos/chinx786/2000596661/
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2355/...73515145_b.jpg

Looks like a city on the moon. Have they no trees? No nurseries? No landscaping of any kind? It just looks so "crumbly" to me.

ô¿ô

PhxSprawler Jan 23, 2008 4:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnandahalf (Post 3302382)
Looks like a city on the moon. Have they no trees? No nurseries? No landscaping of any kind? It just looks so "crumbly" to me.

ô¿ô

It is a desert.

the urban politician Jan 23, 2008 4:52 PM

I think this thing will be gorgeous.

I hate some of you architecture elitists, who would praise this exact structure if it were built in 1890, yet seem to loathe it now. What a silly, fickle group of nitwits some of you are..


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:05 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.