HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2018, 6:57 PM
Spocket's Avatar
Spocket Spocket is offline
Keep yo pimp hand strong
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Changchun , China
Posts: 2,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blesha13 View Post
Why not incorporate the towers into one? I'd love to see more height capped with a lit spire.
Cost. Anything over about 1000 feet starts to require a fair bit more engineering and the game basically changes (per my understanding...don't ask me what changes exactly)

These behemoths you see going up in China and Dubai look nice to enthusiasts like us but they're nowhere near as cost-effective as splitting a mega-tall building in two height-wise.
__________________
Giving you a reason to drink and drive since 1975.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2018, 12:36 AM
TallBob TallBob is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,960
Nice building LA!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2018, 8:03 PM
DJ1272 DJ1272 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 65
Would somebody be kind enough to do a rendering of this tower included in the current entire downtown skyline?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2018, 6:51 PM
headcheckjj's Avatar
headcheckjj headcheckjj is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ1272 View Post
Would somebody be kind enough to do a rendering of this tower included in the current entire downtown skyline?
Including the Beacon, Perla, and the three towers around the LA Times please
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Jan 31, 2018, 8:25 PM
Totojuice's Avatar
Totojuice Totojuice is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spocket View Post
Cost. Anything over about 1000 feet starts to require a fair bit more engineering and the game basically changes (per my understanding...don't ask me what changes exactly)

These behemoths you see going up in China and Dubai look nice to enthusiasts like us but they're nowhere near as cost-effective as splitting a mega-tall building in two height-wise.
I am so sick of hearing this excuse. Not attacking you Spocket, but we keep hearing the same nonsense. Los Angeles is not Panama City. There is PLENTY of money in this town, and plenty of financing available to build in America's 2nd biggest city and doorway to Asia. There is clearly another reason that we are not being told.

I suspect that there must be some financial arrangement between the current tallest and the city (whether LA, NY, or any city), that prevents other towers from surpassing that height limit unless they reach a more favorable deal....just guessing here, but no other explanation makes sense to me.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Feb 1, 2018, 2:27 AM
Blesha13 Blesha13 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Los Angeles, CA 90026
Posts: 147
Might as well keep this in the 900 ft range and remove Wilshire Grand's spire so US Bank Tower can claim its title back (which there's a 0% chance of that happening), if not Angels Landing MUST BUILD TALLER than 1100 ft.
__________________
GO DODGERS! GO LAKERS!

Last edited by Blesha13; Feb 1, 2018 at 3:36 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:09 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.