SHANGHAI | Shanghai Tower / 上海中心大厦 | 2,073 FT / 632 M | 128 FLOORS - Page 115

muppet · #**2281** Posted **Mar 31, 2015, 10:55 PM**

muppet · #**2282** Posted **Mar 31, 2015, 10:58 PM**

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showth...1698&page=1108

SHMOG

muppet · #**2283** Posted **Mar 31, 2015, 10:58 PM**

ChicagoMan · #**2284** Posted **Apr 13, 2015, 5:45 PM**

Flickr image:https://www.flickr.com/photos/archit...n/16947783210/

New Building Materials & Construction World (NBM&CW), India's top construction trade magazine, has published a detailed story on the design of the new Shanghai Tower in its April 2015 edition. It includes an interview with Shanghai Tower Chief Architect Marshall Strabala, who talked about how the building was created for its specific Shanghai location and purpose, and his expectations for future high rise building in India, a market with which he is very familiar. Read the story on NBM&CW's website at: http://nbmcw.com/Online_Edition/NBMC...2015/index.htm

chris08876 · #**2285** Posted **May 11, 2015, 10:17 PM**

Credit: http://curbed.com/archives/2015/05/1...-supertall.php

ChicagoMan · #**2286** Posted **May 21, 2015, 2:25 PM**

Flickr image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/archit...n/17817933242/

Marshall Strabala, Chief Architect of Shanghai Tower, was interviewed on CNN's "Newsroom" program about his design of this, China's tallest building and the world's second tallest building, slated to open this summer. Strabala, who created the winning design for the 632-meter Tower, said that he expects the structure to be a business success. Working for the owner and developer, Shanghai Tower Construction and Development Co., Ltd., Strabala directs all design and engineering work on the building, including work of outside contractors.

First broadcast on May 17, 2015, the CNN video can seen at: http://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2015...t-building.cnn

10023 · #**2287** Posted **May 21, 2015, 2:38 PM**

I've been critical of much Chinese postmodern architecture in the past ("cartoonish", etc), but this building is fantastic and even more impressive in person.

I still think Lujiazui (and most of Pudong) is a disaster from an urban planning standpoint, but the building is very cool.

antoun · #**2288** Posted **May 23, 2015, 4:58 AM**

Need a better drawing

THE BIG APPLE · #**2289** Posted **May 23, 2015, 4:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 10023

I still think Lujiazui (and most of Pudong) is a disaster from an urban planning standpoint, but the building is very cool.

The method in Shanghai is trees surrounding buildings, and space for pedestrians to stand for a second and breathe. I would say that most cities in the world are copying Shanghai.

NYC's 1,000,000 tree program is basically putting trees around buildings, and Times Square becoming fully pedestrian says something about the sign of the times.

How is it a urban planning disaster, when most cities in the world support the idea of cities in parks and vice versa?

SkyscrapersOfNewYork · #**2290** Posted **May 24, 2015, 8:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by THE BIG APPLE

The method in Shanghai is trees surrounding buildings, and space for pedestrians to stand for a second and breathe. I would say that most cities in the world are copying Shanghai.

NYC's 1,000,000 tree program is basically putting trees around buildings, and Times Square becoming fully pedestrian says something about the sign of the times.

How is it a urban planning disaster, when most cities in the world support the idea of cities in parks and vice versa?

because these cities become unwalkable and traffic disaters, tower in the park concepts are usually anti urban and just dont work this is why cities favor grids nd symetrical design.

THE BIG APPLE · #**2291** Posted **May 25, 2015, 12:13 AM**

^ Why then are cities like NYC copying Shanghai with the tower in park concept?

I think cities have realized that the 19th Century concept of a "city grid" while at one time successful is not compatible with the 21st Century where people are worried about the environment, and realize the damage that cities, automobiles, and skyscrapers are doing to the environment.

SkyscrapersOfNewYork · #**2292** Posted **May 25, 2015, 12:35 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by THE BIG APPLE

^ Why then are cities like NYC copying Shanghai with the tower in park concept?

I think cities have realized that the 19th Century concept of a "city grid" while at one time successful is not compatible with the 21st Century where people are worried about the environment, and realize the damage that cities, automobiles, and skyscrapers are doing to the environment.

adding trees doesnt equal copying shanghai, there being placed on existing streets and parks its not like NYC is cutting out round circles in manhattan and placing greenery on them. infastructre in these developing cities are horrific and creating progress traps by not being very well thought out and often are simply not built to a human scale. as for the enviromental point i dont se any cities being concerened with changing their format to decrease carbon emissions and so on because thats not where the problem lies it lies with out dated forms of energy.

Besides Shanghai is far from being a leader in efficentcy just look at the smog problem. this is also an issue of density vs. sprawl in which case sprawl never works as well as density. Pudong is a walking and traffc nightmare, and they will feel the effects of poor planning in coming years. by now way should cities follow in shanghais footsteps especially not estabilshed metropolitian areas .

THE BIG APPLE · #**2293** Posted **May 25, 2015, 12:59 AM**

In an ideal city, the cars would all be underground, and pedestrians would walk the ground level automobile free. Few trees would need/require cutting down, and more trees should be planted. With Times Square, Herald Square, Grand Central Terminal, Hudson Yards, High Line, and their vicinity all becoming fully pedestrian in the next two decades, and with NYC aiming to replant 1,000,000 trees with the goal of replacing all the trees cut down to develop Manhattan, then it begs the question: is it worth it to make all these roads, and connections between forests? I like the idea of a really tall building that could support an entire city but it being surrounded by trees, as opposed to many buildings forming a concrete city, and a few small parks. NYC has opened its eyes. Other North American cities are opening their eyes. Shanghai is not perfect, but at least they are carefully developing their major structures and not displacing many trees in the major cities.

Cities aren't just promoting the planting of trees on every concrete block for no reason. There is a reason. Shanghai is preserving the Pudong forest as much as possible, while building cities in the sky.

Cities in the sky is a 21st Century concept, and a concept that works.

This below works.

THE BIG APPLE · #**2294** Posted **May 25, 2015, 1:08 AM**

^ Another note on the picture. Every setback of the proposed prefabricated Changsha skyscraper has grass and trees. Where else in North America have we seen cities where they want the roofs of highrises and skyscrapers converted into parks and gardens?

NYC
Chicago
etc.

SkyscrapersOfNewYork · #**2295** Posted **May 25, 2015, 1:14 AM**

I really just think were talking about two different things, reinstating green space has nothing to do with Shanghai's city planning and there simply are no tower in the park concepts planned here in NA. a greener world is a global inititive not something by innovative chinese design.

THE BIG APPLE · #**2296** Posted **May 25, 2015, 1:19 AM**

I'll lave you with this. When all the smoke and mirrors are removed, what's the difference between a skyscraper built in a forest (China), and a skyscraper surrounded with sidewalks lined with trees (NYC)?

Not much. Essentially the same thing.

Both America and China have bad environmental records, and need all the help they can get.

aaron38 · #**2297** Posted **May 25, 2015, 1:53 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by THE BIG APPLE

Cities in the sky is a 21st Century concept, and a concept that works.

This below works.

There's a big problem with this concept, and it's how much total land is developed and how much is natural? Those trees surrounding that tower is not a natural forest. The ground is not a natural forest floor with a full ecosystem, ponds, streams. There will be no fires that reinvigorate the soil.

Instead it is a groomed park. The rain that falls goes into storm sewers. Every plant that grows will be planted and tended. Covered in trees but it counts as developed land.
And every acre that is wasted that way is another acre that is developed elsewhere to house people and businesses. It makes cities bigger overall.

It's better to have dense cities with buildings shoulder to shoulder so that more land can devoted to true wide open natural environments.

Cook County which includes Chicago is commited to growing the forest preserves by 20,000 acres. At the same time county population needs to keep growing. That's not going to happen if every new building sits inside its own park.

The Chemist · #**2298** Posted **May 25, 2015, 2:59 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkyscrapersOfNewYork

Besides Shanghai is far from being a leader in efficentcy just look at the smog problem. this is also an issue of density vs. sprawl in which case sprawl never works as well as density. Pudong is a walking and traffc nightmare, and they will feel the effects of poor planning in coming years. by now way should cities follow in shanghais footsteps especially not estabilshed metropolitian areas .

A few notes:

1. The pedestrian realm and traffic flow have both been improved significantly in Lujiazui in the last 5 years.
2. Pudong is 1500 square kilometres, much of which is as walkable as areas in Puxi.
3. The smog problem in Shanghai has very little to do with cars. Shanghai has half the number of cars as Beijing due to the high cost of license plates, and has one of the world's largest and busiest Metro systems (nearly 8 million passengers / day). Most of the smog in Shanghai comes from factories and power plants in the Yangtze River Delta, not from vehicle emissions.

SkyscrapersOfNewYork · #**2299** Posted **May 25, 2015, 7:56 AM**

yes im aware of the factory problem...and im just saying that the city has its flaws thats all.

SkyscrapersOfNewYork · #**2300** Posted **May 25, 2015, 7:58 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by THE BIG APPLE

I'll lave you with this. When all the smoke and mirrors are removed, what's the difference between a skyscraper built in a forest (China), and a skyscraper surrounded with sidewalks lined with trees (NYC)?

Not much. Essentially the same thing.

Both America and China have bad environmental records, and need all the help they can get.

i have honesty no clue how to answer this..