News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Tall Buildings of the Last Fifty Years.

Re:Tall Buildings of the Last Fifty Years by ruytlm on Saturday October 12, 2019 @08:29AM (#21232506)
CTBUH have an interesting set of skyscraper data[0] that's worth perusing, if you are willing to register (or block certain elements..)

Also, interesting piece of trivia: the voluntary demolition of buildings taller than 200m is unprecedented.[1][2] The first of these buildings to be built was the Metropolitan Life Tower,[3] completed in 1909, which is still standing today.

[0]: https://www.skyscrapercenter.com/

[1]: 9/11 and the destruction of the WTC towers being the implied involuntary demolition.

[2]: https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/praising-squareness-...

[3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_Life_Insurance_Co...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tall Buildings of the Last Fifty Years by bbanyc on Saturday October 12, 2019 @01:33PM (#21234774)
270 Park Avenue (215 m), the headquarters of JPMorgan Chase, is currently being demolished to build a new headquarters building about twice as tall.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tall Buildings of the Last Fifty Years by BerislavLopac on Saturday October 12, 2019 @10:13AM (#21233256)
> voluntary demolition of buildings taller than 200m is unprecedented

Any insight into why is it so?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tall Buildings of the Last Fifty Years by brianwawok on Saturday October 12, 2019 @12:04PM (#21234148)
Do you normally destroy things worth millions of dollars that still can do their basic function (house offices)?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tall Buildings of the Last Fifty Years by BerislavLopac on Sunday October 13, 2019 @08:56AM (#21240123)
Well office buildings get torn down routinely; I would expect there to be a separate reason why 200m+ ones are not.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tall Buildings of the Last Fifty Years by pas on Monday October 14, 2019 @04:25AM (#21246159)
The higher/bigger the building, the bigger you need to replace it with, thus it's a much bigger investment, than finding a lot with a smaller building on it.

As a sibling post a bit up mentioned JP Morgan's 270 Park Av. building 215m and it's getting replaced, because in this case it wasn't easier to "just find a lot with a smaller building", which is probably very rare and rather recent (though once there were multi-storey buildings in place of every skyscraper in Manhattan) solution.

[ Parent | on HN ]