Wachovia South Tryon Projects

[dubone]

Well, I do admit that there were some specific spots with no people, there were actually a significant amount of people out and about.

But actually, the pedestrian population was (as usual) concentrated on the section of Tryon that I didn't take many photos, between 8th and 4th. That is the section that Hugh built up with many project.

Here are the only two photos I took of the area, and these weren't even spots with the most people.

My point, though, is that Hugh (or Ken L.) doesn't need to retaliate (I originally wrote retailiate by mistake ), as Ken T. is only trying to catch up, on what Hugh was doing throughout North Tryon. Not necessarily height, but much more focus on the ground level, in order to inspire off hours activity. Wachovia is trying to catch up, which is why they built the Green, and now the arts projects. But they have a long way to go, as South Tryon isn't really an off hours destination for many pedestrians, even the Green.

(I should also note that it was hot and rainy, not a very good combination for pedestrian activity, yet N Tryon had easily hundreds of people on the sidewalks of just a couple blocks.)

Also, (I'm not sure why underground city got an eyeroll smily) the tunneling appeared to be starting, by virtue of them having two lanes of Tryon closed for a long time. I didn't look to see how far they went down, though.

[AuLukey]

Also, (I'm not sure why underground city got an eyeroll smily) the tunneling appeared to be starting, by virtue of them having two lanes of Tryon closed for a long time. I didn't look to see how far they went down, though.

I may have to take the eyeroll back after having slept on it. I just can't imagine an underground city in Charlotte when we're still trying to promote street level activity. The arts package should help pull more and more pedestrians further south along tryon, but telling even a fraction of these people to "go underground" kinda defeats the idea.

I agree that originally the trend was not to focus on street level in the days of Hugh, but that was also not a trend in Charlotte at the time. It has taken years for there to be more of a general focus on pedestrians rather than monoliths. I believe that, for the time being, most all new high rises built by the banks and/or major corporations will have at least some ground level retail/entertainment/restaurants. Maybe Meck could legalize gambling and Charlotte could fill up with casinos and tourists and have an enormous amount of street traffic. There are plenty of things that would boost involvement on the pedestrian side of things, but look back maybe five or ten years. Aside from the scattered restaurants and the occasional nighttime clubs, what motivation did anybody have for spending time uptown?

[dubone]

The tunnel is part of improving the street activity. It carries trucks to an underground loading dock, so that the project can avoid having a back. As a result retail or other facilities will have their front doors on all sides of the buildings.

[AuLukey]

The tunnel is part of improving the street activity. It carrier trucks to an underground loading dock, so that the project can avoid having a back. As a result retail or other facilities will have their front doors on all sides of the buildings.

And I just learned something new.

[schmopperX]

Reading the article in the paper yesterday about Nashville's Signiture Tower.

Can anyone tell me why, that project is estimated at 300 million & Wachovia's is estimated at 800 million?

Just seems as tho the size of Signiture would make it closer to Wachovia's supposidly smaller building, but Wachovia is nearly 3 times more.

[unccmyway]

800 million is the cost of the entire project...not just the wachovia tower. And the sig tower isn't going to be LEED certified

[schmopperX]

800 million is the cost of the entire project...not just the wachovia tower. And the sig tower isn't going to be LEED certified

Ok, I buy that to a certain extent, but...

Lets say (for discussion sake) a 800 to 1000ft. tower these days runs you about 300 to 400 mil.

LEED desingn comes in, and adds approximately 100 million to the project (which is really a healhy number).

Then you add in the ARTS package, (going from memory) isn't that like 150 million? (sorry if I get that wrong) so we're at 400 + 100 + 150 = 650, we're still 150 million away even if we use liberal estimates.

All I'm saying is; With all the hesitation in realeasing a rendering & the inflated price tag, this thing has to be bigger than we've been led to belive, it just has to be.

[metropolitan]

Ok, I buy that to a certain extent, but...

Lets say (for discussion sake) a 800 to 1000ft. tower these days runs you about 300 to 400 mil.

LEED desingn comes in, and adds approximately 100 million to the project (which is really a healhy number).

Then you add in the ARTS package, (going from memory) isn't that like 150 million? (sorry if I get that wrong) so we're at 400 + 100 + 150 = 650, we're still 150 million away even if we use liberal estimates.

All I'm saying is; With all the hesitation in realeasing a rendering & the inflated price tag, this thing has to be bigger than we've been led to belive, it just has to be.

A 800 - 1000 ft OFFICE tower may well be more than 300 - 400 mil these days. If I remember, BofA Charlotte was 300 mil 15 yrs ago. Nevertheless, I'm also hoping the 800 mil figure is hiding a pleasant surprise.

[atlrvr]

I know I posted a cost breakdown somewhere a few pages back but $800 million includes real and personal property....that means that number includes peronsonal computers, furniture, etc. in the new tower.....the point of that high figure is to sell the project to the city and county since they have to pay property taxes on both real and personal property.

[schmopperX]

A 800 - 1000 ft OFFICE tower may well be more than 300 - 400 mil these days. If I remember, BofA Charlotte was 300 mil 15 yrs ago. Nevertheless, I'm also hoping the 800 mil figure is hiding a pleasant surprise.

I thought BofA was 200m 15 years ago.

But that is my hope as well I mean 800M

I know I posted a cost breakdown somewhere a few pages back but $800 million includes real and personal property....that means that number includes peronsonal computers, furniture, etc. in the new tower.....the point of that high figure is to sell the project to the city and county since they have to pay property taxes on both real and personal property.

Ohhhh, Ok well that do make a difference don't it.

[Plasticman]

Cmon guys. I think everyone had assumed the secresy surrounding both the Signature Tower and the Wachovia projects were purposefully protected because there was/is some underlying competition. But it appears neither project was concerned with the other and the only competition was the strawmen built up on here.

So I would just move on and be proud of what you have.

[monsoon]

So I would just move on and be proud of what you have.

No moving on is needed. I will note the Wachovia tower is already under construction. The signature tower may or may not happen based on condo sales in Nashville.

There never was a competition here against Nashville as if you check back in this thread, there were rumors of the Wachovia project going to 80-100 stories long before the signature tower was even announced. This is based on the fact the bank has already "almost announced" an 100 story for Charlotte. If there is are any competition concerns in Charlotte is against other towers in Charlotte of which there are 14 highrise projects announced or already under construction. What is going on in Nashville isn't even on the radar screen here for most of our forumers yet certain Nashville forumers persist in looking for something that isn't there. Maybe this is going on on certain skyscraper fanboy sites, but not here.

[rockhilljames]

I will say that most of us are cheering for the Signature Tower. I, for one, love it and think it would be a great tower.

It does have a 200 foot spire from what I've heard, and I've never been a fan of a spire counting towards the final height. The whole Petronas thing and all.

To get back on topic, Wachovia has always said 40 - 50 story range, has announced a floor count of 46 stories and has never waivered from it. So...that's what I'm going with. Based on the actual site plan submitted to the city, we're looking at a 700' + tower, and that ain't bad!

[Plasticman]

I will say that most of us are cheering for the Signature Tower. I, for one, love it and think it would be a great tower.

It does have a 200 foot spire from what I've heard, and I've never been a fan of a spire counting towards the final height. The whole Petronas thing and all.

To get back on topic, Wachovia has always said 40 - 50 story range, has announced a floor count of 46 stories and has never waivered from it. So...that's what I'm going with. Based on the actual site plan submitted to the city, we're looking at a 700' + tower, and that ain't bad!

No it isn't bad. It's taller than the latest Atlanta projects right now.

I disagree with the spire not counting. There seems to be a feeling among half the people that spires are somehow a cheat. But if everything had a flat roof, wouldn't a lot of skylines look bland? Sigs spire is actually one of the finest I've ever seen and certainly isn't cheap. I rank it ahead of even the Chrysler building or ESB. Chrysler's spire ends almost needle thin for a long, long way. Heck, I even rank it well ahead of BOA Atlanta. As much as I like our BOA, in the daylight, the thing looks like it's waiting to be finished. Now at night, it looks incredible.

[AuLukey]

I agree, spires are needed for architectural variety. The real cheats are antennae. Those make me mad when they are included in a buildings height. They do nothing to add to the tower.

As for the Wachovia tower, this is really taking longer for them to announce it than I had anticipated. As speculative as I have become on towers, thanks to naysayers on this site, I still am holding out on this tower being over 800ft. 1000+ft would be nice, but in that location, it wouldn't look right without another tower further along S. Tryon. It would further divide uptown rather than help bring it together if it were too tall. So, as much as I'd love to see a humongous tower souring in our skies which is visible from Mt. Mitchell, I think it would actually hurt our skyline if not placed correctly. Somewhere in the vicinity of Trade would do wonders for the skyline, but also needs to have a wonderful street level presence. It's a bit to ask right now.

[monsoon]

I agree, spires are needed for architectural variety. The real cheats are antennae. Those make me mad when they are included in a buildings height. They do nothing to add to the tower.

Antennas are not included in the building's height. The Sears tower as well as the former WTC are examples of this.

[Nostyle]

I still am holding out on this tower being over 800ft. 1000+ft would be nice, but in that location, it wouldn't look right without another tower further along S. Tryon.

More towers would come in time. Megatall skyscrapers are few and far between though. Charlotte probably won't have another one of this (potential) height for quite some time, so I am hoping they give it all the height they can muster. There will be plenty of 400-600 footers in Charlotte's future. A project of this magnitude is one of Charlotte's more rare chances to actually top the 1000' mark.

[AuLukey]

Antennas are not included in the building's height. The Sears tower as well as the former WTC are examples of this.

I've seen listings saying one of the wtc's was taller than the other because of the antanna. This was a long time ago, so who knows what the source was I was going by.

[jednc]

I remember something similar. One (WTC) was taller than the other due to the communications equipment (antenae?) on top.

Perhaps not. The buildings were only 6 ft. different in height. Looking at the pics, it's clear the antenae were taller than 6 ft. This couldn't fully explain the height difference, however it doesn't prove the antenae weren't counted in the heights. Source

[monsoon]

The TV antenna was not part of the WTC's height.

[dubone]

If an antenna falls and no one is around, does it make a sound?

It is an existential question to ponder how antennas have no height.

[monsoon]

...It is an existential question to ponder how antennas have no height.

Not really. Antennas have height, but they do not count towards a building's height when bolted to the top. But it is a pretty fine line because crowns and spires do count. There are 4 criteria for "worlds tallest building".

1. Tip Height - measured to the absolute top,

2. Structural height - measured to the last 'integral structural element',

3. Highest occupied floor,

4. Roof height.

In terms of official height for ranking, the World Council on Tall Buildings has decided that criteria #2 is the only one that counts. Thus on the WTC and Sears towers the antenna is not counted in the height of the building. The mast on the of the ESb is counted as it is part of the structure, but the real building is a good bit shorter at 82 floors (or is is 86).

[nomadic_buffalo]

expect to hear about wachovia's new tower within the next 3 weeks.

any images available yet?

[Norm2]

Other than the one that was leaked....um.....no.

[schmopperX]

This is torture waiting for something to be released, It's like waiting for Christmas, & you know your gonna get somthing good but you have no idea what & how good.

I still thank Santa has something has something extra in store for us.