Collingwoodbuildinglover said:
Highly doubtful The one is currently averaging one floor per week. The transfer slab on this project took 12 weeks and we have got another four floors since then. I can see it passing the super tall Mark before the one tops out but not topping out before
Click to expand...
UtakataNoAnnex said:
This building has a lot more floors than The One. And seem to be using a lot more reinforcement on the concrete...so I am going to wager a no on that.

..besides, The One is going up like gangbusters right now. It may slow up on the mechanicals, but I doubt that will be enough.
Click to expand...
You guys may be right, but it'll hardly matter in the end as it isn't a Chrysler Tower vs 40 Wall Street scenario, it's more of a Chrysler Tower vs the Empire State Building. It may lose the battle but ultimately it will win the war, that much has been decided. Chrysler may have been the first to reach the new benchmark but ultimately it was ESB that held the crown for an incredible 40 years. Though I suspect One Yonge probably won't hold it for as long.
 
IMG_0523.jpeg


IMG_0524.jpeg


 
GenerationLee said:
I've also heard that FCP is not truly 298M, but around 290M. I havent tested if this true, but AFAIK the former number was what the tower was touted to be in height when first built.
Click to expand...

There are lots of ways to measure a building. The highest occupied floor is 287.1m but Urban Toronto typically measures to the top of the mechanical/roof which is 298.1m. The tip of the antennae is 355m.

All of these are measured from lowest public entrance from outdoors. Due to slope of the ground, these points can vary by a bit depending on how you choose the "bottom" point.


IMO, buildings should be measured from the lowest occupied slab, often the lowest underground parking level, to the highest architectural element but nobody aside from me does that: roughly 310m for FCP. A building on an above ground parking podium shouldn't be encouraged.
 
Last edited:
kris said:
Using google earth pro you can measure building heights I tested it on a bunch of buildings and its within 1-2m, with FCP its 293m to the top of the mech penthouse...
Click to expand...
This is what I heard from several users on another forum, and my basis for my prior post.
Though it does narrow the lead that the FCP had on Scotia Plaza now that I think of it.
 
mburrrrr said:
From today
Almost ready for the final pour of the 17th floor. ~2 weeks. Maybe one of two more floor cycles and they should be up to full speed?
Some vertical accent lines starting on level 7.

View attachment 543892
Click to expand...

Nice.
Good to see it lines up with the curved column 6 floors above.
 
rbt said:
There are lots of ways to measure a building. The highest occupied floor is 287.1m but Urban Toronto typically measures to the top of the mechanical/roof which is 298.1m. The tip of the antennae is 355m.
Click to expand...
kris said:
Using google earth pro you can measure building heights I tested it on a bunch of buildings and its within 1-2m, with FCP its 293m to the top of the mech penthouse...
Click to expand...
I first saw that many years back expected the CTBUH to make the appropriate changes but surprisingly there's never been any corrections.

Yes the Google Earth data could be wrong, but if it was wrong there would be a lot more evidence. How so? Well, GE's elevation data was taken from the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission. The SRTM used the radar interferometry technique for its measurements. RI is accomplished by taking two radar images from slightly different locations, and then comparing the differences between these two images in order to generate a precise calculation of surface elevation and change. Yes, it's possible for this data to be off by 5m or more... however it's incredibly unlikely that it would be off that much for a single building while simultaneously being accurate within 1-2m or less for literally every other building in the entire area.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top