evandyk
Senior Member
Luckily, they measured, and it's going to fit after all!Man that area looks narrow for them to be putting that building there.
Luckily, they measured, and it's going to fit after all!Man that area looks narrow for them to be putting that building there.
Man that area looks narrow for them to be putting that building there.
It does appear narrow!Man that area looks narrow for them to be putting that building there.
It also has a bit of a 'hang-over' on top of the rail berm.Optical illusion. You can measure the site area, using Google.
Remember this includes everything up to the railway embankment more or less, give or take set backs/separation from the building to the north.
It's actually quite a large footprint.
It also has a bit of a 'hang-over' on top of the rail berm.
Yes, it's narrower, but it's also much longer. The building has been designed with that in mind.yeah I was including that in my assessment but it still seemed so narrow.
I believe they are...just not the same shape.I thought the footprints of both phases were the same? At least that's what it appears like in the architectural plans.
The second tower is just rotated to align with the tight corridor it's being built in.
You're on the money! That's exactly what that outline is:
is that 38 elevators in the lobby plus 2 larger service elevators ?You're on the money! That's exactly what that outline is:
View attachment 330882
Because this is a mainly core supported building, I presume they don't need to anchor that portion of the building in with a foundation.