# CITY TBC | WORLD'S TALLEST | 1600m | 5250ft | FL TBC | PROPOSED



## Birmingham (May 29, 2007)

Mile-high tower: Prince Alwaleed invites Burj Khalifa developer Emaar to go for new record
Lucy Barnard
Jun 19, 2013 










The Saudi prince funding the world's tallest tower in Saudi Arabia has invited Emaar to help develop an even higher mile-high tower in one of the world's largest cities.

According to press reports on Tuesday, Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, one of the world's richest men, has invited Emaar chairman Mohammed Alabbar to team up with his own property development company Kingdom Holding to develop the tower.

Locations which the prince says he is considering include *Shanghai, Moscow, London and New York*.

"I am now inviting the major cities of the world like Shanghai, Moscow, New York, London and regional cities in the Middle East to come and give their offers," Mr Alwaleed told Reuters, adding that interested countries would have to offer attractive financing terms or tax breaks.

The prince omitted to mention how much the project would cost or how he planned to finance it.

Prince Alwaleed's Kingdom Holdings is currently developing the Kingdom Tower in Jeddah, which is set to overtake the 830-metre Burj Khalifa in Dubai when it is expected to be completed in 2018. A mile tall tower would exceed this by another third, measuring 1.6 kilometres.

Back in 2009 the prince announced that Emaar would develop the Kingdom Tower and supervise its construction although the tie up was later shelved as construction of the US$1.2 billion scheme was delayed due to the global financial crisis.

In February, a joint venture led by Kingdom Holding awarded the construction contracts to develop the long awaited tower to Mace and EC Harris.

The 500,000 square metre tower will include a Four Seasons hotel, serviced apartments, offices and flats.

Earlier this week Kingdom Holdings announced in its website that a company board of directors meeting had heard that a final deal had been struck with hotel operator Four Seasons and initial construction work on the project was going according to plan.

Neither Emaar nor Kingdom Holding were immediately available to comment when contacted by The National.


Read more: http://www.thenational.a...per-emaar-to-go-for-new-record#ixzz2WZ1BH1kq 
Follow us: @TheNationalUAE on Twitter | thenational.ae on Facebook


----------



## krkseg1ops (Mar 19, 2009)

Is this for real? How can he be inviting other cities and Emaar if he himself is building WTB??


----------



## inno4321 (Dec 10, 2007)

Invited SEOUL!!!
In youngsan IBD project is best located for this supertall!!

Come to seoul Seoul is mecca of ASIAN culture!!! welcome:banana:


----------



## Gabriel900 (Apr 24, 2013)

that tower is gonna end up in dubai


----------



## Bligh (Apr 29, 2013)

Go to LONDON - The Financial Centre of the world.


----------



## Bligh (Apr 29, 2013)

Gabriel900 said:


> that tower is gonna end up in dubai


No it probably will not.... Dubai would be the last place the prince wants it - he sees Dubai as a rival. Didn't you read? 

"Locations which the prince says he is considering include *Shanghai, Moscow, London and New York*."

I really hope London will have it. Maybe on the sight of The Pinnacle?! *lightbulb moment*


----------



## Birmingham (May 29, 2007)

^^ And regional middle eastern cities which Dubai is one!! 

I would like to see it in either New York or London. 

However it will probably be in any city but these because of the strict laws and guidance relating to construction of buildings so my preference is ... 

DUBAI.

Might aswell build an absolute Mecca of gigantic structures. Be closer to looking like a city from Star Wars too :hahaha:


----------



## Gabriel900 (Apr 24, 2013)

Bligh said:


> No it probably will not.... Dubai would be the last place the prince wants it - he sees Dubai as a rival. Didn't you read?
> 
> "Locations which the prince says he is considering include *Shanghai, Moscow, London and New York*."
> 
> I really hope London will have it. Maybe on the sight of The Pinnacle?! *lightbulb moment*


It seems you didn't read! it says "regional cities in the Middle East to come and give their offers" and maybe they are rivals when it comes to the middle east but talking worldwide I'd say they'd team me against western cities


----------



## hunser (Nov 25, 2008)

How cool would it be if both New York and Shanghai (both cities have one of the most massive and impressive skylines on earth) end up with a 1km+ tall tower ... :drool:

Btw this belongs to the proposed section.


----------



## Bligh (Apr 29, 2013)

@Birmingham
@Gabriel900

Argh sorry I mis-read that part - my bad. But yes, I still do not think Dubai would be a contender... maybe Abu Dhabi or Kuwait etc etc. But the fact that he has mentioned the financial centres of the world, I am thinking that would be his main preference - otherwise why mention them at all?

I really think London could have this one.


----------



## Birmingham (May 29, 2007)

He would seriously have to kiss some ass if the this was to be built in London. No chance i'm afraid.


----------



## kwoldtimer (Jan 18, 2011)

No chance and no point, at least in London or New York.


----------



## Bligh (Apr 29, 2013)

Birmingham said:


> He would seriously have to kiss some ass if the this was to be built in London. No chance i'm afraid.


If he buys out the Pinnacle site it will be totally different. With that availablilty I believe this could be a real possiblity.


----------



## Birmingham (May 29, 2007)

Bligh said:


> If he buys out the Pinnacle site it will be totally different. With that availablilty I believe this could be a real possiblity.


Unfortunately not. The Pinnacle is in "The City" - A banking district. They wouldn't even take a second look at this proposal and as a site would not even be viable as the size of foundations and the foot print itself would be far, far bigger than anything available. 

London is far too built up with far to many flight paths and potential residential disturbances for this to even be considered.


----------



## Bolzeng (Oct 4, 2012)

Moscow.
Giant tower for giant city.


----------



## 1Filipe1 (Jul 13, 2012)

i highly doubt it would be new york..maybe a chinese city or arab city

oo maybe chicago


----------



## saiho (Jun 28, 2009)

It would look decent in London because it seems to try to contrast the historic low rise with the futuristic skyscraper for aesthetics but I'm pretty sure the historical preservationists will start banging a lot of pots and pans if this project starts in London. Other cities with a massive skyline (Shanghai and New York) the thing would look so out of proportion to everything else, the tower is like 3 times taller than 1 WTC and more than 2 times taller than the Shanghai Tower. Also there is an issue with airport approach lanes in New York and poor soils for foundations in Shanghai. 

PS its interesting that he did not mention Hong Kong... but I think a tower like that will ruin that skyline too.


----------



## ThatOneGuy (Jan 13, 2012)

They should restart Russia Tower, but taller and keeping with the proportions.


----------



## GZT (May 17, 2010)

Ah, now I know what I'm paying for when I fill up my tank.


----------



## wjfox (Nov 1, 2002)

This isn't really "proposed", as nothing has been officially confirmed yet.


----------



## deadhead262 (Feb 28, 2012)

5250ft!!!??? Thats just fucking ridiculous, when is enough?


----------



## 970467 (May 25, 2012)

interesting...


----------



## KillerZavatar (Jun 22, 2010)

personally hoping for Shanghai out of the list. London would be epic, but it just does not make any sense, most of the cities are also far too expensive, some chinese cities like Tianjin, Wuhan, Guangzhou or Shenzhen it would fit perfectly in, but i think since it is a project like that it might end up in a middle eastern country in the endit is just the cheapest way to go tall, really.

out of the ones mentioned:
Shanghai - if it is next to the big three it will give Shanghai an even more lujiazui centric look. four towers tapering taller and taller and the tallest shadowing over everything would be amazing.
Moscow - we all are still scarred by russia tower. building more than twice as tall would redeem this wound like someone else in this thread already mentioned.
New York - new york has a lot of modern, yet also a lot of weird towers, building an eye catcher this tall could give new york a new face, which would help having a center of attention in the skyline instead of so many different pinnacles all over the city.
London - since it is the closest city to me a dream to come true, the tower would finally give London a landmark that it is worth talking about instead of a barely 300m building, which looks nice, but cannot compete with what is going on elsewhere.
Tokyo - Tokyo like London has far too low skyscrapers for the importance of the city. The skytree showed what Tokyo could be capable of and all these visionary projects scream for Tokyo to finally build a Mega-Tower for godzilla to climb.
Beijing - Beijing is late for the skyscraper race, but with the coming CBD a lot can happen. The importance of the city may push it in the eyes of the investors and media, since cities like Shenzhen may be under the radar for many.
Dubai - an obvious candidate as a playground for supertall craziness
Elsewhere - Hong Kong, Chicago, Guangzhou, Shenzhen don't seem to unlikely to me as well


----------



## wjfox (Nov 1, 2002)

My previous map was inaccurate.

This one is correct:


----------



## bbcwallander (Mar 22, 2013)

MUHA said:


> I hope to see it rising in NYC, the big apple, just across the statue of liberty, in the land of prosperity, big dreams and fair chances. This should be a small gift from people of earth to the country that invented airplanes, sent humans to walk the moon, and created internet. God bless the USA.


The internet was invented in the UK, come to think of it, so was the USA!


----------



## krkseg1ops (Mar 19, 2009)

*del*


----------



## Erlenberg (Mar 17, 2013)

ZZ-II said:


> Paris itself has just over 2 million habitants, not 10 million. Just the suburbs make it that big.
> And the metro area of london has 15 million people ^^


Well, London municipality (Greater London) is 1 572 km² while Paris municipality is 105 km² ... we can't compare ! 

calculate population with city proper is a nonsense : Berlin would be bigger than Paris, and Bremen bigger than Nuremberg nuts ...

And metropolitan area represents only labor pool, not the city (and it changes significantly according to the reference).
The only really occurate census data is urban area (=city+agglomeration)


----------



## iveman94 (Oct 16, 2011)

Ok, but I don't understand what is Moscow doing in this rating. It is not major political cultural or economical centre of the world, not even Europe...


----------



## Nikonov_Ivan (Aug 25, 2011)

^^ Moscow is major city in Eastern Europe and one of the most powerful cities in Europe. Also, it's skyline( financial district, I mean) is rather interesting, so, such building maybe could fit it. 
Anyway, Moscow is well-known all over the world, that is why we can call it global city, also.


----------



## The-Real-Link (Oct 9, 2004)

I picked Dubai only for the reason that the generally tallest buildings are already there, even if the economy is still developing (compared to NYC for example). 

But as others pointed out, I'd honestly be curious. Shanghai / Tokyo have their plans and seismic issues. A tower that tall just would overwhelm NYC's skyline even if the city could support it. Chicago might be the only place it could fit but I don't know if the downtown / overall city could handle something of that scale. I think it'd also be not quite right for London, though as was said the city is very important. Edit. Some Chinese city could work. Now which, who knows? Hong Kong perhaps or one of the inland cities. Not Shanghai only because of the master plan.

It's such a tall structure that it's for a change, really hard for even this skyscraper fanatic to realistically envision a place it'd mesh with. But then my mind is also thinking a stretched Kingdom Tower. The design could be totally different and change my opinion. 

But wow, if he's even remotely serious about going forward with such an ambitious plan, good luck!


----------



## iveman94 (Oct 16, 2011)

Nikonov_Ivan said:


> ^^ Moscow is major city in Eastern Europe and one of the most powerful cities in Europe. Also, it's skyline( financial district, I mean) is rather interesting, so, such building maybe could fit it.
> Anyway, Moscow is well-known all over the world, that is why we can call it global city, also.


Moscow is nor a global city https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_city it's just a typical capital of country with big population. Maybe it was a global city but only 20 years ago. Now there are powerfull European, North American and Asian cities, which affect on all processes that is important in the modern world


----------



## Nikonov_Ivan (Aug 25, 2011)

^^ According to different ratings-yes, it isn't. But as I've already said, this city is very well-known all over the world, and that is why we can call it global in some ways.


----------



## Alexenergy (May 10, 2011)

iveman94 said:


> Ok, but I don't understand what is Moscow doing in this rating. It is not major political cultural or economical centre of the world, not even Europe...


Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal himself told about Moscow, mate 

_"Right now we are discussing and evaluating the possibility of building a one-mile tower," Mr. Alwaleed told Reuters. "I am now inviting the major cities of the world like Shanghai, Moscow, New York, London and regional cities in the Middle East to come and give their offers."_ :cheers:

http://www.ctbuh.org/News/GlobalTallNews/tabid/468/EntryId/5087/Saudi-Prince-Looks-to-Pursue-Another-Supertall.aspx


----------



## Nikonov_Ivan (Aug 25, 2011)

^^ He means that Moscow isn't global city and can't compete with such cities as NY, London, Shanghai etc...


----------



## Birmingham (May 29, 2007)

It has to be Dubai.

Let the world's great cities continue as they are and lets use Dubai as a human play yard and blank canvas. As a species we could turn it into something that when aliens arrive would blow their minds  :lol:


----------



## Nubian_Warrior (Nov 14, 2008)

It would be cool to see it in Moscow, Yekaterinburg or Vladivostok


----------



## Nikonov_Ivan (Aug 25, 2011)

^^ Especially in Ekaterinburg and Vladivostok " The biggest emptiest skyscraper in the world"


----------



## Rckr88 (Nov 25, 2012)

Interesting to see which cities would accept this 'invitation' and submit an offer for this project


----------



## krkseg1ops (Mar 19, 2009)

I wouldn't be surprised if Moscow had actually submitted an offer or at least willingness to cooperate. Its skyline is very special and I really think such a tower (provided it is still a giant needle) would complement it. Of course, the Russia Tower plot is not big enough to accomodate the tower and there will be height restrictions from the airports


----------



## patrykus (May 14, 2008)

If this proposal is serious in the first place I think it's obvious it won't be build in new york, london or any european country for that matter. As someone mentioned earlier such place have to meet many different conditions to be right for the project. New york is quite liberal for construction of tall towers but they have zoning plans and height restrictions. There is no place for such tower in this city for legal reasons. Plus it would be tremendously expensive to build it there - it would probably be the most expensive mile tower you can imagine. It's similar in London but unlike in ny in london there is strong local community against tall construction. It's enough to say the shard took something like 10 years till start of the construction. Just imagine the rage caused by the mile tower  It's simply not possible there. I won't even mention Paris it's probably even worse than London. If you are following Tour Phare or Hermitage Twins you know what I'm talking about  And frankly I think it's good thing that such tower won't be build in those old well settled cities because in all cases it would destroy the skyline. Seriously you need forest of 800m towers around it to make it look even remotely acceptable. I think that to make tower like that well integrated you either surround it with tall towers OR you design large plaza with center exposed location for the tower with nothing tall around. This is what they did with burj khalifa and that looks quite ok. Problem is you can only go with this option if you have large empty areas available like deserts or fields. For this reason I think such tower will rise somewhere in one of the Arabian states or in one of those huge build from the ground up Asian (Chinese?) districts. The other reason why I think it will be build there is that both in Dubai or china public opinion or bureaucracy is not a problem. You will have very little problem relocating all districts of small houses in dubai while in the European city it's not possible. Same, you don't have to deal with nimbys in those places. At least I have never heard of chinese local community blocking a single project. And finally it's a lot cheaper to build those places. I'm sure Saudi prince will not think twice if he will have chose between Pakistan and american worker which get payed 5 times as much.


----------



## KillerZavatar (Jun 22, 2010)

CTBUH also mentions it in the news section now: http://www.ctbuh.org/News/GlobalTal...Prince-Looks-to-Pursue-Another-Supertall.aspx


----------



## Archaean (Apr 27, 2013)

Patrykus, why did you capitalize Pakistan and not American in the last sentence of your last post?


----------



## patrykus (May 14, 2008)

For a very mysterious reason I won't reveal to you  


Anyway will edit it for you if that bothers you so much.

edit: hmm can't edit it. I guess because I edited it before. Sorry, you have to live with that.


----------



## Uaarkson (Feb 11, 2009)

There would be riots in the street if they tried to build this in London, and it would be DOA to NYC's approval process.


----------



## MarshallKnight (Feb 24, 2013)

A mile-high tower would look terribly out of scale almost anywhere you put it. 

Even next to Shanghai's big 3 it would be sort of ludicrous (2.5x as tall as the next tallest), although it still feels to me like the best fit.

Having the Burj already would make it the least out of place in Dubai, but it's hard to see a Saudi prince adding more prestige to an economic rival.

Personally, wouldn't want to see it in NY, at least until there are multiple 2000/2500ft+ towers to balance it out.

One interesting route would be to build a modern version of "The Illinois" in Chicago, with a tip of the hat to Frank Lloyd Wright. But that's a level of deference to an American icon that it's hard to imagine coming from Alwaleed.

I wonder, why not just build it in Riyadh? Or Jeddah, overshadowing Kingdom Tower?


----------



## no_gods (Aug 6, 2008)

O
M
G


----------



## Azrain98 (Nov 27, 2011)

Kuala Lumpur,Tokyo,Osaka,Nagoya,Shanghai,Beijing,Ryugyong or Seoul


----------



## desertpunk (Oct 12, 2009)

Hopefully NOT NYC.




Build it in some interior oil sheikdom like Dallas or Houston...


----------



## djidma11 (Mar 11, 2012)

I want Shanghaï,but I think Dubaï because it will be perfect for their skyline with Burj Dubaï and The Laggons...Cities like Moscow London Tokyo or New York are very expensive...


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

I don't think it would look good anywhere outside of the Middle East. It might suit Russia though.


----------



## KillerZavatar (Jun 22, 2010)

i think it would look good nearly anywhere, just very different. after all taipei 101 also looks great getting all the attention within the skyline. Sure it would make any surrounding building look tiny, but that doesn't need to be a bad thing per se. especially for cities like new york or hong kong that do not have a real center of attention, would improve the skyline into a new direction i think.


----------



## patrykus (May 14, 2008)

Taipei is really a bad example. It had no skyline to destroy really . There was no more than 20 towers over 100m and *one* over 200m in 2004 in taipei. NY have over *half a thousand* of towers over 100m and over 50 over 200m. Just imagine subtle mountain of skyscrapers and then BANG a mile tall monster  Also while taipei was 5 times taller than 100m towers present in the city, a mile tower would be 8 times taller than 200m towers of ny.

Anyway it won't be build in ny for many other reasons.


----------



## hunser (Nov 25, 2008)

patrykus said:


> Taipei is really a bad example. It had no skyline to destroy really . There was no more than 20 towers over 100m and *one* over 200m in 2004 in Taipei. NY has over *750* towers over 100m and *58* over 200m. Just imagine a subtle mountain of skyscrapers and then BANG a mile tall monster  Also while Taipei was 5 times taller than 100m towers present in the city, a mile tower would be 8 times taller than 200m towers of ny.
> 
> Anyway it won't be build in ny for many other reasons.


Corrected. 
And btw New York already has its artificial mountain: 








New York City By nyperson









Reflections of a Golden Sunrise By pmarella


----------



## patrykus (May 14, 2008)

hmm ctbuh says 542 of 100m+ towers.

http://skyscrapercenter.com/create.php?search=yes&page=5&type_building=on&status_COM=on&list_continent=NA&list_country=US&list_city=US-NYC&list_height=100&list_company=&completionsthrough=on&list_year=


----------



## hunser (Nov 25, 2008)

patrykus said:


> hmm ctbuh says 542 of 100m+ towers.
> 
> http://skyscrapercenter.com/create.php?search=yes&page=5&type_building=on&status_COM=on&list_continent=NA&list_country=US&list_city=US-NYC&list_height=100&list_company=&completionsthrough=on&list_year=


Their data is outdated. Take a look in the  # of 100m+ Buildings Completed, U/C, Proposed thread:

According to univer and isaidso, New York has about 750 buildings exceeding 100m. I even think it's more ...
Right now there are over 40 towers U/C + ~120 proposed.


----------



## patrykus (May 14, 2008)

The list is far from official though and the guy admitted that he is using roof height. But anyway i can imagine it's hard to count all the towers in ny so the ctbuh list can have some errors. I just thought you have some better source than a thread in ssc 

Anyway if there are even hundreds more 100m+ towers in ny that makes my point even stronger.


----------



## Calvin Coolidge (Jan 22, 2013)

I voted "Elsewhere," because _clearly_ this tower belongs in Los Angeles.


----------



## CarlosBlueDragon (May 6, 2007)

^^ :troll:?? I want Voting Shanghai!!


----------



## wtcforever (Mar 19, 2013)

Bligh said:


> Go to LONDON - The Financial Centre of the world.


cant build it in london. to many airplanes in the sky build it in nyc:banana:


----------



## Caravaggio (Oct 17, 2009)

I would actually love to see it rise in Hong Kong


----------



## ThatOneGuy (Jan 13, 2012)

I want to see a massive, tall, tapering building in the middle of a city of low-rises, to give the most imposing effect.

The closest thing to that, I guess, is in a tower-less desert city (or at least far from towers)
Not Dubai, though, because they already have an ultra-tall building.


----------



## SkYsCrApEr2013 (May 11, 2013)

They should build it triangular and with very deep foundations so if a very strong earthquake occured near the building, then it'll still stand.


----------



## 970467 (May 25, 2012)

This should be build in a concept like the Eiffel tower.


----------



## Kanto (Apr 23, 2011)

Definitely New York City. There's no place in the world that would deserve to have the World's tallest more than NYC. After all, NYC held the title for so long :drool:


----------



## patrykus (May 14, 2008)

As usuall you ignored all the logic


----------



## hunser (Nov 25, 2008)

patrykus said:


> As usuall you ignored all the logic


Well, to give Kanto a break, this tower is so ridiculous that it defies all logic anyway.


----------



## patrykus (May 14, 2008)

It is technically possible, and there are places on earth where it have some chances to get build. It's just that New York is not one of those places. Which was well covered why in this thread. 

But let the kid dreaming


----------



## Kanto (Apr 23, 2011)

patrykus said:


> As usuall you ignored all the logic


Huh, where do you see me say that this will be built, where do you see me say that this is realistic, where do you see me say that I believe this will be built? I just love when somebody, who doesn't read my post and confabulates about things I have never written tries to lecture me hno:


----------



## sgollis (Apr 3, 2013)

^^^^

confabulates?

:lol:


----------



## patrykus (May 14, 2008)

Sorry, I thought we discuss here where and why it actually have chances to get build. 

I forgot your posts are usually just irrational wishful tinging. Like adding 600m twins to the existing wtc


----------



## Kanto (Apr 23, 2011)

patrykus said:


> Sorry, I thought we discuss here where and why it actually have chances to get build.
> 
> I forgot your posts are usually just irrational wishful tinging. Like adding 600m twins to the existing wtc


1st I never ever said that 600m Twin Towers will be added to the WTC site.

2nd I never ever said that I thought this proposal had any chance of being built anywhere in the world in the forseeable future.

You know, fantasy is usually a good thing but if you start to generate statements of other people inside your head it stops being called fantasy and starts being called lying.

Oh, and I think you're naive if you thing that this proposal has a chance in any city in the world in the forseeable future.


----------



## patrykus (May 14, 2008)

I don't think they will build it one mile tall (if anything probably closer to something from 1200-1400m). However it has been reported that with current technology we can build towers up to 2km tall, so it is technically feasible. And while in china or some arabian state it has some slight chance of getting build (1km tall tower u/c is best proof that anything is possible there) in new york it has none, zero, nada  So saying that it should be build there is just pointless. I can very well say I'd like to see it in my backyard.


----------



## Kanto (Apr 23, 2011)

^^ In case you didn't notice, this proposal isn't 1200-1400 meter tall, it is 1600 meter tall, so you should stay focused on the height the article says and not imagine another height.

And no, such a building isn't the slightest bit less realistic in New York City than it is in China or some arabian state. It is equaly unrealistic in any of these cities.


----------



## patrykus (May 14, 2008)

You missed the part where I said 2km tall buildings are feasible with current technology?


----------



## Kanto (Apr 23, 2011)

^^ And you apparently don't understand the difference between technically feasible and economically feasible hno:


----------



## patrykus (May 14, 2008)

Many have said 800m tall tower is economically not feasible and yet there is one 200m taller u/c right now


----------



## Kanto (Apr 23, 2011)

^^ Well, none of us is Muad'Dib so we just have to wait and see what the future holds :cheers:


----------



## L.A.F.2. (Jun 26, 2012)

I'd love to see this in NYC or Chicago, but I doubt zoning would permit such a building.


----------



## patrykus (May 14, 2008)

If it was only zoning. FAA for instance would have to allow a building that almost triples it's top allowed height of 600m  And there are other reasons we already talked about.


----------



## L.A.F.2. (Jun 26, 2012)

Yeah, I though of that as well. Unfortunately it's probably not going to happen here.


----------



## Tinchake (Jun 23, 2013)

I think Moscow or London, because Europe is devoid of supertalls.


----------



## Alex/Khvostenko (Jul 18, 2011)

Road to Moscow!


----------



## Bhound (Mar 14, 2012)

iveman94 said:


> Ok, but I don't understand what is Moscow doing in this rating. It is not major political cultural or economical centre of the world, not even Europe...


 
Whether you like it or not and there are multitudes who will agree with me, Moscow is a Major Political/Cultural centre of the world. Period. I guess you are confusing Moscow with Morocco :lol:


----------



## NNshenzhen (Jul 11, 2012)

Personally, I feel that Hong Kong / Shenzhen would be a good catch, since this is the centrepiece of ~80 million Pearl River City continuous urban area, the world's largest mega city, with 160 km from one to the other end of the skyline 

Even in HK, if built in Kowloon Bay area where the former airport was, it could be possible to consider, and for Shenzhen, surely - the "old" Luohu CBD needs exactly this kind of landmark for a rapid revival. Shenzhen itself has 17 million population and growing, and has those huge areas suitable to put up supports for this kind of tower.


----------



## KlausDiggy (Jan 21, 2013)

Saudi-Milliardär Prinz Alwaleed bin Talal could build the one mile high tower instead of the TV Tower in Berlin. In Germany it is really time for a world record and Berlin is how made for this tower..


----------



## MarshallKnight (Feb 24, 2013)

Bhound said:


> Whether you like it or not and there are multitudes who will agree with me, Moscow is a Major Political/Cultural centre of the world. Period. I guess you are confusing Moscow with Morocco :lol:


Yeah. Moscow is an Alpha World City. I also think that anybody who was alive during the Soviet Union will always remember it as being the seat of one of the two world superpowers. So while the playing field has leveled out in the last 20 years as other developing cities and nations have risen to prominence, Moscow will always have a certain cachet.


----------



## chennaisky (Apr 11, 2013)

I want it in mumbai.


----------



## Pals_RGB (Apr 1, 2013)

^^I would take four 400 meter towers for Mumbai than this. Mumbai don't need such towers.


----------



## ZZ-II (May 10, 2006)

KlausDiggy said:


> Saudi-Milliardär Prinz Alwaleed bin Talal could build the one mile high tower instead of the TV Tower in Berlin. In Germany it is really time for a world record and Berlin is how made for this tower..


Great idea :cheers:

I like the TV tower in berlin but the tallest building in the world is better


----------



## Julito-dubai (May 30, 2006)

ZZ-II said:


> Great idea :cheers:
> 
> I like the TV tower in berlin but the tallest building in the world is better


yes. Especially as Berlin is so good in building other things like airports or castle/shopping mall replicas....:cheers:


----------



## Brad (May 19, 2006)

To my mind it would be a great idea to build this tower in a hot weather country. 
The temperature will be about 5 degrees lower at the upper floors. This would be a kind of a luxury.


----------



## CxIxMaN (Jun 12, 2009)

I think it should be built in Kuala Lumpur as there is still plenty of open space available even near the Petronas Twin Towers!


----------



## Puppetgeneral (Jul 9, 2013)

I think they should a couple in China like Beijing, Shanghai, And Guangzhou or HK.


----------



## hqho1671 (Dec 15, 2012)

I think Shanghai because China growing economic power


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

Please, nowhere in north America. It would ruin any city it was put in.


----------



## Pals_RGB (Apr 1, 2013)

Build this in an unknown island.


----------



## TowerVerre:) (Dec 1, 2012)

Yeah or make a real Skycity. Only this skyscraper itswlf whithout a city around it.


----------



## Its AlL gUUd (Jan 24, 2006)

This will NEVER get built in London. There's no chance in hell.


----------



## KillerZavatar (Jun 22, 2010)

if nicely designed it wouldn't really ruin any city in my opinion. instead it would reinvent the skyline of the city completely. :cheers:


----------



## vraem (Oct 30, 2012)

WTF...Riad has tb disease...PLOP


----------

