Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

doormanpoet

Knoxville to get tower

Recommended Posts

On Skyscraperpage.com/gallery/Knoxville There is the rendering of the 35 story Worthan Watkins Building to be built a few blocks away from the sun sphere. With the glass and steel spire, the building is taller than the Bellsouth Tower.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


I did some research on it. You are right. It has been dead for awhile. A city with under 200,000 people does not need a 600 foot tower. Plus, Knoxville is on a series of caves and caverns. The expence of pouring a 20 foot deep artificial rock bed for the cassions to rest on would be extremely expensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, there are plans to build another high rise in Knoxville, but it will be in the mid-high 20's in terms of storyes. I'm not sure what the time frame is or any more specific details, but as a resident of the city I know that they are pushing pretty hard for more high rise development. I'm not sure about the whole cavern thing (there aren't caverns that I'm aware of), and Knoxville metro has a population of 450k fast approching half a million plus - there is plenty to support another high rise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, there are plans to build another high rise in Knoxville, but it will be in the mid-high 20's in terms of storyes. I'm not sure what the time frame is or any more specific details, but as a resident of the city I know that they are pushing pretty hard for more high rise development. I'm not sure about the whole cavern thing (there aren't caverns that I'm aware of), and Knoxville metro has a population of 450k fast approching half a million plus - there is plenty to support another high rise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I knew some engineers from Knoxville, and the soil is very unstable there in parts of downtown. East Tennessee has a lot of caves and caverns 50 to 100 feet below the surface. Sometimes they have to create an artificial rock bed to build a building and that gets very expensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I knew some engineers from Knoxville, and the soil is very unstable there in parts of downtown. East Tennessee has a lot of caves and caverns 50 to 100 feet below the surface. Sometimes they have to create an artificial rock bed to build a building and that gets very expensive.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The Worsham Watkins was not going to require special foundation - maybe that site is stable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Worsham Watkins was not going to require special foundation - maybe that site is stable

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The site isnt stable, and knoxville can not support a high rise at this time. They need more population and drive to get one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there anymore news on a new future highrise in Knoxville?

Speaking of the "caves and caverns" - I wonder if this is one reason that upper east Tennessee does not have more highrise buildings. Around here- they max around around 10-12 stories high. :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there anymore news on a new future highrise in Knoxville?

Speaking of the "caves and caverns" - I wonder if this is one reason that upper east Tennessee does not have more highrise buildings. Around here- they max around around 10-12 stories high. :unsure:

Well, also, there'd be little justification for building a "high rise" in a town of less than 100k.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I knew some engineers from Knoxville, and the soil is very unstable there in parts of downtown. East Tennessee has a lot of caves and caverns 50 to 100 feet below the surface. Sometimes they have to create an artificial rock bed to build a building and that gets very expensive.

To second this mention about caves, McClung Tower on the UT campus has long been known as the "Leaning Tower of UT". It is on top of one of those underground voids. I cannot remember how much concrete they poured into that hole just to try to keep it stable. Limestone just has this problem with rainwater, it melts. It gives you great tasting water that is very good for liquor though. When you have enough of that limestone, you get Karst areas. Makes you wonder why Mammoth Cave exists. :blush:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did some research on it. You are right. It has been dead for awhile. A city with under 200,000 people does not need a 600 foot tower. Plus, Knoxville is on a series of caves and caverns. The expence of pouring a 20 foot deep artificial rock bed for the cassions to rest on would be extremely expensive.

^That's why Knoxville didn't get it, a small group speaking for a larger population.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A city with under 200,000 people does not need a 600 foot tower.

Come on now, a lot of cities under 200K have buildings that are around 35 stories or higher. It's not unusual (btw, 35 stories normally wouldn't = 600 ft).

Examples:

Grand Rapids, MI: Poulation 195,115 / tallest building 34 stories

Des Moines, IA: Population 194,311 / tallest building 45 stories (630 feet)

Little Rock, AR: Population 184,081 / tallest building 40 stories

Hartford, CT: Population 124,848 / tallest building 38 stories

Winston-Salem, NC: Population 191,523 / tallest building 34 stories

(site: emporis.com)

those are just a few. Besides, Knoxville's current tallest building is 27 stories high... only 8 less than what you said that new building would be. is 8 more floors really THAT crazy of an idea? Have a little more faith in your community :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I am not mistaken, I heard that our metro area has a population of around 450,000. Despite that, our tallest building is 10 stories high, but we have about 4 that are that high. I am not sure how tall the tallest one in Johnson City is. Perhaps 10-12 as well?

I have been hearing a rumor that a low-cost housing building is supposed to be built in Bristol, VA. It is supposed to be a 25 story high-rise, but when I e-mailed the city, the planner said there were no plans for this now. :unsure:

Here is a photo of one of our tallest buildings. It is 10 stories tall. Well, 11 stories if you call that little building on top a story....

I took this photo today.....

100_0305.jpg

100_0301.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on now, a lot of cities under 200K have buildings that are around 35 stories or higher. It's not unusual (btw, 35 stories normally wouldn't = 600 ft).

Examples:

Grand Rapids, MI: Poulation 195,115 / tallest building 34 stories

Des Moines, IA: Population 194,311 / tallest building 45 stories (630 feet)

Little Rock, AR: Population 184,081 / tallest building 40 stories

Hartford, CT: Population 124,848 / tallest building 38 stories

Winston-Salem, NC: Population 191,523 / tallest building 34 stories

(site: emporis.com)

those are just a few. Besides, Knoxville's current tallest building is 27 stories high... only 8 less than what you said that new building would be. is 8 more floors really THAT crazy of an idea? Have a little more faith in your community :)

You're counting those simply as the city proper, a mistake often made, but one which isn't often the best measure (especially if they are hemmed in from annexing but still serve as the business center for a large area). Grand Rapids, Des Moines, Little Rock, and Winston-Salem function more like areas of 500k+ people. Hartford has always been a "major" city (at least by New England standards) and its current city population is well-below what it was several decades ago, it is second only in impressiveness to Boston with an excellent skyline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're counting those simply as the city proper, a mistake often made, but one which isn't often the best measure (especially if they are hemmed in from annexing but still serve as the business center for a large area). Grand Rapids, Des Moines, Little Rock, and Winston-Salem function more like areas of 500k+ people. Hartford has always been a "major" city (at least by New England standards) and its current city population is well-below what it was several decades ago, it is second only in impressiveness to Boston with an excellent skyline.

according to NECMA, Hartford's city population between 1980 and today has only changed by 15,000 people. I mena, that's a big decrease... but really, it's not like they were that much larger of a city before. Their metro area too is comparable to most of the other cities that I mentioned. Grand Rapids, Little Rock, ad Winsto-Salem all have populations of around 1 million and over, like Hartford. All are very large business centers and are headquarters for national/internationl corporations, have major universities, etc... so to me they're all comparable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was simply being subjective. All of these cities are considered "major" cities in their own area and have metro populations over 500K (some over 1 mil)... not just Hartford. Some are state capitols, like Hartford... and ALL are centers for National/International corporations, banks, Universities, etc... like other major cities.

The post that I commented on said that a city under 200,000 should NOT get a building like what they want to build in knoxville (35 stories... "600 feet"). My post was to show him that it's not unheard of. Neither of us said anything about metro areas... and I'm not quite sure if those factor THAT MUCH into making a bigger skyline anyway. maybe they do, who knows.

I agree, I think it should be up to an individual city (of any particular size) to ascertain if a 30+ story building is suitable and meets their needs. Although I do think metro area (or more to the point, the county for which a particular city is located within) is what I tend to view the "real" population as. In the case of Knoxville, I don't see it as a city of 170-180k, but one of 400k+ (taking Knox County into account).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How big did Hartford used to be?

Well, Connecticut now has 4 cities within a 20k range of one another (Bridgeport, Hartford, New Haven, and Stamford) currently between 120-140k.

Here are some of the population trends for the past several decades:

Bridgeport

2004 - 139,910

2000 - 139,529

1990 - 141,686

1980 - 142,546

1970 - 156,542

1960 - 156,748

1950 - 158,709

1940 - 147,121

1930 - 146,716

1920 - 143,555

1910 - 102,054

1900 - 70,996

Hartford

2004 - 124,848

2000 - 124,121

1990 - 139,739

1980 - 136,392

1970 - 158,017

1960 - 162,178

1950 - 177,397

1940 - 166,267

1930 - 164,072

1920 - 138,036

1910 - 98,915

1900 - 79,850

New Haven

2004 - 124,829

2000 - 123,626

1990 - 130,474

1980 - 126,109

1970 - 137,707

1960 - 152,048

1950 - 164,443

1940 - 160,605

1930 - 162,655

1920 - 162,537

1910 - 133,605

1900 - 108,027

Stamford

2004- 120,226

2000- 117,083

1990 - 108,056

1980 - 102,453

1970 - 108,798

1960 - 92,713

1950 - 74,293

1940 - 47,938

1930 - 46,346

1920 - 35,096

In the case of Bridgeport, its zenith was 1950 (as were many major cities), though effectively had the same population for the next 20 years (and has only suffered about a 12% drop overall from its peak). Interestingly, as of 2000, the city was split almost 3 ways Hispanic/Black/Caucasian in its demographics, and was actually plurality Hispanic by 1%.

In New Haven, its peak came also in 1950, though had been effectively the same population going all the way back to 1920, but it has lost a whopping 25% of its population since, shedding 40k. As of 2000, it was plurality Black (40%) with Whites being 35% and Hispanics at 21%.

Stamford is unusual in that it rose, fell, and is now booming like no other CT city, may likely eclipse both New Haven and Hartford to become the 2nd largest city, but it is the newest of the 5 major CT cities (I excluded Waterbury for the purposes of comparison). It remains heavily Caucasian at 61%, Hispanics are way down at 17% and Blacks at 15%.

Now, as for Hartford, it, too, maxed out in 1950 at just under 180k, but it has suffered the single-worst population decline of any of the CT cities, losing 1/3rd of its population since (in 1970-80 alone it dropped a whopping 22k, and again from 1990-2000 lost an additional 15k+). Hartford now has had ghastly levels of White flight and is almost a reverse Stamford, and only 18% are White (4th (!) place), an astonishingly low number. Hispanics now maintain the plurality at 41% with Blacks narrowly behind at 38%, "Other Race" (likely a mix of all) is a whopping 27%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.