Quote:
|
Originally Posted by emoney
I know that chicago's planning peeps are going thin to win or whatever, but looking at the diagram drawing it looks too thin I like buildings with at least a little girth. I guess I will have to wait for a more detailed rendering
|
Well, they're saying "thin is in" down at City Hall. Like it or not, this going to be the look of most of our future supertalls.
The idea is, of course, that tall thin buildings are less visually disruptive at the street level than shorter, more squat buildings. They are also touted as being less obstructive when viewed from the upper floors of nearby tall buildings.
I have two concerns about "tall and thin":
One is that it means that we will likely be seeing more pedestal buildings. "Tall and thin" works wonders for occupied space, but parking still requires a more spacious plan. We may see a lot of beanstalks growing out of cowpies in the future. I hope that there will be enough tall towers with fully integrated designs to offset this.
Secondly, I am worried that it will also mean less streetwall construction. Developers will be allowed to build taller if they set the building back from the property lines. The resulting plazas will be welcome to the homeless and skateboard communities, but will do nothing to enhance or focus life on the sidewalks, the cultural arteries of our city.