Quote:
Originally Posted by ozone
 agree 100%
It's true that great skylines do not ensure a great downtown. New Orleans is a good example of a city that for it's size and fame has a pretty dull skyline (even duller in person) and yet, of course, it's anything but dull. Sacramento does not need skyscapers to have a exciting downtown, however, IMO we need them for psychological reasons. I don't know of too many cities where the residents have as poor of civic image as they do here in Sacramento. |
I totally agree. When looking at the perception of a city, they look at two area's, the airport and the size of it's downtown skyline, at least that's the way I used to look at it. I would be happy to see 500 foot towers and I'm sure it will happen someday, but midrise projects like the new Marriott, 1801 L, L street lofts, and 800J are very important too, and if CIM/Calpers goes with a smaller version like 400-450 foot tower, although I worry about the new design than the height, that is absolutely fine.
Threaded Mode