Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnIII
Well, I agree I would like that but I suppose it depends on the need of the company.
However if Comcast does need a tall building I would say why not make a 1200' roof height and make a lantern in the center up to 1300' and really make a nice somewhat modernized Art Deco with a gold texture to it.
|
I can't imagine a architect, developer, or corporation in this country sitting down to talk about a new building and the proposed height of said building being in the top 50 concerns for any of those players. Height is a byproduct of the needs of the client(s), and to a lesser degree the design the architect comes up with. (its doubtful that Comcast asked Lord Foster for a lantern to top off their next project) As I hope you realize that height costs money, and great height costs great amounts of money. I'm sortof just guessing here, but here in Philly where land costs in the CBD aren't a driving force (we still have lots and lots of surface parking lots just waiting to be turned into something taller) I would say you could easily build 4 400'ers for less money then 1 1200' building. Can you imagine what the new Comcast building might have looked like if Four Seasons wasn't interested in parking their hotel on top of what Comcast's NEEDS were. I've got to believe that the hotels interest, and willingness to be without a building for a number of years, was the prime factor that lead to the final design, including the height.