Quote:
Originally Posted by PHL10
I understand McBane’s point clearly. When the announcement was imminent, I had assumed that the tower would be placed on either the east or west side of the lot. If you look at Comcast Center, you could fit two of those towers on that CITC lot.
Like him, I’m not saying whether there should or shouldn’t have been two more slender towers built but the possibility was certainly there. I think that this building is going to look huge and I’m not just referring to height – the girth is going to be really significant.
As far as roof height is concerned, the argument of roof height vs. pinnacle height has been a debate for decades. My first experience with that was in college and the Petronas unseated the Sears Building. By stating that CITC may look visually shorter than CC from some or all angles is not being negative.
Is it me or are people having really strong reactions to seemingly benign topics and comments? Sometimes I feel like some of the posters are having arguments via PM and it’s carrying over on unrelated topics…like I’m missing something. With that spirit in mind, let me amend my post with, “Go to hell, McBane! Why do you hate Philadelphia and puppies!”  |
Yea... I don't think anyone said the discussion over the roof height was being negative. .. it was viewing the roof height as another instance of philadelphia's long history of perceived failure that was attacked as being overly negative. But I don't think that comment was very serious nor were most that followed. I think it's mostly just an issue of tone. It's hard to have a mild mannered debate on the Internet because with zero reference or tone things often get misinterpreted.