View Single Post
  #44  
Old Posted Feb 15, 2012, 12:50 AM
aquablue aquablue is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,650
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd3189 View Post
I didn't say that the Metlife North should be 2,000 feet by rooftop. Something good above the height of the Sears Tower is what would suffice. A few years ago, this country was thinking on building a 2,000-foot building,but the economy rendered that useless. I don't want any western skyline to be filled with tall empty skyscrapers, but I don't want our cities to stop growing in height. London, a city long against the development of anything tall, now has a supertall. And if it makes the situation here seem better, skyscrapers are only built if there's a demand. And there will always be a demand in NYC.
I'd prefer though if most US cities focused on becoming cities and not parking lots before they started thinking about taller towers. I.e, what use is tall towers is nobody actually wants to use the city center or live there?

A 2000ft tower is a vanity project, but in China w/ their population and congested cities, it will serve them well in the future. NYC could also fall into that category with the tiny landmass called manhattan. THen again, the economy could collapse again.

I also see NIMBY issues for a 2000 foot tower. I'd be happy with a 500m to roof in NYC.
Reply With Quote