HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture

About The Ads  This week the ad company used in the forum will be monitoring activity and doing some tests to identify any problems which users may be experiencing. If at any time this week you get pop-ups, redirects, etc. as a result of ads please let us know by sending an email to forum@skyscraperpage.com or post in the ads complaint thread. Thank you for your participation.


    Comcast Innovation & Technology Center in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • Philadelphia Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location
Philadelphia Projects & Construction Forum

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #181  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2014, 7:24 AM
lwill lwill is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 30
Comcast Tower Location

First, I would like to dispel this misnomer that Comcast must necessarily construct a tower across the street from one another. Although on some levels it may be optimal; although we dont even know if operations in both towers would be any more similar-therefore justifying proximity-than operations of any other company.

Second, many corporations around the globe occupy locations within the same city at much greater distances than the one I proposed 10 blocks away. Citigroup for example occupies Tribeca Towers in lower Manhattan, and also Citigroup Towers over 50 blocks away in midtown.

Again,Comcast like all other corporations are guests in our city and not entitled to any specific property. City planning has an integral job not only to consider the concerns of a corporation, but also the vision, and direction this city should go. Again, I believe this city should be marketing and positioning themselves as a global city and no longer a regional second-tier city.

Our city has the potential to be a healthcare, science and technology mecca-by the way the most lucrative fields outside of oil and finance-should focus all of its energy on retaining and attracting the best and brightest minds in the world. World class dining, a brilliant waterfront, and an expansive skyline should be top priority on the list of development strategies, not the ease of transportation for for a few hundred Comcast employees.

Last edited by lwill; Jan 22, 2014 at 2:38 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #182  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2014, 8:43 AM
Jelly Roll Jelly Roll is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 1,310
Quote:
Originally Posted by lwill View Post
Again,Comcast like all other corporations are guests in our city and not entitled to any specific property. City planning has an integral job not only to consider the concerns of a corporation, but also the vision, and direction this city should go. I believe this city should be again marketing and positioning themselves as a global city and no longer a regional second-tier city.

Our city has the potential to be a healthcare, science and technology mecca-by the way the most lucrative fields outside of oil and finance-should focus all of its energy on retaining and attracting the best and brightest minds in the world. World class dining, a brilliant waterfront, and an expansive skyline should be top priority on the list of development strategies, not the ease of transportation for for a few hundred Comcast employees.
Are you serious?
__________________
"Jesus would still be alive today if he had a gun." -Homer Simpson
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #183  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2014, 8:45 AM
Phil_North Phil_North is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Philly, PA
Posts: 179
Iwill, I like your passion for skyscrapers and for Philadelphia. It's why we all here. I definitely understand where you're coming from. I disagree however on a skyline defining a city. Paris, London, Washington D.C. and Boston are all well known cities and none are known for their skyline. Other than perhaps NYC, Chicago, Seattle and SF, it would be hard for the average American to identify a city by it's skyline. Philadelphia was a great city long before Liberty One was even built. The new Comcast building represents more than an addition to the skyline. It's an investment in the city of Philadelphia. If the new building were a few blocks away, it would give the skyline a different look, but it's going to be impressive either way. Eventually, we'll get some towers that span across Center City. In the meantime, we can enjoy watching this new one go up.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #184  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2014, 12:46 PM
looper121's Avatar
looper121 looper121 is offline
Register This
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Phila
Posts: 401
Quote:
Originally Posted by lwill View Post
First, I would like to dispel this misnomer that Comcast must necessarily construct a tower across the street from one another. Although on some levels it may be optimal; although we dont even know if operations in both towers would be any more similar-therefore justifying proximity-than operations of any other company.

Second, many corporations around the globe occupy locations within the same city at much greater distances than the one I proposed 10 blocks away. Citigroup for example occupies Tribeca Towers in lower Manhattan, and also Citigroup Towers over 50 blocks away in midtown.

Again,Comcast like all other corporations are guests in our city and not entitled to any specific property. City planning has an integral job not only to consider the concerns of a corporation, but also the vision, and direction this city should go. I believe this city should be again marketing and positioning themselves as a global city and no longer a regional second-tier city.

Our city has the potential to be a healthcare, science and technology mecca-by the way the most lucrative fields outside of oil and finance-should focus all of its energy on retaining and attracting the best and brightest minds in the world. World class dining, a brilliant waterfront, and an expansive skyline should be top priority on the list of development strategies, not the ease of transportation for for a few hundred Comcast employees.
Bottom line is, Comcast is footing the bill so they can build it wherever they please.
__________________
My cats breath smells like cat food
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #185  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2014, 1:15 PM
eliasrapp98 eliasrapp98 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 65
Why is this going to take 4 years?

Hey guys. I'm a long time lurker of the site and finally just decided to make an account. I'm super excited about this building, but am wondering why, if it's starting around June 2014, it would take until end of 2017? Comcast Center started in March of 2005 with a scheduled completing in March of 2008, but finished in December of 2007. Why is this expected to take a good 6-9 months more? I understand it's taller and there's other complications, but am more asking as a "is there any reason construction wise why this is the case?"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #186  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2014, 1:44 PM
apetrella802 apetrella802 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 546
Citc

I believe that the highest occupied floor on CITC is higher than the highest occupied floor on Comcast Center
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #187  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2014, 2:22 PM
Kidphilly Kidphilly is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 922
Quote:
Originally Posted by lwill View Post
Can you do a few of these with it in the new location, just curious thanks

Also with the new tower at Broad and Spruce
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #188  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2014, 2:38 PM
Jonboy1983's Avatar
Jonboy1983 Jonboy1983 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: The absolute western-most point of the Philadelphia urbanized area. :)
Posts: 1,692
Iwill does make a small but significant point about skyscrapers and skylines. Yes, skyscrapers may not necessarily define a city, but each city does have its signature building/landmark that does/do make it stand out. Here are some examples:

New York: Statue of Liberty, Empire State Building, Chrysler Building, Grand Central Station, One World Trade Center
Chicago: Willis Tower, John Hancock Center
Atlanta: Sun Trust Plaza
Pittsburgh: US Steel Tower, PPG Place, Cathedral of Learning
St. Louis: The Arch
Los Angeles: US Bank Tower, Hollywood Sign
Seattle: Columbia Center, Space Needle

Again, I'm not saying that these locations are defined by their skylines, but the aforementioned landmarks are something that outsiders can identify the cities with. This building, along with Independence Hall, Liberty Place, Comcast Center, and Reading Terminal to name a few, will likely be a signature landmark for Philadelphia.

Here's a question, what is the tallest mixed-use building in the States? Technically, since this is going to house a Four Seasons Hotel, wouldn't that make this building a mixed use structure?
__________________
Transportation planning, building better communities of tomorrow through superior connections between them today...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #189  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2014, 2:58 PM
Phil_North Phil_North is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Philly, PA
Posts: 179
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonboy1983 View Post
Here's a question, what is the tallest mixed-use building in the States? Technically, since this is going to house a Four Seasons Hotel, wouldn't that make this building a mixed use structure?
Without looking it up I would guess the John Hancock Center in Chicago.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #190  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2014, 3:04 PM
skyscraper skyscraper is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonboy1983 View Post
Here's a question, what is the tallest mixed-use building in the States? Technically, since this is going to house a Four Seasons Hotel, wouldn't that make this building a mixed use structure?
Yes, the CITC definitely qualifies as mixed use.
The tallest mixed use building in the U.S. is still the John Hancock Center in Chicago.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #191  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2014, 3:11 PM
Phil_North Phil_North is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Philly, PA
Posts: 179
Quote:
Originally Posted by lwill View Post
I love this picture. I can imagine a row of residential skyscrapers lining Fairmount Park along Pennsylvania avenue a la Central Park West (or east for that matter).

Edit: After reading my post it would have been more fit for the Philadelphia General Development Forum. But the picture was here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #192  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2014, 3:35 PM
Mappy Mappy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 259
technically there is a mix of uses (retail, office, hotel, restaurant), but the purest meaning of mixed-use intends for it to apply to live/work structures. Eventually that will become more evident as the jargon gets clarified by planners putting mixed-use into practice in the future. Since nobody will be living in this building, I wouldn't consider it "mixed-use," but I also wouldn't take on the challenge of telling people not to call it that.

As for the whole CITC location discussions... My two cents: The Skyline is not the first priority for the people footing the bill. Nor the second, third, or probably twentieth. This location has about 100 pros, and very few cons, and listing the silhouette of the skyline from 1-2+ miles out as a 'con' is still an arguable matter of opinion when counted. The people that will see/use the building up close will get a benefit for its proposed location, while most (us included) who may grip about the overall city skyline have little to no standing in the matter.... that being said I would (1) like to see a 600-800 footer replace the gallery, but that's not Comcast's duty, and (2) get a bit irked that the new tower will block the Liberty Places from view of the Art Museum, but that is minor, and may be in exchange for a better, yet to be determined, view.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #193  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2014, 3:49 PM
skyscraper skyscraper is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mappy View Post
technically there is a mix of uses (retail, office, hotel, restaurant), but the purest meaning of mixed-use intends for it to apply to live/work structures. Eventually that will become more evident as the jargon gets clarified by planners putting mixed-use into practice in the future. Since nobody will be living in this building, I wouldn't consider it "mixed-use," but I also wouldn't take on the challenge of telling people not to call it that.
Don't want to descend into a semantics battle here, but mixed use pertains to a variety of uses within the main tower. In other words, the Willis Tower (nee Sears Tower) is considered an office building even though it has retail and an observation deck all open to the public. The main use in the tower is offices. The Hancock is considered mixed use because it has both office and residences in the tower. Even a building with office and hotel is considered mixed use. it doesn't matter that the other function isn't full time residences, it's another use other than offices. Hence the name, mixed use. Even if it were a residential building with a hotel component it would be considered mixed use.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #194  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2014, 4:38 PM
Pennsgrant Pennsgrant is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 818
Quote:
Originally Posted by lwill View Post
First, I would like to dispel this misnomer that Comcast must necessarily construct a tower across the street from one another....Second, many corporations around the globe occupy locations within the same city at much greater distances than the one I proposed 10 blocks away....Again,Comcast like all other corporations are guests in our city and not entitled to any specific property.
Let it go man.

Most(me included) would probably agree that the skyline would be better served if E of Broad, or W of 30th added some building height and density but that's not Comcasts concern or problem. They are going to what they feel is best for their corporation . Hence they doubled down at 19th + Arch.

You criticizing and questioning Comcasts location is a waste of time and energy. Its up to other companies and entities to expand the skyline for the time being. University City is emerging although the heights (other than FMC) don't inspire . You don't really need an 1100' building east of broad but rather 3 or 4 400-500' buildings , that would do wonders for the skyline. Unfortunately E of Broad has been dead since St James was built a decade ago.

For the record I was roundly chastised for suggesting that University City had a better comprehensive plan in regards to maximizing the skyline. I see 3737 Market and want to puke. That was a building opportunity to put an exclamation point on the western skyline and they left it woefully short.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #195  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2014, 4:50 PM
Jelly Roll Jelly Roll is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 1,310
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pennsgrant View Post
For the record I was roundly chastised for suggesting that University City had a better comprehensive plan in regards to maximizing the skyline. I see 3737 Market and want to puke. That was a building opportunity to put an exclamation point on the western skyline and they left it woefully short.
There are still 3-4 lots in that area of Market St with much larger air rights then 3737 Market St so all is not yet lost.
__________________
"Jesus would still be alive today if he had a gun." -Homer Simpson
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #196  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2014, 5:39 PM
lwill lwill is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 30
Yes, pehaps my argument is a waste of time, but think im trying to say a little bit more about the overall planning of this city. Philadelphia seems to shun projects which would open us up to the world.

For example, how in the world do you piss Donald Trump to the point where not only do we lose a Trump Tower, but the man says "I will never attempt to do business in this city ever again"? Again, the casino waterfront project was an opportunity for this city to create a Las Vegas type strip on the eastern seaboard; instead we get a gambling box for our local market.

My argument is that this city seems to thwart progress, and building a tower which obscures two others in the process is just the type of planning which is perfect for keeping our city looking small to the world.

So again, I think Im hinting at a general pattern of deliberate planning which seeks to minimize this cities presence, and global friendliness.

I would have liked to see this tower be our John Hancock in contrast to the Sears Tower; demarcating a new distinct sector symbolizing this cities wish to
attract more super talls.

By the way, the ACC design was killer; this one is less than inspiring, even more so by clustering it together with other buildings. In the renderings it seems to have little distinction from the rest. A Comcast twin tower was definately not the way to go.

And I will do some more renderings as some of you asked shortly.
thanks.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #197  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2014, 5:45 PM
Plokoon11 Plokoon11 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,635
ACC was bland, I liked it because of how tall it is, and it was massive. But it reminded me too much of the WTC old rendering. I was still excited about it, but with this building it may be awkward in terms of proportions, but as days gone by its design really shows a flare of a symbol with that spire on the side. I mean people are saying its tacked on, I don't think that at all because it flows along the side of the building all the way down, and fits uniform with the other bands of lines.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #198  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2014, 5:52 PM
apetrella802 apetrella802 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 546
The REAL importance of this tower has little to do with how it affects the skyline. Let the architect tell you why it is so important.
http://www.archdaily.com/467277/fost...-philadelphia/

apetrella802
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #199  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2014, 6:09 PM
Chriss Chriss is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 50
It may be the case that there are no harms to Comcast in building 10 blocks away. But there are definitely no benefits to Comcast. So why should Comcast take the risk?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #200  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2014, 6:15 PM
christof christof is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 521
Quote:
Originally Posted by summersm343 View Post
The design has actually grown on me. I would like to see some refining though. I was hoping for more rounded/curved edges... I would like to see it not so boxy.
You nailed it, summer!
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:10 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.