Originally Posted by City Wide
just to make sure I understand what the beef is, is that 2400 Market is not a tower. I would certainly like to see a large tower there, and I still can't get my head around why it isn't happening, but I don't want our screwed up City fathers and mothers telling some one they have to build a tower if they don't want to. Maybe if the tax base was based on the worth of the land and not the building, something might change. But that method has just as many problems as the existing set up.
The large floor plate, shorter building is much less expensive to building than a tall tower. The developers were targeting a part of the office market which desired new space but did not want to pay the rent associated with a tall, slender tower. Aramark was such a customer, very cost conscious, unwilling to pay a +$40 per SF NNN necessary to support a new tall tower. This is the same reason why high-rise office development has lagged in Market East. Actually has very little to do with zoning.