PHILADELPHIA | Comcast Technology Center | 1,121 FT | 60 FLOORS

[lwill]

I posted here a few days ago to express my dismay at the seemingly majority approval of this new Comcast Tower, but also clearly mentioning my ignorance in regards to the technicalities essential in approving, planning, and constructing a skyscraper. However, as an aesthetic argument I am still vehemently against this site for all the reasons i stated in my first postings.

But to reiterate: 1) The current proposed location seems to create a twin tower effect which in my opinion ultimately ends up making both towers look bulky. They also seem to accentuate the smaller twin buildings to their right which again makes the over all effect uninspiring. In my opinion, they almost resemble the top third of the late WTC towers in New York; in some ways it just makes both towers look shorter.

2) The location of the new tower makes what I call 'the pyramid effect'. This 'pyramid effect' does nothing to differentiate itself from other second tier skylines, or even itself; more importantly, it does nothing to distinguish itself as a city ready to be a global player. This clustering to me is still indicative of a mid tier city mentality which seeks to minimize its presence as opposed to maximizing it.

4) On the other hand, positioning this tower at another location could actually act as a hub for new development as in the University city area. This tower could be used to develop a whole technology subsection of the city-think University City, Centre City, and Tech City- all distinct corridors. Phillys small city planning mentally, vision, and business practices has kept the progress of this city moving at a snails pace- including thwarting a Trump Tower, Foxwoods, WTC, Commerce center, Disney land, Will Smith projects, Columbus blvd and any other project which would have attracted a global presence. The next generation of city planners hopefully will think more globally, and stop trying to keep the world out of this city.

In my first postings I spoke without the aid of visual renderings of how I see the optimal visual positioning of this tower. Below I have added the tower at long and short range proximity to the other skyscrapers. Thanks.

[lwill]

[lwill]

[lwill]

[SJPhillyBoy]

Well I will say it sticks out a lot more in those locations. I give you an A+ for effort.

The first one is actually possible if they built it on the Girard Estate.

The last one is just about right on Independence Mall...interesting.

[christof]

Originally Posted by SJPhillyBoy

Well I will say it sticks out a lot more in those locations. I give you an A+ for effort.

The location is not the problem with the proposed building. Actually, it makes perfect sense. Have the R&D office located right next door to the mother ship tower is very wise for a corporation.

the issue is the design itself. With construction set to start in less than 6 months, maybe there will be some fine tuning of the design. But what we are seeing is what we are going to get.

[summersm343]

Why would Comcast build their next tower 10 blocks away from their current tower?

I understand you want more towers on the other side of Broad, and that will certainly happen some day, but Comcast is dedicated to Philly and is giving us our first Supertall. We should appreciate this, not criticize it.

It makes sense for them to build a Supertall on a parking lot RIGHT NEXT to their current tower because they want to build a "vertical campus." It would make literally NO sense to build one ten blocks away.

[summersm343]

Originally Posted by christof

The location is not the problem with the proposed building. Actually, it makes perfect sense. Have the R&D office located right next door to the mother ship tower is very wise for a corporation.

the issue is the design itself. With construction set to start in less than 6 months, maybe there will be some fine tuning of the design. But what we are seeing is what we are going to get.

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.

[iheartphilly]

The truth of the matter is that this bldg has a lot of ground interest as well. A great balance between what we see on the ground and from afar. IMO, liberty 1 and 2 severely lack ground interest, and is truthfully ugly at street level. My prediction is that a lot of naysayers of the design will change their mind once they see it come to life.

[Philly-Drew]

Iwill (or a moderator), can you pleas remove the gigantic panoramic pic in the above post? You are killing the thread on mobile devices by posting such large pics.

Thank you, it is much appreciated.

[Jonboy1983]

I agree with the remarks about the location of the building being in the most appropriate place. This is basically an extension of Comcast's existing mother ship at 1701 JFK Blvd. Also, architecturally this building is appropriately placed among other 40-50-plus-story office towers. East of Broad Street there are a handful of high-rise office buildings, but for a good reason. I always wondered why Market East was never developed as a high-end retail center, and someone responded by saying it catered to the local market, which was mostly lower and lower-middle class residences. Plus, I guess land value here wasn't quite as high as that once you head west of Broad. I guess when the zoning laws changed some time during the 1980s to allow for buildings to rise higher than the height of Billy Penn, they decided to cluster the highrises in this area of the city given the relatively higher price of land.

I'm just speculating based on what someone told me here on SSP. If anyone else has any insight do tell! I'm not originally from Philly, but I am living and working in the greater Philly region. I do have pride in it, and talk of a supertall here is rather exciting!

[Phil_North]

lwill, nice job with the photoshopped pics of what the tower would look like in another location. Before seeing the pics I actually agreed with you that a supertall east of Broad would look better. But after seeing your pics I actually see the Atlanta or Houston effect, where the tall buildings are spaced out. The 1,000 footer at 8th and Market would actually make the buildings in between look shorter. Skylines need to grow organically. The cluster effect looks good. My favorite skyline is Chicago's. It has good density and nice spacing between the John Hancock and Willis (Sears) Towers. Once FMC and the surrounding buildings are completed then we'll have an even more beautiful skyline. I like the new Comcast tower where it is. But I do appreciate the views of what it would look like in other locations.

[duffey]

i understand where iwill is coming from, which is why i thought the same thing when comcast was built. lib 1 is a good pinnacle, and larger global cities often do have a bimodal or even trimodal skyline. when you put a tall tower among mid rises and high rises east of broad, they all the sudden appear to rise with it and it becomes somewhat of a skyline in and of itself. that said, this doesn't stop a tech center which could eventually prompt large-scale high-rise development from happening elsewhere in the city, like u-city, where infill is already going up like crazy. besides, summers point is what matters most: they are building a giant corporate "vertical campus" and this needs to be next to the main tower.

[Jelly Roll]

Originally Posted by Jonboy1983

I agree with the remarks about the location of the building being in the most appropriate place. This is basically an extension of Comcast's existing mother ship at 1701 JFK Blvd. Also, architecturally this building is appropriately placed among other 40-50-plus-story office towers. East of Broad Street there are a handful of high-rise office buildings, but for a good reason. I always wondered why Market East was never developed as a high-end retail center, and someone responded by saying it catered to the local market, which was mostly lower and lower-middle class residences. Plus, I guess land value here wasn't quite as high as that once you head west of Broad. I guess when the zoning laws changed some time during the 1980s to allow for buildings to rise higher than the height of Billy Penn, they decided to cluster the highrises in this area of the city given the relatively higher price of land.

I'm just speculating based on what someone told me here on SSP. If anyone else has any insight do tell! I'm not originally from Philly, but I am living and working in the greater Philly region. I do have pride in it, and talk of a supertall here is rather exciting!

Development of Center City West corresponded with suburban station being connected to the reading commuter lines known as the center city connection. This along with the penn center redevelopment shifted the prime office space west because of the open space and it was now the center of regional trains.

[lwill]

Sorry, not quite sure how to. Hopefully a moderator will correct the issue.

[lwill]

Actually, I love the way Atlanta is developing their skyline. Light and airy with ample green space in between buildings seems to me the way to go. Of course Philly is and old city with very limited space for this type of development to an extent, but again, in regards to aesthetic impact this structure does nothing appealing.

Also, i'm not quite sure why a "campus/tech center" must be 50ft away for each other. Will the majority of employees be shuttling back and forth between the two? Again, in the spirit of the greatest skylines, the two anchor super talls at spaced out intervals seem to assert a sort of presence that sets them apart from other skylines. Staking a claim to me would show commitment to opening up the region for serious development.

Again, I find this city in general is still not quite ready to open itself up to the rest of the world; in other words become a 'global city'.

[jakel]

Originally Posted by lwill

Also, i'm not quite sure why a "campus/tech center" must be 50ft away for each other.

The same reason you don't drive 20 miles to go to a grocery store when there's 5 others before you get to that one. Comcast has a large tract of land right outside their door zoned super CMX-5 and could probably find 5 others before they crossed Broad Street. Any business with an appropriate mindset is going to rank employee proximity much higher on the scale than an aesthetic notion that they have to put a skyscraper 10 blocks east when they could locate next door.

[mmikeyphilly]

I do like the location where it's at. Everyone has an opinion and it shouldn't be shot down by someone who has another opinion. I found that out a few years ago when I first joined this site. We all like to dream of what "could be", "should be", or "what might have been if". We all come from different backgrounds, and we are all not the same. If we were, all buildings would look alike, and that's not fun! Okay, I've said my two cents....Guess I'll lurk in the corner for another 4 years, if I'm lucky

[summersm343]

Originally Posted by lwill

Actually, I love the way Atlanta is developing their skyline. Light and airy with ample green space in between buildings seems to me the way to go.

You mean no density, and no walkability? Look at Philly's skyline compared to Atlanta's. Philly is a large cluster of highers. Atlanta is a thin strip of highrises. It looks bigger from a far but it's really not...

P.S... since you seem to be pretty good at photoshop, can you photoshop CITC where into the skyline where it will ACTUALLY be located into those pictures you have above? That'd be awesome.

[shakman]

Building Comcast's tower several blocks away from its current headquarters would not be economically feasible for Comcast. I think the new tower's location is perfect.