|
Originally Posted by mhays25 I'd be gathering for Seattle too. It would be all about getting tons of housing units (can they be full of residents or do we need to handle that?) into our underperforming areas. Give me five 70-story-plus towers. There can be parking but not much and put it below grade. Let each building have at least 800 units, including a decent percentage with two bedrooms. I thought Hawkesteel wanted already existing buildings. I'd be hard-pressed to identify even one 70-story residential tower in the US, let alone five. Maybe that pencil-thin condo tower on a questionable foundation in Manhattan, but I think that's it. And that won't give you the unit count you want in a single building, either. (If you want 800 units in most US cities now, chances are they'll look like this.) But hey, if you can get somebody to build five 70+-story, 700+-unit residential towers in Seattle, more power to you. Hope they'd match the Space Needle and Seattle Public Library in distinctiveness. Speaking of distinctiveness, the skyline of my hometown of Kansas City is lacking in it now, as some bulky, ill-shapen glass-box towers have dwarfed the attractive Art Deco towers built there in the 1930s (including City Hall [1936-37]). And worse still, in the 1970s, some misguided real estate investor "modernized" the old Southwestern Bell Telephone Company headquarters (1911) by covering its Gothic Revival detailing in white stucco, an act of architectural vandalism up there with the demolition of Penn Station. So I need to perform atonement for my hometown's falling off the path of good architecture by stealing these buildings: John Hancock Tower, Chicago Comcast Center and One Liberty Place, Philadelphia Customs House Tower, Boston Chrysler Building or 30 Rockefeller Plaza, New York And speaking of residential towers, I'd also swipe the twin corncob cylinders of Chicago's Marina City and plop them amid the mid-rise buildings atop the bluff on Quality Hill. (责任编辑：) |