41 replies to this topic

[ATL4EVER]

Atlanta should have it. I mean, the south is taking over.

[Lady Celeste]

I wish it could be built in Atlanta. I mean come on guys, if Kuala Lumpur can have such a huge tower then I think Atlanta should have one as well. I know some great spots too. Near the BOA tower would be a great choice. It would be so exciting.

[ATL4EVER]

If it's in atlanta, it should be in that huge gap between midtown and downtown.

[CtownMikey]

just wondering.. how is the south taking over? and where are we classifying north and south boundaries?

[Charleston native]

New York should get it. Replacing the WTC should be the top goal; by doing that, they should build a building where the floors themselves (NOT just a freaking antenna!) should reach a height that is the tallest in the world.

[Ted80]

Chicago

[Inkdaub]

rbhriuthbu1234, on Feb 10 2005, 12:57 AM, said:

They were just talking about a possible skyscraper at 5000 ft, I really doubt there actually going to build it in the next few decades.

This is that 'city in a building' thing, right? A mile high...that would be like the buildings on Corascant in the Star Wars movies.


I chose Seattle because thats my favorite town. They recently dropped the height restrictions for downtown and are looking to build up in the core. A building that would rank as the tallest in the country would stick out in Seattle but still...why not. If the thing was centered...which wouldn't be possible really...it would look cool.

[alon504]

It should be NYC, IMO. In regards to a 5,000 foot tower, I just don't think it is necessary, at this point, in America. It would take too much time, effort, and $$$. Yes, Asia will likely build something like this, but, the solid economy of the world remains the US. It doesn't take height for the economy to be considered "tops."

[SBCmetroguy]

Who says there has to be just one?

I believe New York, Chicago, and Houston would all make excellent locations for such a project. And what a better way to get America back up there than to have those three major cities all with the world's tallest buildings?

And for the record, I do believe Houston would be an excellent site for something like this. The city really doesn't get the credit it deserves mostly because it's in the deep south, but it is one of the largest, wealthiest, and most curturally diverse cities in the nation.

[hood]

I've always been partial to Chicago when it comes to skyscrapers, it looks like they may very well be building the the new tallest in the US, retaining their record even with the new WTC.

[dtown]

i say NYC, but Chicago would be great too. Detroit would be sweet, but it would stick out really bad, but it would be exiting for me, lol

[GRDadof3]

I think the U.S. should maintain its stature as the world leader in innovation, entrepreneurship, and democracy, not be known for having the tallest vacant buildings, IMO.

[Eastwestrob]

I would love to see it in Atlanta....But I would settle for Chicago. Everyone keeps mentioning the 5000 footer. There was a program about the proposed city in the sky in Japan and the height was 13,000 ft. It showed a huge structure and each level was pretty much self contained and housed about 50-100k people. And there were subway type people movers and literally green habitats on each level.

[damus]

Eastwestrob, on May 9 2006, 01:57 PM, said:

I would love to see it in Atlanta....But I would settle for Chicago. Everyone keeps mentioning the 5000 footer. There was a program about the proposed city in the sky in Japan and the height was 13,000 ft. It showed a huge structure and each level was pretty much self contained and housed about 50-100k people. And there were subway type people movers and literally green habitats on each level.

I saw the same program. I would LOVE to see someone (besides China) attempt something that ambitious. There's also this idea of a trans-continental highway that included a tunnel under the bering strait. It would most likely be like the chunnel and require cars to load onto trains, and would also carry long distance passenger and freight lines. That would be an engineering marvel.

[ShowMeKC]

IMO, Chicago is a true American city, I've been to both NYC and Chicago, yet Chicago is my favorite by far. It deserves the next tallest in the nation.

BTW, We won't be able to build the world's tallest, the FCC and FAA would not allow a 1km+ building in either NYC or Chicago, or anywhere... The national "height limit" the FAA enforces is 2,000ft... Only 2-3 structures escaped that by being built before it was enacted.

[malec]

^^ That's just a rule for masts. It's not set in stone that nobody can build higher than 2000ft, it's just that they'd need permission from the government.

[ShowMeKC]

Not to mention extra money... However, there are height limits for cities enforced by ppl other than the government.

[MJLO]

I checked the box marked other.

[runawayjim]

i voted NYC just because it's the epitome of tall buildings in the US in my opinion. philly would be my second choice. i think it would be good for philly... although i do like that one of the tallest buildings in philly is city hall.

[Inkdaub]

KCDevin, on May 9 2006, 04:23 PM, said:

IMO, Chicago is a true American city, I've been to both NYC and Chicago, yet Chicago is my favorite by far. It deserves the next tallest in the nation.

BTW, We won't be able to build the world's tallest, the FCC and FAA would not allow a 1km+ building in either NYC or Chicago, or anywhere... The national "height limit" the FAA enforces is 2,000ft... Only 2-3 structures escaped that by being built before it was enacted.

What structures are more than 2000 feet tall?