dammit! we moved into our new swanky offices near the top floor of "the tallest building in philadelphia" a year and a half ago. it didn't take long before the comcast center rose up and demoted us to #2. (though it was cool to watch the tower go up). now i'm just getting used to being in "the second tallest building in philadelphia" when this comes along.
kidding aside, i disagree with atrios on this one. the reason why the u.s. got out of the "tallest building in the world" race after the sears tower was built is because those super-tall things just aren't economical. the sears tower is expensive to maintain and when i lived in chicago there were often articles about the high percentage of vacancies. since 9/11 that's probably only gotten worse with added security costs and more reasons to be skittish about working in a tall building. these days the super-tall building is more about ego and showing off to the world than sensible urban planning. that's why the super-talls built after the sears tower have all been in the developing world, places where they're trying to tell the world: "look at us, we're sophistimacated!" considering how philadelphia has a bit of a chip on its shoulder, i guess i'm not surprised that we could catch a little bit of that bug here.
then again, maybe i'm wrong. maybe the asian projects taught us how to have a super-tall that doesn't turn into a boondoggle. hell, maybe the sears tower found a way to be profitable since i left chicago. it's just that i don't see the point in extra-tallness for its own sake.
