h a l f b a k e r yOn the one hand, true. On the other hand, bollocks.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
I live near the World Trade Center site in New York City and we've been having debates about what to build there. The other night I thought instead of building really big skyscrapers on speculation, why not build ones with a big enough base (and sturdy enough core) so you can add floors as necessary?
In New York, where there are boom and bust markets, you could add floors during a really serious expansion mode. This way you wouldn't overstretch yourself. Also, it'd allow zoning boards to decide whether a building height extension is appropriate given current economic conditions.
[link]
|
| |
Baked, no? I can't imagine a man-made structure that can't be added to. |
|
| |
I appreciate the imagery of a skyscraper built like one of those child's toys where the floors (rings) stack on a center core, though. |
|
| |
You can't add to a manmade structure if the foundations aren't strong enough for your addition. [customer1]'s idea would require that the foundation be way enormously stronger than the immediately-planned rentable space needed, which is one way of dividing up the financing to build between now & the future, but maybe isn't the most effective. OTOH, maybe it is, certainly I've known people building houses who built a big foundation with a little house on it & added rooms and stories as they could afford it. |
|
| |
Possibly the add-a-stories get removed and shipped somwhere else, when the boom-and-bust cycle blesses that second place. Tokyo might have some office space to sell right now. |
|
| |