To crown, or not to crown? A couple weeks ago, our shot of 555 Mission's blazing rectangular ring of glory got us wondering whether we were going for broke on the nighttime lights. Apparently Chicago and New York have been pondering similar things about their own skylines, which are no doubt beefier than our own. According to a lighting designer, "The tall tower with the illuminated floors on all night long is probably a thing of the past. You're not relying on the glowing floors to have the building presence. It is relying on the crown of light." Meaning the carbon-footprint brigade can consider falling back— it's the insides of the building that consume the most energy. The crown only eats up a "small fraction." And if you're into Hong Kong-ification, the "bright light, big city" theory says putting up purdy lights everywhere will make the city feel less like a ghost town and encourage more people to live in dense areas. Like moths to a high, high flame.
· Must skyscrapers be bird-killers? Not necessarily [Tribune]
· A Golden Crown for SoMa's Newest High Rise [Curbed SF]