Originally Posted by AustinGoesVertical
So the spire to roof height percentage on the Fairmont is 30%. Off the top of my head, I thought the new World Trade Center had to have it beat, but it's a 29% ratio. One Predential Plaza in Chicago is a 34% ratio, so I guess it's not the top, but it still has to be up there. I know there are thousands of building candidates I'm not thinking of but I would guess this is an unprecedented spire height/roof ratio for a hotel at least. In other words, it's not crazy to think this will look out of place.
One World trade and 2 Prudential Plaza and many other scrapers like them look good with spires because they are centered on the narrower pointed roof. One Prudential's spire looks ridiculous but if it has an antenna function, then it explains, perhaps, the reason its so tall. It should also disqualify the total recorded height, but that's another worn out argument. I think as far as aesthetics are concerned, the Fairmont falls between the examples. I certainly don't think its a necessary feature because I think it was added to the design to inflate the overall height of the building, and unless its a flagpole with a flag, a spire on top of a rectangular roof looks ackward to me. I'm hoping there will be some sort of night time value add with lighting at least.