View Single Post
Old Posted May 18, 2015, 8:42 PM
apetrella802 apetrella802 is offline
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 546
building height

Originally Posted by allovertown View Post
Yea... I don't think anyone said the discussion over the roof height was being negative. .. it was viewing the roof height as another instance of philadelphia's long history of perceived failure that was attacked as being overly negative. But I don't think that comment was very serious nor were most that followed. I think it's mostly just an issue of tone. It's hard to have a mild mannered debate on the Internet because with zero reference or tone things often get misinterpreted.
The Council on Tall Buildings recognizes three measures of building height.
1) to the top of a spire(a spire is an attenuation of the structural framing system, unlike an antennae which is a foreign object, if you will, just attached to the roof)

2) the top of the roof

3) the top of the highest occupied office

if the building has a spire that is usually the height reported

think of a Gothic cathedral, we all agree that when you think of how "high" it is you naturally measure to the top of it's spire(s). The spire in this case is an attenuation of a masonry framing system.
Reply With Quote