Twelve West | 22 floors | Complete

[urbanlife]

Originally Posted by New Madrid

are you just free associating here or am I supposed to take this seriously? Kevin Cavenaugh maxed out a credit card or two and swept up his own jobsite, so by some tangential association I'm not allowed to be "negative" about (read: critical of) ZGF's pinwheels? Even by your logic they truly have nothing to do with one another in any respect other than that they both were built on a budget, just like every other building. ever.

please stop.

Well, it is clear that you feel that this attempt is pointless or stupid or whatever you feel like calling it...or do you just not like wind turbines on top of buildings? Was a close family member or friend killed by a wind turbine robbing a liquor store or something?

[PacificNW]

Hmmmm..... ".....wind turbine robbing a liquor store or something?" How is this possible? I am also curious: ...why did you feel the need to add the "family member or friend" implying they were killed "while" robbing a liquor store or something? I think that part of your post borders on being personal and offensive. Was this your intention, or have I misread your intent? I am not "getting" the debate you (urbanlife, and New Madrid,) are having. Maybe I am "being thick and overly sensitive......." if you guys think I am, I apologize.

[JordanL]

Originally Posted by New Madrid

are you just free associating here or am I supposed to take this seriously? Kevin Cavenaugh maxed out a credit card or two and swept up his own jobsite, so by some tangential association I'm not allowed to be "negative" about (read: critical of) ZGF's pinwheels? Even by your logic they truly have nothing to do with one another in any respect other than that they both were built on a budget, just like every other building. ever.

please stop.

You really hate the idea of a firm not jumping into the 13 foot section of the ecofriendly pool, don't you.

This whole conversation started because you basically flipped out over the windmills being too tame/safe. You need to chill and realize that development companies and architecture firms do not exist to help the environment. It's a tangent.

[Valentij]

Originally Posted by PacificNW

I am also curious: ...why did you feel the need to add the "family member or friend" implying they were killed "while" robbing a liquor store or something?

That would have to be one seriously misplaced wind turbine. Honestly, placing a gigantic chopping turbine right at the exit to a public business is just begging for a lawsuit, unless it is a gigantic miniature golf course. Then I feel that people consciously accept that risk upon entrance. Instead, in this case, we have a liquor store which the objectively rational actor would assume has non-lethal ways of entrance and egress. Unfortunately, New Madrid's miscreant relations met with the business end of these well-intentioned renewable energy projects during the perpetration of their crime. A triumph for green energy, but a personal tragedy for the Madrid family. I would further enjoin the rest of you from using these ad hominem personal histories in our architectural correspondence.

Good Day.

[urbanlife]

Originally Posted by PacificNW

Hmmmm..... ".....wind turbine robbing a liquor store or something?" How is this possible? I am also curious: ...why did you feel the need to add the "family member or friend" implying they were killed "while" robbing a liquor store or something? I think that part of your post borders on being personal and offensive. Was this your intention, or have I misread your intent? I am not "getting" the debate you (urbanlife, and New Madrid,) are having. Maybe I am "being thick and overly sensitive......." if you guys think I am, I apologize.

Not offensive, just my way of saying I am giving up, it is clear that New Madrid, who has been posting in here for barely a month doesnt like the wind turbines for whatever reason and could care less what actual benefit that they have or whatever...seriously, I got tired of debating something he clearly had no interest in debating other than calling wind turbines silly names.

[PacificNW]

Gotcha, thanks for the clarification.....Keep posting.

[New Madrid]

Originally Posted by JordanL

You really hate the idea of a firm not jumping into the 13 foot section of the ecofriendly pool, don't you.

This whole conversation started because you basically flipped out over the windmills being too tame/safe. You need to chill and realize that development companies and architecture firms do not exist to help the environment. It's a tangent.

Clearly you misunderstood my intent. I have no problem at all with the windmills themselves, and I said as much in response to Urbanlife's questioning. I merely questioned whether or not he was being realistic about their purpose as a "risky experiment." I got upset when he attempted to compare them to Kevin Cavenaughs projects only because I respect Kevin and what he's doing, and I honestly see no connection between what he does and ZGF's building, windmills or not. Urbanlife seems to believe that I have no interest in having a reasonable conversation about them, but then again my version of "reasonable" doesn't include non sequiturs and asides about liquor store robberies, so maybe he's right.

I'm sorry if I'm rubbing people the wrong way, Urbanlife included, but if people are going to make assertions about windmills (or anything else) they should be willing to defend their judgements with cogent arguments. Clearly people seem to like the windmills, and I will be the first to say I think they're a bit beautiful in certain moments, but that has little, if anything, to do with what I was upset about...

[urbanlife]

Originally Posted by New Madrid

Clearly you misunderstood my intent. I have no problem at all with the windmills themselves, and I said as much in response to Urbanlife's questioning. I merely questioned whether or not he was being realistic about their purpose as a "risky experiment." I got upset when he attempted to compare them to Kevin Cavenaughs projects only because I respect Kevin and what he's doing, and I honestly see no connection between what he does and ZGF's building, windmills or not. Urbanlife seems to believe that I have no interest in having a reasonable conversation about them, but then again my version of "reasonable" doesn't include non sequiturs and asides about liquor store robberies, so maybe he's right.

I'm sorry if I'm rubbing people the wrong way, Urbanlife included, but if people are going to make assertions about windmills (or anything else) they should be willing to defend their judgements with cogent arguments. Clearly people seem to like the windmills, and I will be the first to say I think they're a bit beautiful in certain moments, but that has little, if anything, to do with what I was upset about...

Do you wish to clarify what you are upset about, I am confused by this post because you make mention that you actually like them, then make mention that you do not.

If you upset with them simply because they are on top of the building, then that is a fine opinion to have, but it was beginning to seem like you didnt like them simply to say you dont like them.

[rsbear]

Originally Posted by PacificNW

I am also curious: ...why did you feel the need to add the "family member or friend" implying they were killed "while" robbing a liquor store or something?

I took it that way the first read, too, but grammatically I think the sentence is stating that the windmill was robbing the liquor store, not the family member or friend, and the windmill did the killing, too.

[JordanL]

Originally Posted by New Madrid

Clearly you misunderstood my intent. I have no problem at all with the windmills themselves, and I said as much in response to Urbanlife's questioning. I merely questioned whether or not he was being realistic about their purpose as a "risky experiment." I got upset when he attempted to compare them to Kevin Cavenaughs projects only because I respect Kevin and what he's doing, and I honestly see no connection between what he does and ZGF's building, windmills or not. Urbanlife seems to believe that I have no interest in having a reasonable conversation about them, but then again my version of "reasonable" doesn't include non sequiturs and asides about liquor store robberies, so maybe he's right.

I'm sorry if I'm rubbing people the wrong way, Urbanlife included, but if people are going to make assertions about windmills (or anything else) they should be willing to defend their judgements with cogent arguments. Clearly people seem to like the windmills, and I will be the first to say I think they're a bit beautiful in certain moments, but that has little, if anything, to do with what I was upset about...

I don't particularly like the windmills on a building idea. But I understand how difficult figuring such things out can be for architecture firms.

[New Madrid]

Originally Posted by New Madrid

Clearly you misunderstood my intent. I have no problem at all with the windmills themselves, and I said as much in response to Urbanlife's questioning. I merely questioned whether or not he was being realistic about their purpose as a "risky experiment." I got upset when he attempted to compare them to Kevin Cavenaughs projects only because I respect Kevin and what he's doing, and I honestly see no connection between what he does and ZGF's building, windmills or not. Urbanlife seems to believe that I have no interest in having a reasonable conversation about them, but then again my version of "reasonable" doesn't include non sequiturs and asides about liquor store robberies, so maybe he's right.

I'm sorry if I'm rubbing people the wrong way, Urbanlife included, but if people are going to make assertions about windmills (or anything else) they should be willing to defend their judgements with cogent arguments. Clearly people seem to like the windmills, and I will be the first to say I think they're a bit beautiful in certain moments, but that has little, if anything, to do with what I was upset about...

Originally Posted by urbanlife

Do you wish to clarify what you are upset about, I am confused by this post because you make mention that you actually like them, then make mention that you do not.

If you upset with them simply because they are on top of the building, then that is a fine opinion to have, but it was beginning to seem like you didnt like them simply to say you dont like them.

read before you respond please.

[urbanlife]

Originally Posted by New Madrid

read before you respond please.

So I cannot question you on why you dont like them or feel that they are not a risk to do? Again, I ask, how many buildings do you know of that incorporate wind technology in an urban setting? That by definition is considered risky...much like trying to get a loan for a condo building in a downtown that has no condo units (much like what Spokane had to deal with when a developer tried to build some lofts in an old warehouse.)

You may not appreciate what the firm is doing or the ongoing study and research that they are having within their firm, but anything that is not common is considered a risk.

There for, in a business sense, yes it is risky because trying to talk a developer into anything that requires alot of upfront money where the pay off is stretched throughout several years and may not produce the same numbers that was projected (which their are now lawyers that deal with such things).

And it is an experiment because this is something that ZGF is doing to their own building, thus they will not be suing themselves if the pay off isnt as great as was projected, but they will then have more concrete numbers when talking to future clients.

Therefore I consider this to be a "risky business."

[JordanL]

Originally Posted by urbanlife

So I cannot question you on why you dont like them or feel that they are not a risk to do? Again, I ask, how many buildings do you know of that incorporate wind technology in an urban setting? That by definition is considered risky...much like trying to get a loan for a condo building in a downtown that has no condo units (much like what Spokane had to deal with when a developer tried to build some lofts in an old warehouse.)

You may not appreciate what the firm is doing or the ongoing study and research that they are having within their firm, but anything that is not common is considered a risk.

There for, in a business sense, yes it is risky because trying to talk a developer into anything that requires alot of upfront money where the pay off is stretched throughout several years and may not produce the same numbers that was projected (which their are now lawyers that deal with such things).

And it is an experiment because this is something that ZGF is doing to their own building, thus they will not be suing themselves if the pay off isnt as great as was projected, but they will then have more concrete numbers when talking to future clients.

Therefore I consider this to be a "risky business."

(Sorry, trying to lighten the mood.)

[urbanlife]

Originally Posted by JordanL

(Sorry, trying to lighten the mood.)

too it a second for me to get that, I didnt even realize I said Risky Business. nice catch. I meant to say "risky experiment."

[zilfondel]

I am skipping this entire thread. This forum is becoming a tangent.

[JordanL]

Originally Posted by zilfondel

I am skipping this entire thread. This forum is becoming a tangent.

Congrats?

[smendesPDX]

does anyone know what is on the top floor of this building? There seems to be a lot of something, but I cannot tell what it is. Maybe a rooftop garden, glass ceilings and something else.

[2oh1]

Originally Posted by New Madrid

read before you respond please.

So, your lack of clarity in making a point that gets you upset enough to hijack an entire thread is everyone else's fault? You really want to start a flame war over the word "risky"? That says more about you than it does about anyone else. Luckily, your friendliness makes up for your lack of clarity.

In the midst of an economic collapse - which is where we were as recently as just a few months ago - I find it amazing that the wind turbines were built at all. I'm sure I'm not the only one who thought they'd get scrapped in a cost cutting move.

I think they're beautiful. Sure, I wish they were able to generate more than 1% of the building's energy needs, but it's a start. It's a start that few others seem to be taking, so I applaud it.

[rsbear]

Originally Posted by 2oh1

Sure, I wish they were able to generate more than 1% of the building's energy needs, but it's a start.

Finally, a number. Thank you. Four windmills equals 1% of the building's power needs. Just another 396 to go!

I, too, applaud the effort but it I also wish there was a realistic way wind and or solar power could effectively provide a more significant share of a tower's power needs.

[urbanlife]

Originally Posted by rsbear

Finally, a number. Thank you. Four windmills equals 1% of the building;s power needs. Just another 396 to go!

I, too, applaud the effort but it I also wish there was a realistic way wind and or solar power could effectively provide a more significant share of a tower's power needs.

it can, by reducing the amount of power the building needs.