HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2010, 10:26 PM
STR's Avatar
STR STR is offline
Because I'm Clever!
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 5,087
^Exactly. They don't have the luxury of intellectual wankery.
__________________
There are six phases to every project 1) enthusiasm, 2) disillusionment, 3) panic, 4) search for the guilty, 5) punishment of the innocent, 6) praise for the non-participants. - Guy Tozzoli
Build your own Model Skyscrapers** New York City 2015 3D Model W/ New WTC ** World Trade Center (1971-2001) 3D Model
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2010, 11:19 PM
Plokoon11 Plokoon11 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,479
I say hey, if they didn't count spires then we would have more box skyscrapers, but one good recent example of a sort of box building is the Comcast Tower.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2010, 12:54 AM
Kamatzu's Avatar
Kamatzu Kamatzu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 129
Highest occupiable floor. Bam.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2010, 5:55 AM
sw5710 sw5710 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,510
"CTBUH"!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2010, 2:26 PM
MolsonExport's Avatar
MolsonExport MolsonExport is offline
The Vomit Bag.
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: The Tropic of Sir Galahad
Posts: 28,555
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyscrapersOfNewYork View Post
true though the sears tower would not be the sears tower without its antenna's.
well it isn't the Sears tower (anymore)
__________________
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.
John Kenneth Galbraith
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2010, 7:54 PM
RCDC's Avatar
RCDC RCDC is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: DC, an eruptive vent of wealth
Posts: 285
Why was my post deleted without any explanation whatsoever?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2010, 11:10 PM
STR's Avatar
STR STR is offline
Because I'm Clever!
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 5,087
Quote:
Originally Posted by sw5710 View Post
"CTBUH"!
Those people are the root of the problem. Rather than making the rules consistent back in 1996, they split hairs in order to crown a new tallest. I didn't elect them, and I don't listen to them either.
__________________
There are six phases to every project 1) enthusiasm, 2) disillusionment, 3) panic, 4) search for the guilty, 5) punishment of the innocent, 6) praise for the non-participants. - Guy Tozzoli
Build your own Model Skyscrapers** New York City 2015 3D Model W/ New WTC ** World Trade Center (1971-2001) 3D Model
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted Nov 25, 2010, 9:10 AM
sw5710 sw5710 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,510
Everyone has an opinion. And some will never be satisfied. "CTBUH" or no "CTBUH".
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2010, 7:25 AM
chiphile's Avatar
chiphile chiphile is offline
yes
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: chicago
Posts: 452
Lightbulb

build·ing   [bil-ding]
–noun
a relatively permanent enclosed construction over a plot of land, having a roof and usually windows and often more than one level, used for any of a wide variety of activities, as living, working, entertaining, or manufacturing.


Here's a novel idea. The world's tallest building should be measured from the point it starts being a building (ground entrance) to the point it ends being one (roof). Antennas, spires, caissons, hats, roller coasters and other nonsense are not buildings. If so, and a "pinnacle is a pinnacle", then this entire site should be renamed "tv mast page.com" because those things are far taller.

Roof height or highest occupied floor should be official, because it defines a clear measurement point and takes away any argument of "it depends on the architecture."

Architects can adorn their buildings with sticks and poles for aesthetic reasons, just as people wear hats for fashion (spires) or function (helmets and antennas).

I'm really 5'10" but I wear a wizard's hat, so my official height at the doctor's office is 6'10". Why? Because I said so. My doctor says a human ends at the top of his/her head, but what does he know?

The analogies are so easy, why is it difficult with buildings? If someone built a 50 foot tall house on top of Mt. Everest, all of a sudden Everest is 50 feet taller?

"Spires count in height measurements. Antennas don't."
"Hats count, but helmets don't"
Same, just as stupid.


Here's another novel idea. THIS SITE is home to one of the most enthusastic architecture, urban design and skyscraper fans in the world. It's diagrams are the best and spot on, yet it is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT (to the real world) AND HAS SHOWN NO LEADERSHIP. How many journalists have cited this aside from a random Kamin article?

The difference between a great site and a good one is relevance and leadership. Skyscraperpage, take some leadership, PUBLISH and PUBLICIZE your own rankings of the world's tallest buildings according to roof height, and you'll see your numbers cited by journalists.

"According to skyscraperpage.com...." can easily be seen in the New York Times, but only if you want it.

Last edited by chiphile; Nov 29, 2010 at 7:28 AM. Reason: typo
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2010, 11:09 PM
sw5710 sw5710 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,510
Are antennas and spires mounted into the roof of a building the same? Is the Hat or Helmet just placed on the head? Or a continuation of the buildings steel and considered part of the structure.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2010, 11:13 PM
SkyscrapersOfNewYork's Avatar
SkyscrapersOfNewYork SkyscrapersOfNewYork is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,518
Quote:
Originally Posted by sw5710 View Post
Are antennas and spires mounted into the roof of a building the same?
according to CTBUH only spires count

though personally i think both count due to their visual impact and presence on the structure.
__________________
New York City,The City That Never Sleeps,The Capitol Of The World,The Big Apple,The Empire City,The Melting Pot,The Metropolis,Gotham

Buildings Over 200 Meters 62 Completed 20 Under Construction 50 Proposed 0 On Hold
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2010, 1:48 AM
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
Innsertnamehere Innsertnamehere is offline
Insertoronto
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,041
i measure 2 things, tippity top of the building, spires, antennas, and all, and the top of the solid structure. the top of the solid structure is where the "official" height should be measured though, as in the building with the highest solid structure would be the worlds tallest building. for example, i would omit the spire on 1WTC, and only count to the top of the structure, so in my mind, it is officially 1,368ft tall, but in total 1,776ft tall.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2010, 8:21 AM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is offline
Chewing gum in the bushes
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: sunshine and taco trucks on every corner
Posts: 43,523
Quote:
Originally Posted by M II A II R II K View Post
Antennas are attachments and are not part of the structure, same goes for flagpoles and stuff.
In some cases they're only temporary, or may be added to. Some are even removed altogether. They just did that for one of San Antonio's most famous buildings, the Tower Life Building. They removed a huge antenna/mast that had been up there since the 50s. The building was built in 1929, and originally had a flagpole up there. After taking down the antenna, they restored part of the cupola on the roof, and also placed a flagpole up there to match the one that was up there before the antenna.

I've always supported spires over antennae and flagpoles, or anything else that wasn't included as part of the building's design. That is, strictly for architectural purposes. Antennas, flagpoles and clocks come and go, but spires and other strictly architectural features are permanent. It would be like ripping off the hood ornament of a Mercedes to replace it without an antenna. It would actually decrease the value of it. Imagine if they did that to the Chrysler Building for an antenna. The Empire State Building for instance has not always had its antenna, and it might in the future be removed, too.

Although, I live 5 miles from downtown Austin, and the one building we have that has a spire really only makes a major impact with its roof. I can see the spire day and night, but the spire's impact on the skyline is pretty much unimportant, especially compared to other buildings with higher roofs.
__________________
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2010, 12:10 PM
chiphile's Avatar
chiphile chiphile is offline
yes
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: chicago
Posts: 452
http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune....b6de970b-popup


The above link is a superb (and large) picture of Trump Tower Chicago from the top, with a full aerial view of the spire.

It perfectly illustrates what a joke this particular spire is. It looks like a PVC pipe held up by a couple of wires, and looks as if it can break off any second from high winds. The glass curtain around it is there to hide that atrocity, but from the ground it appears to be structural or even another couple of floors - another joke.

See for yourself.

(Note, the photo is not "posted" so all credits can be seen once clicking on the link)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2010, 2:24 PM
sw5710 sw5710 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,510
The Transamerica Pyramid in San Francisco. Top floor or top of the pyramid.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2010, 3:58 PM
chiphile's Avatar
chiphile chiphile is offline
yes
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: chicago
Posts: 452
Quote:
Originally Posted by sw5710 View Post
The Transamerica Pyramid in San Francisco. Top floor or top of the pyramid.
IMO, top of the pyramid is the same as its roof. The tower clearly was built to support the structure and weight of the pyramid, aka its very large roof.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2010, 8:54 PM
sw5710 sw5710 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,510
The top floor is the 48th or 640' The top of the pyramid is 853'
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2010, 9:26 PM
SD_Phil's Avatar
SD_Phil SD_Phil is offline
Heavy User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Santa Clara
Posts: 2,671
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas View Post

I've always supported spires over antennae and flagpoles, or anything else that wasn't included as part of the building's design. That is, strictly for architectural purposes. Antennas, flagpoles and clocks come and go, but spires and other strictly architectural features are permanent. It would be like ripping off the hood ornament of a Mercedes to replace it without an antenna. It would actually decrease the value of it. Imagine if they did that to the Chrysler Building for an antenna. The Empire State Building for instance has not always had its antenna, and it might in the future be removed, too.

Although, I live 5 miles from downtown Austin, and the one building we have that has a spire really only makes a major impact with its roof. I can see the spire day and night, but the spire's impact on the skyline is pretty much unimportant, especially compared to other buildings with higher roofs.
Kevin I see you offering 4 different criteria here and they're not all consistent with each other:

1. Only count what's included in the original architectural blueprints.

2. Only count "permanent features"

3. Only count things which, if removed, would decrease a buildings "value"

4. Only count things that "make an impact"

I guess I'd ask you to pick which one(s) you think are the "real" criteria and say more about why. None of these, by themselves, exclude things like antennas and flagpoles (they could have been included in the original blueprints, they could have been intended to be permanent, they could have some patriotic or other economic value that would lessen the building if removed, and they could actually make an impact on the skyline like the Willis Tower's antennas do).

So none of the things I see you proposing would discount counting the full height of all elements of a building and I guess (and I here don't meant to single you out especially) don't see a reason offered yet why we shouldn't count EVERYTHING.

Like I said in my earlier post, we could quibble about whether antennas or spires, or flagpoles "make an impact" on a skyline or a building's profile. Those are aesthetic debates we could have about a building. BUT if I want to know how tall something is, that doesn't seem like something we should quibble about. This building is xxx feet or meters from the sidewalk to the beginning of the sky. That includes everything (and why not?).

If we wanted to compare buildings to one another then we could get technical and say things like "The Petronas Towers, while technically taller than the Willis, is less prominent and less imposing. The Willis looks like the sturdier, more solid building, it reaches its full height more gracefully, more powerfully, etc."

It really seems like what most of us care about isn't necessarily how tall something is (it is exactly as tall as the tip of all manmade structures) but instead about how something achieves its height. It's best not to confuse those two questions though.
__________________
Consumer Ethic:
WORK - PRODUCE - CONSUME
WORK - PRODUCE - CONSUME
-------------------
Flickr: www.flickr.com/photos/preppy381
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2010, 11:25 PM
CyberEric CyberEric is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 639
I really have a hard time counting antennae OR spires in building height. The top of a building is its roof.

When I was out in the 'burbs of Chicago I could just see the lights blinking on the antennae of the Sears Tower in the distance.
I could not see the Sears Tower, what I could see was the antennae on top of the Sears Tower.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2010, 3:25 AM
BrennanW's Avatar
BrennanW BrennanW is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Manhattan, Kansas USA.
Posts: 196
Think of a mountain or hill. You measure its height at its peak, not the top of the cell tower on top of it.
__________________
Proud Kansan
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:44 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.