Originally Posted by Yankee fan for life
Wow Guiltyspark did not know that your opinion was fact,their are plenty of reasons for 1 wtc antenna to still be considered part of its original design and i can tell you that none of them are crazy.
Not my opinion. I have been told by many on this very forum that antenna do not count as height while architectural spires do. Now that this building clearly only has an antenna (unless something changes) and not a spire, I feel we should acknowledged that. Why should the rule be different for this one particular building. I know we all want it to be the nations tallest, but come on, it is what it is.
The criteria for whether an antenna counts in calculating height has nothing to do with whether it is part of the original design. The criteria states that if it is an antenna, then no, if it is an architectural spire (like Trump or Chrysler) then yes. So tell me why this antenna should count when every other does not? I did not make the rules on how official heights of buildings are measured and I am not the one who decided which rules that this site would follow. I would just like to see some consistency.
Also, I had no intention of turning this into a city vs city discussion, I just used Sears because it is the other most famous tall building in America with a major antenna. I guess I could have just as easily used ESB.
But yeah, still waiting on compelling evidence on why this antenna should still be considered a spire. People used to say that the cladding that enclosed the antenna made it spire like enough to count as a spire, and I was just starting to buy that. But now the cladding is gone.