Huntsville's height restriction (versus, land, location)

[HsvMike]

Originally Posted by Huntsville_secede

Yes considering Monte Sano is a foothill and not an actual mountain its more of a bump but still looks pretty beautiful.

I agree, Monte Sano does look great. It's just that the City and Chamber is trying to draw people in from all over the country. To me, it is impressive because I come from a place that is very flat, but I am used to a lot taller buildings and skyscrapers. People coming from places that have tall buildings and huge mountains would be even more disappointed at the downtown area, IMO.

I can see where the decision makers in Hsv are coming from that they want to maintain the look and feel of downtown, but if Huntsville wants to be a player in the country / world market then they have got to make Hsv look like a leader.

I agree I can see a lot of people thinking that University Drive or Research Park is the downtown area. And I really doubt Hsv wants that. All that would do is drive more and more businesses out of the downtown area and make it more of a ghost town than it already is.

[deesonic]

Originally Posted by HsvMike

A lot of people that lived by some actual mountains would disagree with Monte Sano being a skyline. Compared to other mountains, it could be mistaken as a speed bump. We need a more modern skyline to Hsv. Or is this just another northerner trying to change the way of life down here. Hmmmmm.

Well, I've lived in Denver and Los Angeles, so I know what real mountains look like. Nevertheless, Monte Sano and our "speed bumps" are actually a very nice and green backdrop for our city. Especially after cruising in from the dreadfully flat western Madison County or Limestone. A nice skyline would look great up against it, similar to Chattanooga maybe minus the river.

And University Drive as downtown? Ack!!! It's a billboard littered traffic magnet. You can't exactly get out and stroll around University Drive.

[Charles]

Will sky be limit downtown? - al.com

[HSVbulldawg]

Originally Posted by Huntsville_secede

Yes considering Monte Sano is a foothill and not an actual mountain its more of a bump but still looks pretty beautiful. Monte Sano is probably around 1700 feet MSL at its highest point. Compare that to say Pike's Peak in Colorado which is over 14,000 feet MSL and there really is no comparison.

Pike's Peak is really a foothill when you compare it to, say, Mount Everest which is over 29,000 feet. There really is no comparison.

My point is, so what? Monte Sano can still be a mountain just like Pike's Peak can still be a mountain.

[HSVbulldawg]

I heard, and this may not be true, that there is a natural limit to the height of the buildings in downtown Huntsville because of all of the caves underneath the ground in that area.

Anyone else hear that?

[Huntsville_secede]

Originally Posted by HSVbulldawg

Pike's Peak is really a foothill when you compare it to, say, Mount Everest which is over 29,000 feet. There really is no comparison.

My point is, so what? Monte Sano can still be a mountain just like Pike's Peak can still be a mountain.

Not really this is flawed logic, Pike's Peak is not a foothill when you compare it to Mount Everest. Mount Everest is the tallest mountain in the world.. Pike Peak is still about half the height of Mount Everest so it actually does compare. Monte Sano on the other hand is 1600 feet while Pike's Peak is over 14,000 feet almost ten times higher than Monte Sano. FYI its not the height alone that defines an area of land as a foothill. Have you been to Pike's peak? See it and you will see why its classified as a mountain and why Monte Sano is a foothill/Mesa. Ask a geologist if Monte Sano is a "mountain".

[DvlsAdvc8]

In the next 20 years, does anyone really expect that anything in the Huntsville skyline is going to compete with Monte Sano?

Build or don't build; the mountain, and whether its a foothill or a mountain is completely irrelevant. It's a big freakin' mostly impassable lump of rock... qualifies as a mountain in my book - and I've lived in Denver. I'm not a geologist, so actual geologic terms don't really matter much to me. Besides, "go over the hill" might be appropriate for describing driving down my street, but it is entirely inadequate in reference to Monte Sano.

More relevant IMO, is that cities ought to strive for efficient use of land - rather than this sub-urban sprawling non-sense we see. I noticed fairly recently that the Huntsville city limits extend all the way out to I-65 in two places... now that doesn't make any sense to me.

[Huntsville_secede]

Originally Posted by DvlsAdvc8

In the next 20 years, does anyone really expect that anything in the Huntsville skyline is going to compete with Monte Sano?

Build or don't build; the mountain, and whether its a foothill or a mountain is completely irrelevant. It's a big freakin' mostly impassable lump of rock... qualifies as a mountain in my book - and I've lived in Denver. I'm not a geologist, so actual geologic terms don't really matter much to me. Besides, "go over the hill" might be appropriate for describing driving down my street, but it is entirely inadequate in reference to Monte Sano.

More relevant IMO, is that cities ought to strive for efficient use of land - rather than this sub-urban sprawling non-sense we see. I noticed fairly recently that the Huntsville city limits extend all the way out to I-65 in two places... now that doesn't make any sense to me.

I'm not saying that Huntsville would build something that would compete with Monte Sano skyline somebody else suggested that ridiculous idea in an earlier post that's how we got on this subject about Monte Sano. Regardless of what you think or not Monte Sano is not a mountain by the correct technical definition regardless of what we decide to call it I do agree that it might as well be considered one due to its apperance and I sometimes call it mountain by convience although generally people saying stuff that's incorrect just irritates me. My post was just responding to the incorrect notion by KE(HSVBullDawg)that somehow Pike's Pike is a foothill but back to the real topic I'm with you on the sprawl and inefficient use of land by Huntsville, we need to develop some character which starts with downtown.

[friday13]

Originally Posted by Huntsville_secede

..was just responding to the incorrect notion by KE(HSVBullDawg)

this is gonna make one of them unhappy with the association:

KE=A&M Bulldawg (the man with a 1000 well-thought questions)

HSVBulldawg=just another innocent poster

[HSVbulldawg]

Originally Posted by Huntsville_secede

Not really this is flawed logic, Pike's Peak is not a foothill when you compare it to Mount Everest. Mount Everest is the tallest mountain in the world.. Pike Peak is still about half the height of Mount Everest so it actually does compare. Monte Sano on the other hand is 1600 feet while Pike's Peak is over 14,000 feet almost ten times higher than Monte Sano. FYI its not the height alone that defines an area of land as a foothill. Have you been to Pike's peak? See it and you will see why its classified as a mountain and why Monte Sano is a foothill/Mesa. Ask a geologist if Monte Sano is a "mountain".

Actually I just applied your logic in the same manner to Pike's Peak vs. Mount Everest.

Have you ever asked a geologist what a mountain is? If you haven't, why are you getting so self-righteous?