|

10-24-2008, 04:32 PM
|
|
Senior Member
Status:
"Nature knows no indecencies; man invents them. -M. Twain"
(set 20 days ago)
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
1,523 posts, read 1,106,525 times
Reputation: 172
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by aquila
DM sent.
|
lol ... what's with this "DM sent" ... "I just sent you a DM" ... isn't that the whole point of a DM. Is the little 4" window that pops up in the middle of your screen not enough?
|
|

10-24-2008, 04:44 PM
|
|
Senior Member
Status:
"Nature knows no indecencies; man invents them. -M. Twain"
(set 20 days ago)
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
1,523 posts, read 1,106,525 times
Reputation: 172
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by aquila
That stuff is highly subjective.
|
You just showed your knowledge on this topic. Flagpoles are ALWAYS counted. I haven't seen one yet, except for the Carew Tower.
Quote:
|
You're talking about a bunch of skyscraper enthusiasts who are always fighting to find some way of making a building taller.
|
... but arguing that a city is diverse when it's over 90% white is legit, am I right here?
Quote:
|
So if they think they can do that by including a flagpole (which is STUPID)
|
Again ... CD is not the place for this. You are in the wrong field, or you're sending your message to the wrong people. I might be wrong, but a lot of us could give a rats ass about your disagreement with the architects differences.
Quote:
|
Hell, if that's the case, a rollercoaster's true height could be measured to the top of the sign which reads "Remain seated at all times" at the end of the lifthill. That could add a whole additional 10' to the height of the rollercoaster.
|
Ridiculous comparison. Nowhere close.
Quote:
|
Stupid to do that, though, because it's not actually what the designer had in mind as part of the ride's height.
|
Actually it is ... those flagpoles are drawn into the design just as much as a floor is. There's this awesome new site called google.
Quote:
|
Same thing with a flagpole at the top of a skyscraper. I highly doubt the designer's official height includes such spurious things.
|
... again, lack of knowledge here.
Quote:
|
Nevermind that the official press release stated it would be 660'. Why are you guys fighting this so much, when the info is clearly out there.
|
Much like the press release for One Kansas City Place? Riiiiiight. I'll tell you what, why don't you come back here when you get an email straight from the developers stating the the building will in no way cross the 660' benchmark. You can post any news source you want, and I'll show you an error in that distributers journalism. Happens all of the time. Welcome to the real world.
Quote:
EDIT: Something you might want to consider....why did Ronnie draw the diagram of GAI showing it at 660'? Where did he get the information that would lead him to conclude that was the height of the building
|
This was a great "edit" .... EXCEPT that it wasn't from Ronnie!!!! LOL!!!!!!!!!
BTW, I heard West Chester got another hispanic today.

|
|

10-24-2008, 06:10 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2006
945 posts, read 666,946 times
Reputation: 285
|
|
Quote:
|
What are you talking about? Too bad for Carew Tower what? What happened to Carew Tower? Do you mean because it's no longer going to be the tallest in the city? So what? Why does that suddenly diminish Cincinnati's skyline?
|
Because, if you are talking about the "aesthetics" of a skyline, Cincinnati had a nearly perfect one with two great older skyscrapers, Carew Tower and Central Trust (or whatever it was called), clustered together as the higher towers. Their designs werent that bulky, either, so they read as spires.
This new thing with that wierd top is going to detract from the skyline. And its too bulky, though they did design it to mask that & make it read more verticle.
|
|

10-24-2008, 06:50 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
1,076 posts, read 1,018,749 times
Reputation: 138
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JefferyT
Because, if you are talking about the "aesthetics" of a skyline, Cincinnati had a nearly perfect one with two great older skyscrapers, Carew Tower and Central Trust (or whatever it was called), clustered together as the higher towers. Their designs werent that bulky, either, so they read as spires.
This new thing with that wierd top is going to detract from the skyline. And its too bulky, though they did design it to mask that & make it read more verticle.
|
cincinnati has to get bigger sometime, especially in cincinnati, where you rarely ever know when "sometime" is.
|
|

10-24-2008, 10:43 PM
|
|
City Boy in The 'Burbs
Status:
"Sigh...back in Reston."
(set 7 hours ago)
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Reston, VA ---> Pittsburgh, PA (Hopefully in 2010)
16,748 posts, read 14,929,747 times
Reputation: 5267
|
|
I'm not leaving the Ohio forum until aquila and Cincy-Rise hug! 
|
|

10-25-2008, 02:54 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Cleveland
2,348 posts, read 2,205,282 times
Reputation: 279
|
|
|
I dont plan in on joining into this childish argument that this thread has become, I have no desire to and dont have time.
But Just to add one thing. BP is much taller than Carew Tower. If you are seriously going to say its taller because its 12 inches more because of a virtual twig sticking out of the top, youve got to be out of your mind. Flag poles are not part of the structure and shoudlnt even be counted. Current 5 tallest buildings in Ohio: 1. Key Tower 2. Terminal Tower 3. BP 4. Rhodes Tower 5. Carew Tower.
Last edited by BelieveInCleve; 10-25-2008 at 03:03 AM..
|
|

10-25-2008, 10:53 AM
|
|
Senior Member
Status:
"Nature knows no indecencies; man invents them. -M. Twain"
(set 20 days ago)
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
1,523 posts, read 1,106,525 times
Reputation: 172
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cle440
BP is much taller than Carew Tower. If you are seriously going to say its taller because its 12 inches more because of a virtual twig sticking out of the top, youve got to be out of your mind. Flag poles are not part of the structure and shoudlnt even be counted. Current 5 tallest buildings in Ohio: 1. Key Tower 2. Terminal Tower 3. BP 4. Rhodes Tower 5. Carew Tower.
|
Regardless of semantics, the list above will have to be updated ... and that my friend is more reflective of what the reality is with our cities and their future.
Quote:
I dont plan in on joining into this childish argument that this thread has become, I have no desire to and dont have time.
But Just to add one thing.
|
In other words, you do (but you want the last word). 
|
|

10-25-2008, 10:56 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
1,076 posts, read 1,018,749 times
Reputation: 138
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cle440
I dont plan in on joining into this childish argument that this thread has become, I have no desire to and dont have time.
But Just to add one thing. BP is much taller than Carew Tower. If you are seriously going to say its taller because its 12 inches more because of a virtual twig sticking out of the top, youve got to be out of your mind. Flag poles are not part of the structure and shoudlnt even be counted. Current 5 tallest buildings in Ohio: 1. Key Tower 2. Terminal Tower 3. BP 4. Rhodes Tower 5. Carew Tower.
|
that's an opinion, cle440. ask yourself, have you ever seen carew without a flagpole? do you have proof that it was a late addition, or added post-construction? would it be the same building without it? the flagpole is a part of the building; the flagpole completes the concept of an art-deco classic sitting majestically over the river. you present links and such, and expect them to be taken seriously, but when someone else provides support for their argument, you dismiss them upon opinion claimed as fact. i've noticed this pattern.
oh yea...what other building has a flagpole with the kind of iconic status of carew?
|
|

10-25-2008, 10:57 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
1,076 posts, read 1,018,749 times
Reputation: 138
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cincy-Rise
In other words, you do (but you want the last word). 
|
haha, that's a good point.
|
|

10-25-2008, 12:40 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Cleveland
2,348 posts, read 2,205,282 times
Reputation: 279
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by hillside
that's an opinion, cle440. ask yourself, have you ever seen carew without a flagpole? do you have proof that it was a late addition, or added post-construction? would it be the same building without it? the flagpole is a part of the building; the flagpole completes the concept of an art-deco classic sitting majestically over the river. you present links and such, and expect them to be taken seriously, but when someone else provides support for their argument, you dismiss them upon opinion claimed as fact. i've noticed this pattern.
oh yea...what other building has a flagpole with the kind of iconic status of carew?
|
Let me just ask you one thing. Are you seriously calling Carew Tower taller than the BP building because the "flagpole" is 1 foot taller? wait, I dont think you heard me right, I said "flag pole" and "1 FOOT aka 12 inches" Not to mention emporis, which is basically the official site, has the carew tower listed at 574 ft, all you could find was a single graph and how am I supposed to even know if thats true?. Ive seen flag poles sticking out of the ground and 30 ft buildings, and the ground doesnt all of a sudden become 40 ft tall, or the building 70, you see what I mean?.
The actual structure of the BP building is 658 ft tall, nearly 90 ft taller than the Carew Tower. This is not one of the instances where the stats dont agree with my point so Im arguing (which 9/10 of the people on here do also), even you cant deny that saying the Carew Tower is taller is flat out ridiculous. If you say its taller, I have nothing further to discuss with you on this topic.
|
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
|
|