HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #4961  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2012, 1:48 AM
simms3_redux's Avatar
simms3_redux simms3_redux is online now
She needs her space
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 2,454
Quote:
Originally Posted by scania View Post
Let's be respectful. This forum is about skyscrapers. There are people that are fascinated with the height of buildings, as well as other aspects of buildings. Saying that's stupid is harsh and unnecessary.
Really?
     
     
  #4962  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2012, 2:42 AM
ChadK's Avatar
ChadK ChadK is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by simms3_redux View Post
Really?
I thought it was rude. Just saying.
     
     
  #4963  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2012, 3:33 AM
RudyJK RudyJK is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Atlanta GA
Posts: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by simms3_redux View Post
Really?
Considering this forum practically requires building heights to be discussed in the 'Buildings' pages, then calling someone stupid for discussing building heights is disrespectful. (And, dare I say it? Stupid.)

Anyhow, do you think the preservationists will be up in arms at the mere suggestion than an IM PEI (gasp!) building be demolished for a new development...whatever it's projected height?
     
     
  #4964  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2012, 3:52 AM
A-town's Avatar
A-town A-town is offline
Born and raised
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 456
Skyhouse impact on the skyline



__________________
Capital of the south
     
     
  #4965  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2012, 7:29 AM
Dustinto Dustinto is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by RudyJK View Post
Considering this forum practically requires building heights to be discussed in the 'Buildings' pages, then calling someone stupid for discussing building heights is disrespectful. (And, dare I say it? Stupid.
First thing, he didn't call the guy stupid. He simply said that worrying about the height of a development is stupid. Which I agree that it is stupid (or maybe silly is a better word to use) in this environment. It's not the hay day when all the plans were for 50 story office building high rises (that mostly didn't get built). We have to take the 23 story residential and be happy. So, take off your troll hats and put down your keyboard pitchforks and more on.

Second thing, I've seen the Skyhouse Orlando plans from 6/5/2012 and the building is NOT 357'. It is taller than Skyhouse Atlanta, because the typical floor to floor height is 9' - 10" instead of 9' - 7". My guess is local building codes require different slab thicknesses. The top of roof elevation is 262' - 3". There is a little more crown above that (I didnt see a dimension in the plans), but I'd guess 265' is about right on the money.

     
     
  #4966  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2012, 10:26 AM
scania's Avatar
scania scania is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA (DTLA)/Atlanta, Ga. (Midtown)
Posts: 2,486
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dustinto View Post
First thing, he didn't call the guy stupid. He simply said that worrying about the height of a development is stupid. Which I agree that it is stupid (or maybe silly is a better word to use) in this environment. It's not the hay day when all the plans were for 50 story office building high rises (that mostly didn't get built). We have to take the 23 story residential and be happy. So, take off your troll hats and put down your keyboard pitchforks and more on.

Second thing, I've seen the Skyhouse Orlando plans from 6/5/2012 and the building is NOT 357'. It is taller than Skyhouse Atlanta, because the typical floor to floor height is 9' - 10" instead of 9' - 7". My guess is local building codes require different slab thicknesses. The top of roof elevation is 262' - 3". There is a little more crown above that (I didnt see a dimension in the plans), but I'd guess 265' is about right on the money.

Interesting. He said it was stupid to be concerned with the height of the building. Even though you agreed, you reply with a post with additional information concerning the height. Which is why we all said that it was rude.
__________________
It's a beautiful day!
     
     
  #4967  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2012, 11:37 AM
simms3_redux's Avatar
simms3_redux simms3_redux is online now
She needs her space
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 2,454
Scania and Dale,

Sorry that I was rude, but I also provided additional information about the height. My stern opinion was not meant to be taken personally, but I can see how it was. Dale is a seasoned member of these boards and he and I have duked it out before. I would have assumed that at this point he could reason 2 things:

1) Residential floor heights average about 10' per floor, including slab. Non-luxury apartments have 9' ceilings, and even some luxury apartments do, so you can just add a 1' slab in between each floor. Dustinto's plans essentially proved this. Get creative...add 5' per 10 floors for a feature/mechanical at the top, add a few feet for the ground level retail and the amenity floor. Etc. If you're that obsessed with height, you should be able to do this in your head.

2) Novare does not do "different", especially when it is building 3 towers of the same name and basic design. I actually provided renderings of 2 Skyhouses and a 3rd proposed Novare tower, and myself and others have taken plenty of pictures of the current Skyhouse UC in Atlanta (and I know he follows this construction thread a good bit), so a teeny tiny research could have gone a long way. I also have to believe any amateur skyscraper enthusiast, especially in the south, would be familiar with Novare at this point. They do not stray from their designs and are masters of the pre-fab resi high-rise.

3) To reiterate Dustinto's point, this is a 23 floor bare bones apt building, not some new tallest (we'll probably never know its height here in Atl, nor was it ever even brought up). You can assume it will be significant in Orlando's skyline due to the nature of that skyline, but I'd be much more concerned with the nitty gritty. Skyhouse was very controversial in Atlanta because of its detached garage. In Orlando, you can assume it will also be detached because a podium would be a major design change, which as we established Novare does not do when it is on a roll. But will there be ground floor retail in the garage? Where will it be? What will the rates in Orlando be? What's the rental market in DT Orlando like now? How will this be integrated into the urban landscape and what impact will it have? Etc.

Again, sorry Dale and Scania.
     
     
  #4968  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2012, 3:13 PM
briantech's Avatar
briantech briantech is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by A-town View Post
From that angle it almost doesn't appear to impact the skyline at all. Its basically just blocking viewpoint.

I'm happier about the foot traffic and human density these projects will be adding.
     
     
  #4969  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2012, 3:16 PM
ATLaffinity ATLaffinity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 872
Quote:
Originally Posted by TarHeelJ View Post
Why does it look like it won't pass? I haven't been paying attention, so I may have missed something...I know TSPLOST has some naysayers, but I was thinking (hoping) that they didn't represent the majority.
A. They've done a horrible job promoting it.

B. GA doesn't exactly have a highly educated populace.
     
     
  #4970  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2012, 3:40 PM
Dustinto Dustinto is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5
Orlando's site plan shows expanded retail around the podium and 1 retail spot in the detached parking deck.


I, also, noticed that the plans call for different crowns. Atlanta is getting the rounded crown seen in one of the newer renderings and Orlando is getting the other (just based on plans that may or may not change or already changed)

Atlanta:


Orlando:
     
     
  #4971  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2012, 3:53 PM
cabasse's Avatar
cabasse cabasse is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Ἀταλάντη
Posts: 4,385
Quote:
Originally Posted by ATLaffinity View Post
A. They've done a horrible job promoting it.

B. GA doesn't exactly have a highly educated populace.
exactly. i turned my absentee ballot in, but everwhere else i see online people are just trashing it left and right. (creative loafing, various local patch news sites, mdjonline, etc)
__________________
     
     
  #4972  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2012, 3:55 PM
BlueSangha's Avatar
BlueSangha BlueSangha is offline
Topher’s 2 cents
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 944
Quote:
Originally Posted by briantech View Post
From that angle it almost doesn't appear to impact the skyline at all. Its basically just blocking viewpoint.

I'm happier about the foot traffic and human density these projects will be adding.
Impactful is not a word I would use to describe SH on the skyline. To me it's merely background noise. That said, I do agree with the statement in regards to density and foot traffic, that excites me. I love what midtown has become over the years.
__________________
Enjoy the journey...
     
     
  #4973  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2012, 4:07 PM
jnihiser jnihiser is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 302
Interesting you would say that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ATLaffinity View Post
A. They've done a horrible job promoting it.

B. GA doesn't exactly have a highly educated populace.
While I am not disagreeing with your statement (you obviously are sensing opposition to this ref) I've had a totally different experience.

My wife and I were talking about how well-funded the pro-tsplost initative seems to be. It's hard to miss the billboards, online ads, yard signs, etc.

Other than op-ed articles (which obviously require opinions from both sides of an issue), there seems to be no funded resistance to the tsplost. Additionally, the governor (a republican) appears to be supporting it.
     
     
  #4974  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2012, 4:39 PM
ChrisInmanPark ChrisInmanPark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 157
10 Atlanta Development sites to watch for new construction.

http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/news/2012/07/06/slideshow-10-atlanta-intown.html
     
     
  #4975  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2012, 4:51 PM
shivtim's Avatar
shivtim shivtim is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Midtown Atlanta
Posts: 2,623
Quote:
Originally Posted by jnihiser View Post
While I am not disagreeing with your statement (you obviously are sensing opposition to this ref) I've had a totally different experience.

My wife and I were talking about how well-funded the pro-tsplost initative seems to be. It's hard to miss the billboards, online ads, yard signs, etc.

Other than op-ed articles (which obviously require opinions from both sides of an issue), there seems to be no funded resistance to the tsplost. Additionally, the governor (a republican) appears to be supporting it.
I've seen the same. Outside of the Midtown MARTA station during the Peachtree Roadrace there were volunteers promoting the T-Splost and helping register voters. Same for Atlanta Streets Alive and other events. There was a big press conference with all of the major sports teams supporting it. There are billboards and yardsigns everywhere. I'm not saying if it will pass or not, but I think the "yes" campaign is highly visible and has been run really well so far.
     
     
  #4976  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2012, 5:46 PM
smArTaLlone smArTaLlone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 8,807
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisInmanPark View Post
Do we know that a tower is planned? Looking at the size of the site, it could easily be something around 10-stories or less.

http://www.bullrealty.com/xtras/brochure/3460-8885.pdf
     
     
  #4977  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2012, 7:09 PM
A-town's Avatar
A-town A-town is offline
Born and raised
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 456
Quote:
Originally Posted by briantech View Post
From that angle it almost doesn't appear to impact the skyline at all. Its basically just blocking viewpoint.

I'm happier about the foot traffic and human density these projects will be adding.
I think the real impact is how it's interacting with the surrounding buildings. It looks like a mini core is forming down there!
__________________
Capital of the south
     
     
  #4978  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2012, 7:29 PM
BlueSangha's Avatar
BlueSangha BlueSangha is offline
Topher’s 2 cents
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 944
Quote:
Originally Posted by smArTaLlone View Post
Do we know that a tower is planned? Looking at the size of the site, it could easily be something around 10-stories or less.

http://www.bullrealty.com/xtras/brochure/3460-8885.pdf

It's really sad the original design never got off the ground, I wonder what they did with all that work. As far as what tower is planned, it looks as though the application has been submitted, but no plans or renders have been released.
__________________
Enjoy the journey...
     
     
  #4979  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2012, 8:48 PM
simms3_redux's Avatar
simms3_redux simms3_redux is online now
She needs her space
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 2,454
All the people who are active in metro Atlanta, whether it be politicians, real estate folks, big companies/senior management, the universities, foundations, etc are doing what they can to promote TSPLOST.

Those who are against are 3 groups:

1) All the "think I know what's really best for Atlanta because I'm such a connected businessman" Republicans in the suburban counties. These are definitely your Tea Party people who just can't conceive that conservative businessmen and Republican governors could actually be for such a horrible TAX. They think that all the successful leaders in GA (whether private or public sector) are wrong for some reason.

This same group also refuses to acknowledge any facts and resorts to categorizing, generalizing, and hysteria. They lump this tax in with HOT and GA 400 tolls. They lump it in with any other tax that has produced revenue that has been mispent and subject to corruption. No denying that has happened before. They say this that and the other about this tax without having actually read the bill and without actually saying anything factually correct about it whatsoever, and there won't be any way to convince them. They seriously think all taxes are evil, except for the Fair Tax.

WHICH LEADS ME TO MY MAIN POINT::::

This is hardly different from the fair tax. This is a tax on consumption, and no necessaries like food, batteries during storm season, etc. Why are they so against this tax? Some of them already only pay 6% sales tax, and yet their schools are closing, their libraries shuttering, and obviously gridlock is the 800 pound gorilla in the room. A 25 mil property tax and 6-7% sales tax is not going to solve any problems when your county is growing by 2-4% each year! If we were moderate to slow growth region, sure, but we're not.

2) Fulton/Dekalb middle class residents who feel they already pay for this thing with higher sales tax (technically they do and they have for decades) while other counties piggyback and demand service and say without actually paying for it.

This is a contentious issue because now Fulton/Dekalb residents will be double paying for transit and for roads out in the burbs. Other counties have not been paying for transit in Fulton, but Fulton has been paying for transit that has benefited other areas in indirect ways. There is an issue of fairness here, but I hope people get over it.

Sales tax in Atlanta will now be 9%, among the highest in the nation. That's a tough pill for some to swallow, and rightly so.

I think the way to spin this (at the risk of further alienating suburban voters) is to point out that Atlanta as a city will ultimately benefit the most. This is a jobs bill and those jobs are going to be coming to the city, which will help tax rolls.

3) Poor Dekalb/South Fulton mostly minority residents. They are going to most likely have some forms of relief from this tax and the economics should not necessarily impact them, but the tax does not necessarily benefit them like it does the wealthier suburban areas and the wealthier intown areas of Fulton/Dekalb. It's not like we're building more MARTA lines through dependent neighborhoods or overhauling busses in any significant way.

Sierra Club and the NAACP are on board with this line of thought.


From WSJ today:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304830704577496503502969584.html?KEYWORDS=atlanta

I think it's doomed to fail. People are just too hung up on key thoughts like "It's not the appropriate mix of projects and won't help" or "It's a tax and should not be passed as it will be mispent" (which is entirely not true...we know what 85% of the tax will go towards and we have a citizen oversight committee), etc etc.

Untie Atlanta is catchy, but is not catching on. I am the only one I have seen with a Vote Yes July 31st/Untie Atlanta bumper sticker, and for such a hot/major issue one would expect a little more.
     
     
  #4980  
Old Posted Jul 6, 2012, 10:07 PM
cabasse's Avatar
cabasse cabasse is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Ἀταλάντη
Posts: 4,385
holy shit at all the dissent on a wsj article about this. again, i agree, it probably won't pass. your breakdown of the reasons is pretty well thought-out also, simms3.
__________________
     
     
This discussion thread continues

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

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 4:01 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.