Category Proposal: Skyscrapers

[+beopots]

now, there are no skyscrapers in utah, mostly sagebrush. but this would be a good idea, yes? no?

[+JimmyEv]

There's two skyscrapers in Houston with Sky Lobbies open to the public. Both give really good views of different parts of downtown. I thought they might fit into the 'Cityscapes' but, since both are banks, cameras aren't allowed inside. And they're only 1100 feet apart. So maybe there should be a catefory for skyscrapers.

[OpinioNate]

Great idea. Here are some variable suggestions:

 

Building Name

Use (office, residential, both)

Year Built

Roof Height

Pinnacle Height (if applicable)

 

The commonly accepted minimum height for a skyscraper is 500 feet.

[+BruceS]

Great idea. Here are some variable suggestions:

 

Building Name

Use (office, residential, both)

Year Built

Roof Height

Pinnacle Height (if applicable)

 

The commonly accepted minimum height for a skyscraper is 500 feet.

 

A good source of this information is Emporis Buildings. Using the 500 ft (152 meters) rule sure cuts down on my available buildings

[+ChapterhouseInc]

what about access to the public/methods of ascending to top (cost involved)?

[+Corp Of Discovery]

Perhaps historic skyscapers could be included (many older ones would not meet the 500' requirement).

[+JimmyEv]

Architect or design firm might make a good variable. Historic skyscrapers like the ones in Chicago are usually on the NRHP.

[OpinioNate]

Perhaps historic skyscapers could be included (many older ones would not meet the 500' requirement).

 

By the way, this is the *generally accepted* guideline for the title "skyscraper". You can pick whatever height restrictions you like.

[+Corp Of Discovery]

Perhaps historic skyscapers could be included (many older ones would not meet the 500' requirement).

 

By the way, this is the *generally accepted* guideline for the title "skyscraper". You can pick whatever height restrictions you like.

 

I think the 500' limit is a good idea, in general. When 'skyscrapers' started appearing a height of 200'+ would have been considered one tho. I would not open the category up to all such buildings but limit it to perhaps ones that held the record for tallest and ones that were landmarks in the developement of tall buildings. I don't think there are too many additonal buildings that would be added with those criteria and it would make the category more educational and interesting IMO.

[+JimmyEv]

I created a group for skyscrapers. Anyone that wants to join can click here:

 

http://www.Waymarking.com/groups/details.a...=Rinaghiu"

 

This is what I've got so far. Any suggestions are welcome.

 

Skyscrapers: Any building over 500 feet or 150 meters tall.

 

Skyscrapers define the modern city. Most cities can be recognized from the skyscrapers in their skyline. When you see the Sears Tower, you immediately think of Chicago; the Empire State Building represents New York City; the Prudential Building is most definately San Francisco. Almost every major city has its unique collection of skyscrapers.

 

Early skyscrapers were built with a base, shaft and crown with Beaux Arts or Classical Revival details. This morphed into Art Deco skyscrapers, which emphasized their verticality and usually had stepped set-backs. After World War II the International Style, basically glass or concrete boxes with little detail, became popular. As a reaction to the utilitarianism of the International Style, extravagant Post-Modern buildings became the latest trend in designing skyscrapers.

 

To list your skyscraper, make sure it’s listed at http://www.emporis.com/en/ . The height of the building at Emporis will be used to determine the structure’s height.

 

In the long description, include any interesting details about the building. Two photographs are required: One showing the skyscraper’s position in the city’s skyline, a second showing the skyscraper itself.

 

To visit this waymark, you must provide a description of your experience and add one photograph (taken by you) of any part of the skyscraper to the gallery. This photograph doesn’t have to have either you or your gps in it.

 

Variables included will be:

Building Name

Structure Height (from Emporis)

Floors

Year Built

Style (Beaux Arts, Classical Revival, Art Deco, International Style, Post-Modern)

Architect/Design Firm

Use (residential, office)

Publicly accessible areas

Hours

Cost

[+Jake39]

There is already a group for TALL BUILDINGS (Skyscrapers)

[Rayman]

There is already a group for TALL BUILDINGS (Skyscrapers)

 

But it's not visible in the directory?

[+JimmyEv]

This is annoying. I thought there'd be a category for skyscrapers, but couldn't find any groups or a category. So I searched the forums and dug up this thread. And there was one all along.

 

I haven't been doing this very long. Is there a way to make sure you're not creating a category/group that's already been created?

[+Jake39]

Category Status: The Skyscrapers category has been created (without variables).

The "Category" was created April 15th

Owner hasn't signed into "it" since May 8th.

There are only 3 officers in the group.

 

I contacted the "Category" owner about it but have not received an answer.

 

If I don't hear from him by to-morrow I will resign as an "Officer" and the "Category" will be put on probation at which time I would suggest you get yours up for "Peer" review.

I'll join to give you enough "Officers"

[+The Blue Quasar]

JimmyEv Posted Today, 03:12 PM

This is annoying. I thought there'd be a category for skyscrapers, but couldn't find any groups or a category. So I searched the forums and dug up this thread. And there was one all along.

 

I haven't been doing this very long. Is there a way to make sure you're not creating a category/group that's already been created? unsure.gif

 

There was talk (mostly by me) that the same 'up to five HTML tags' should be tied to the Group as well. It would allow people to use the same Directory Search for Categories AND Groups that might apply.

 

The Blue Quasar

[+chstress53]

jake 39

 

You always could call for a vote from the other officer to demote the leader.If you and the other officer vote to demote you as second take oveer the lead and then all you have to do is bring someone else aboard. The Category would not be on probation just that the leader is now an officer, because he can be demoted if the two of you vote him to be.

 

Something is strange though. The log in on the Category Management page say neither the leader or the other officer has logged on since April & May respectively, but when you click on their profile directly underneath their name it says they last logged in (to Waymarking(on Oct 25, 2006

Edited October 28, 2006 by chstress53