Does that refer to you or the drill, or both?
You donât need a âpitâ for buildings like this. It is not like âslabâ residential construction, the weight of the structure is supported on deeply drilled caissons that transfer the load directly to bedrock.
Frost heave doesnât affect buildings like this. It only affects buildings whose weight is resting on soil, and around here I believe the depth is only something like 18 or 24 inches.
You would think they wouldnât need to bring one all the way from Texas.
Everything is bigger in Texas⌠once it leaves thoâŚ
Wouldnât be surprised if it heads back to Texas ASAP. Austin just started demo to get their next tallest building ready (848 ft).
Did you get a drone?
Holiday inn huh?
I canât wait for this one to be topped out. Will be the highest in that vicinity, on about 30 ft. Higher foundation than the Dillon. Anyone know the ground to crown height for this tower?
If Wikipedia is correct about the height of the Holiday Inn (239â), Raleigh Crossing will top out 24â higher at 263â according to the submittal.
I have such a hard time believing that Holiday Inn is that tall. I would think 200ft at the most. I think the Raleigh Crossings are going to look significantly taller
Iâve measured it on Google Earth and the Holiday Inn is around 200â. No idea why people have it listed higher. 301 is going to dwarf it big time.
There are antennas on top, if my memory serves, which might be counted in n, no idea how they got that number otherwise.
I could be misremembering, but I think the âofficialâ way to measure a buildingâs height is to include any and all ornamental features like crowns and such, but to ignore all non-structural / non-ornamental stuff on top (e.g. antennae / radio equipment, HVAC, etc.), because structural components and ornamentation are not typically changed, but utilitarian features like antennae are likely to be removed / replaced / upgraded one or more times during the life of the building.
One World Trade Center (Freedom Tower to some) reaches its 1776 ft height through its spire because it was deemed architectural, and not just an antenna. There was some controversy about that ruling since the spire is rather weak to many.
I am not sure if there is a difference between official height of the building, including its various architecturally significant ornamentation on the roof, and the height currently allowed under the UDO. Could a building at Raleigh crossing meet the UDO requirement, yet still have an official height many dozen feet taller with some sort of crown on it???