Sherman those are great shots...I love the deep blue skies, you picked a great day to go shooting! They have got to step up on the curtainwall installation. This thing is more than 2/3 to the top and they only got 3 rows of alluminum siding.

Great pictures...thanks!!!

Any chance we can get photos from a little further away? :-)

when driving down I-75 south into the city, you can see the elevator core now, but just barely

Shouldn't the core be the same height as the Chemed Building now?

Shouldn't the core be the same height as the Chemed Building now?

 

From what I could tell coming into town from KY along I-75 it was very close, if not taller.  Tough to tell exactly from that perspective though.

^If the building was located on 4th street it would be. 3rd street is lower in elevation than 4th street.

What will be the total height of QCSII with elevation? Will it really be taller than Carew Tower if you take elevation above sea level into account? For some odd reason this building is actually shorter than Carew tower because Carew tower has 49 floors, this building will have 8 fewer floors; but it's listed at 660ft? That tiara isn't that tall is it? I think this building is an illusion and Carew Tower will still be Cincinnati's true tallest building.

What will be the total height of QCSII with elevation?  Will it really be taller than Carew Tower if you take elevation above sea level into account?  For some odd reason this building is actually shorter than Carew tower because Carew tower has 49 floors, this building will have 8 fewer floors; but it's listed at 660ft?  That tiara isn't that tall is it?  I think this building is an illusion and Carew Tower will still be Cincinnati's true tallest building.

 

Carew sits at 550 feet above sea level, while QCSII is at 514 feet above sea level.  That's only 36 feet higher, elevation wise. (Got these numbers from CAGIS)

 

QCSII is supposed to be 660 feet to the top of the tiara, while Carew is 574 to the top of the roof.  QCSII is about 86 feet taller.

 

Accounting for the change in elevation, QCSII will still appear to be 50 feet taller than Carew.

 

The spire is supposed to be 160 feet, and that's pretty much what it looks like in the renderings.

Carew sits at 550 feet above sea level, while QCSII is at 514 feet.  QCSII is supposed to be about 85 feet taller (top of the crown compared to top of the roof) so after you account for the elevation change, QCSII will still be 49 feet taller.

 

The spire is supposed to be 160 feet.

 

So the height of the roof is actually 36 ft shorter than Carew Tower, now that 550 that's the roof height not the height with the spire?  I don't care about Tiaras and Spires...they are like whipped cream on a pie, you only care about the pie not the whipped cream.

Jesus Christ who cares

lol I was thinking the same thing

Ditto.

...they are like whipped cream on a pie, you only care about the pie not the whipped cream.

 

I'll take a tub of cool-whip over a pie any day!

...they are like whipped cream on a pie, you only care about the pie not the whipped cream.

 

I'll take a tub of cool-whip over a pie any day!

 

put it in the freeze first

Will the steel rise above the core?

Where is the web-cam at!?!?

I would just like to point out that the flag pole atop Carew Tower is almost 50 feet high.  This even further complicates things.

 

It's all about elevation!    Does this thread repeats itself every 72 hours?   

Only when Search is idle.

I'm hungry.  :(

Jimmy John's?

Jesus Christ who cares

 

We all do, that's why we visit forums like this to discuss/debate over buildings/architecture in and around Southwest Ohio. If you don't like it move to another webpage.

I would just like to point out that the flag pole atop Carew Tower is almost 50 feet high.  This even further complicates things.

 

 

Interesting point!

>We all do,

 

No, we don't. All this crap was discussed here and put to rest years ago. 

 

To review: an office tower is under construction. It's the biggest in Cincinnati but modest by world standards.  There is nothing innovative whatsoever about how it's being constructed or its appearance.  It's on a sloped lot.  The tower is being built on the lower part of the lot.  There is underground parking and above-ground parking. There will be minimal retail or contribution to city culture aside from a new focus to the skyline.  The companies that will occupy the tower are moving from elsewhere in downtown, creating scattered vacancies in older buildings. Phase II was built before phase I. 

 

That's pretty much it.

^ Hardcore - I like it, but I like the way the glass on this building is already looking better.  Some have said it, but the renderings are not going to do justice to the impact on the skyline.

>We all do,

 

No, we don't. All this crap was discussed here and put to rest years ago.

 

To review: an office tower is under construction. It's the biggest in Cincinnati but modest by world standards. There is nothing innovative whatsoever about how it's being constructed or its appearance. It's on a sloped lot. The tower is being built on the lower part of the lot. There is underground parking and above-ground parking. There will be minimal retail or contribution to city culture aside from a new focus to the skyline. The companies that will occupy the tower are moving from elsewhere in downtown, creating scattered vacancies in older buildings. Phase II was built before phase I.  

 

That's pretty much it.

 

QFT :D

 

There is much more of an impact on the city as a whole with the Gateway Quarter and the continued redevelopment of our city core than with Queen City Square phase I. Sure, we are building a large skyscraper, but a skyscraper does not make a city. It may make it more visually interesting to the casual passerby or to those who obsess over skyscrapers, but it alone does not add vibrancy or character to a city.

You know it's interesting they raised the core twice this week. Once on Sunday and again on Friday! Will this be a new pattern or are they trying to get more steel up so they can tie the crane down for another raise next week?

"...but a skyscraper does not make a city."

 

There are many city builders who would argue that in fact skyscrapers make cities worse.

^ Skyscrapers are "power" expressed architecturally.  There are few places in the world where demand actually merits construction of skyscrapers. 

At the end of the day, what matters is the strength of the climate downtown and to the extent that Queen City Square helps in that regard, I feel positive towards it.  My hope is that wit the vacancy that this helps to create in other buildings that this will spur additional investment in attracting companies to those properties.

If New York and Washington are considered the #1 and #2 most powerful cities in the country, it's interesting that that one has 400 skyscrapers and the other has zero. LA only has a handful of office towers bigger than Queen City Square. 

 

 

There are much bigger skyscraper geeks (said with love) on here than I, but did NYC build any skyline transforming skyscrapers since 9/11? Philadelphia has caught skyscraper mania with 2 or 3 serious additions to Center City plus a couple other seriously transformative buildings. Chicago was going to do a lot but how many of them are going to come to fruition.

 

QCS is a valuable investment and it is a summation of a career for the generation that is disappearing at Western Southern and the Lindner crowd. This is a heavy anchor for the continued significance of dt, while the investments in OTR represent the desire for whole city to thrive, we need both.

>We all do,

 

No, we don't. All this crap was discussed here and put to rest years ago.

 

To review: an office tower is under construction. It's the biggest in Cincinnati but modest by world standards. There is nothing innovative whatsoever about how it's being constructed or its appearance. It's on a sloped lot. The tower is being built on the lower part of the lot. There is underground parking and above-ground parking. There will be minimal retail or contribution to city culture aside from a new focus to the skyline. The companies that will occupy the tower are moving from elsewhere in downtown, creating scattered vacancies in older buildings. Phase II was built before phase I.  

 

That's pretty much it.

 

One fact you left out.  If you are 77 years of age or younger, you have no memory of any other building being taller than Carew. 

 

To put things in perspective:

Cincinnatians who could possibly remembered Carew not being the tallest: 16,499

Cincinnatians who know of no building taller than Carew: 316,837

My grandparents who are still alive knew a variety of people who worked on the construction of the Carew Tower.  My great-grandfather who was born in 1898 and died in 1998 recalled swimming in the canal as a boy, but oddly never mentioned subway construction, despite his having been raised a block from it. 

If New York and Washington are considered the #1 and #2 most powerful cities in the country, it's interesting that that one has 400 skyscrapers and the other has zero. LA only has a handful of office towers bigger than Queen City Square.

 

 

 

That is interesting.  There are completely different architectural depictions of what one could call corporate/economic power, and political/government power. 

If New York and Washington are considered the #1 and #2 most powerful cities in the country, it's interesting that that one has 400 skyscrapers and the other has zero. LA only has a handful of office towers bigger than Queen City Square.

 

 

 

That is interesting. There are completely different architectural depictions of what one could call corporate/economic power, and political/government power.

 

That got me thinking, what is the tallest government owned building in the country?

If New York and Washington are considered the #1 and #2 most powerful cities in the country, it's interesting that that one has 400 skyscrapers and the other has zero. LA only has a handful of office towers bigger than Queen City Square. 

 

 

 

That is interesting.  There are completely different architectural depictions of what one could call corporate/economic power, and political/government power. 

 

That got me thinking, what is the tallest government owned building in the country?

 

According to http://www.ctbuh.org/Portals/0/Tallest/CTBUH_TallestClockGovernmentPalace.pdf, The Philadelphia City Hall building is the Tallest government-owned building. Although.... that site doesn't specify if it includes building owned by the gov and used by private parties.

The World Trade Center towers were built by the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey.  Business leaders forced them to lease something like 10% of the space to government agencies in order to reduce competition with privately owned buildings.  The towers were sold at some point, but I couldn't quickly find the date.  Here's an article from 1995 about a potential sale, so it happened sometime between then and the attack: http://www.nytimes.com/1995/05/07/nyregion/world-trade-center-sale-is-reconsidered.html

 

 

The WTC was leased to Silverstein Properties three months before the 9/11 attacks.  I think Silverstein has a 99 year lease on the property.  Yet the Port Authority still owns the site.  Hence the frequent delays in construction. 

 

Anyway back on topic...  Core is at 33, floors are at 27ish.  I think it's taller than Chemed and the Atriums, but don't know about Scripps tower.  They should be raising the crane any day now...

 

Oh yea and when is the web cam on the moon going to come back!!?  :-p

If New York and Washington are considered the #1 and #2 most powerful cities in the country, it's interesting that that one has 400 skyscrapers and the other has zero. LA only has a handful of office towers bigger than Queen City Square.

 

 

 

That is interesting. There are completely different architectural depictions of what one could call corporate/economic power, and political/government power.

 

That got me thinking, what is the tallest government owned building in the country?

 

According to http://www.ctbuh.org/Portals/0/Tallest/CTBUH_TallestClockGovernmentPalace.pdf, The Philadelphia City Hall building is the Tallest government-owned building. Although.... that site doesn't specify if it includes building owned by the gov and used by private parties.

 

I know offhand the Rhodes state office tower in Columbus is taller than Philadelphia City Hall.

The World Trade Center towers were built by the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey.  Business leaders forced them to lease something like 10% of the space to government agencies in order to reduce competition with privately owned buildings.  The towers were sold at some point, but I couldn't quickly find the date.  Here's an article from 1995 about a potential sale, so it happened sometime between then and the attack:

 

Larry Silverstein, of Silverstein Properties, who built 7 World Trade Center in 1980, signed an agreement with the Port Authority to lease the towers on July 24, 2001:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Silverstein

Good lord. I come here for some pic updates and I read 2 pages of useless bickering. Too many chefs in the kitchen...lol

Where do you live these days Ronnie?

 

I'm in Cincinnati visiting, and I've just been modifying my routes so I can drive by the site instead of looking for pictures...It's quite novel since I'm usually 980 miles away.

Hey Ronnie I got these for you! From today 11-01-09.  They were raising the crane another 80ft today, woot!  I'd say the core is at a good 450ft now, because it almost looks the same height as the Scripps center but maybe a little shorter.  Also I believe they are on the 30th level with steel and level 34 with the core! Someone correct me if I'm wrong?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

that's going to look really cool coming over the cut in the hill

^  It already does!!!!!!!

Nice pictures Dirty.

 

I wish the front had more articulation, like the side. It's looking rather flat. The curtain wall is nice enough, but would really look cool with some more ins-and-outs.

Nice pictures Dirty.

 

I wish the front had more articulation, like the side. It's looking rather flat. The curtain wall is nice enough, but would really look cool with some more ins-and-outs.

 

I think all the "articulation" will be towards the top when they add the tiara and such.  But yeah the front does sort of look blah!

 

 

Anybody know when that darn webcam is going back up? Geez it's been out for awhile now!

 

Looks to me like they're on the 27th with the steel and 31st with the core based on those photos... Compared to the renderings it looks like there's still plenty more to go...