"Alternate" highpoint for IL

"Alternate" highpoint for IL

Joined: April 5th, 2006, 2:05 pm

April 5th, 2006, 2:49 pm #1

This subject has probably been brought up in the past: The owners of the IL hp and OH hp have been 'difficult' (to use a politically correct term; btw OH is closed on Sundays). So: I would submit that the highpoint of a state is THE HIGHEST POINT, manmade or natural! We highpointers do not condone trespassing; so to heck with the Wuebbels(sp?) in IL; because the Sears Tower Skydeck is OVER 714 FEET higher in elevation than their sorry little hill in NW BFE Illinois...for only $11.95, not only do you get the highpoint of IL, but an incredible view, close lodging, good food, and a great time in Chicago...

Of course, the manmade highpoint would be an "alternate". If you hit the natural one, then fine; but remember, this 'sport' is about enjoying oneself and that will include pristine natural areas as well as beautiful views of some cities (personally, I wish that Delaware had a building that was 20' or 30' taller, because the trailer park that I went to...was less than spectacular...)

There are 6 places where alternates would apply:
FL: hp elev:345' Four Seasons Hotel(Miami) building height is 789'+7' for mean land level=796' (451' difference!)
IL: Sears Tower Skydeck is taller by 714'
IN: Hoosier Hill=1257' but Chase Tower(Indianapolis)=1528' (271'difference)
LA:hp=535'; One Shell Square(New Orleans)=708'(173'difference)
OH: hp=1550'; Key Tower(Cleveland)1637' (87' difference)
Wash.DC: hp=429'; Washington Monument Observation deck:515' (86' difference)

IL & DC are measurements to the observation deck.
All of these measurements include the mean elevation of the city in their height.
If, generally, we can agree on this, then it might take a little more research on the four other buildings to determine what the highest level the public can reach in the buildings in question.

Lastly, there are a LOT more opportunities for enjoyment and entertainment in each of these cases instead of travelling to B.F.E. IL, IN, FL, OH, and even Louisiana... I've been to IN, OH, & LA, and if you read anything about IL or FL, you'll know that you're not missing ANYTHING if you tag the "alternate" highpoint. (LA was...mildly interesting, nothing more)

Lastly, for the purists, if you get the 'natural' highpoint...it still counts...

I would appreciate the thoughts of the forum!
I have been to 22 highpoints so far with 5 more to be done this year.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 21st, 2004, 3:15 pm

April 5th, 2006, 3:34 pm #2

Manmade structures - an interesting concept which has been discussed before. Somewhere laying around I think I have a list of highest manmade structures in each state which someone prepared. Please continue your research and submit it for publication!

Regarding your so-called "difficult" highpoints, just wait until you try WA or AK! Those highpoints are off-limits most of the year and even when they are open it is to visit the top.

A couple private owners have tried an totally open access, only to have incidents require them to restrict. Although never ideal, access is what it is. During the course of time, access constricts and expands, for both government and private HPs. There was a time when it was amusing to complain about that, but now there's a realization that progress and accommodation can be made.

Your concerns are noted, and as a Club we are certainly taking it seriously and reaching out to our friends, the HP owners (all 50).

FYI, for most of the past 50 years, IL has had some sort of restriction. I have old letterhead from the 1960's showing the open dates. And then there was a nominal admission fee. As for Ohio, read the Club Directory about Sunday access.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 26th, 2004, 6:29 pm

April 5th, 2006, 3:38 pm #3

This subject has probably been brought up in the past: The owners of the IL hp and OH hp have been 'difficult' (to use a politically correct term; btw OH is closed on Sundays). So: I would submit that the highpoint of a state is THE HIGHEST POINT, manmade or natural! We highpointers do not condone trespassing; so to heck with the Wuebbels(sp?) in IL; because the Sears Tower Skydeck is OVER 714 FEET higher in elevation than their sorry little hill in NW BFE Illinois...for only $11.95, not only do you get the highpoint of IL, but an incredible view, close lodging, good food, and a great time in Chicago...

Of course, the manmade highpoint would be an "alternate". If you hit the natural one, then fine; but remember, this 'sport' is about enjoying oneself and that will include pristine natural areas as well as beautiful views of some cities (personally, I wish that Delaware had a building that was 20' or 30' taller, because the trailer park that I went to...was less than spectacular...)

There are 6 places where alternates would apply:
FL: hp elev:345' Four Seasons Hotel(Miami) building height is 789'+7' for mean land level=796' (451' difference!)
IL: Sears Tower Skydeck is taller by 714'
IN: Hoosier Hill=1257' but Chase Tower(Indianapolis)=1528' (271'difference)
LA:hp=535'; One Shell Square(New Orleans)=708'(173'difference)
OH: hp=1550'; Key Tower(Cleveland)1637' (87' difference)
Wash.DC: hp=429'; Washington Monument Observation deck:515' (86' difference)

IL & DC are measurements to the observation deck.
All of these measurements include the mean elevation of the city in their height.
If, generally, we can agree on this, then it might take a little more research on the four other buildings to determine what the highest level the public can reach in the buildings in question.

Lastly, there are a LOT more opportunities for enjoyment and entertainment in each of these cases instead of travelling to B.F.E. IL, IN, FL, OH, and even Louisiana... I've been to IN, OH, & LA, and if you read anything about IL or FL, you'll know that you're not missing ANYTHING if you tag the "alternate" highpoint. (LA was...mildly interesting, nothing more)

Lastly, for the purists, if you get the 'natural' highpoint...it still counts...

I would appreciate the thoughts of the forum!
I have been to 22 highpoints so far with 5 more to be done this year.
I guess my thoughts are that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I enjoyed the pastoral view from the IL natural highpoint than the urban sprawl I viewed from the Sears Tower.

Even though some highpoints have less than stellar views, I find that to be part of the unique charm of this hobby. I like the variation. I feel if all you want are high-altitude views, then just go to high places. Nobody is twisting an arm (I think?) to visit all 50 highpoints, so just go where you wanna go.

Don't get me wrong, I love the mountains, and that is my preferred place to be (well, OK, maybe a tropical beach), but being the compulsive listmaker and peakbagger I am...I gotta go to Florida's (and others) highpoint.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: April 5th, 2006, 2:05 pm

April 5th, 2006, 3:57 pm #4

I heartily agree with your enjoyment of natural settings as opposed to city-scapes. That is one of my reasons for getting into this hobby. I also enjoy travelling 'the road less travelled', so I concur.

My original message would only suggest 'alternate' highpoints that offer something different and more exciting (in some ways).

I am thoroughly an outdoor enthusiast as are most in this 'sport'. But many people might like to introduce both convenience and variety into it. Rather than try to schedule a trip to Illinois for one out of only four weekends of the year to visit the over-protective Wuebbels' 100-miles-from-nowhere cow-pasture (which apparently is largely unremarkable from any other of the 100,000 cow pastures in the state ); we can visit the Sears tower on any day, almost any time and be welcomed!

I enjoyed the Louisiana hp; and probably would not 'trade' it for a building in New Orleans (which undoubtedly is a fun city). But the FL neighborhood, and maybe even the non-descript IN hill might be ones that I would substitute if given a chance to visit the cities mentioned previously. Just a thought, in my humble opinion only.

Thank you for your thoughts!
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: April 5th, 2006, 2:05 pm

April 5th, 2006, 4:09 pm #5

Manmade structures - an interesting concept which has been discussed before. Somewhere laying around I think I have a list of highest manmade structures in each state which someone prepared. Please continue your research and submit it for publication!

Regarding your so-called "difficult" highpoints, just wait until you try WA or AK! Those highpoints are off-limits most of the year and even when they are open it is to visit the top.

A couple private owners have tried an totally open access, only to have incidents require them to restrict. Although never ideal, access is what it is. During the course of time, access constricts and expands, for both government and private HPs. There was a time when it was amusing to complain about that, but now there's a realization that progress and accommodation can be made.

Your concerns are noted, and as a Club we are certainly taking it seriously and reaching out to our friends, the HP owners (all 50).

FYI, for most of the past 50 years, IL has had some sort of restriction. I have old letterhead from the 1960's showing the open dates. And then there was a nominal admission fee. As for Ohio, read the Club Directory about Sunday access.
Thank You!

Yes, I've downloaded the 'tallest building in each state' list; and it (so far) seems that the tallest building is also the highpoint. There is the possibility that in 4 of the states, that this 'alternate' highpoint may be with a building that is not the tallest, but the not-so-tall building may be in a city that has a higher elevation than the tallest building that happens to be in a lower city...but I digress... I have a spreadsheet comparing the listed highpoints with the combination building+mean city elevation; more research does need to be done, and I will continue as time and $ allow.

As you mentioned: WA, AK, and even CA, possibly OR have limited access to keep unprepared individuals from either killing themselves or in CA's case overcrowding the place. Unfortunately, these are rules that we have to follow to get to the highest point in those states.

Again, thanks for your comments, when I have a more definitive list of 'alternates' I'll submit it!
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 6th, 2006, 7:55 pm

April 5th, 2006, 6:04 pm #6

I heartily agree with your enjoyment of natural settings as opposed to city-scapes. That is one of my reasons for getting into this hobby. I also enjoy travelling 'the road less travelled', so I concur.

My original message would only suggest 'alternate' highpoints that offer something different and more exciting (in some ways).

I am thoroughly an outdoor enthusiast as are most in this 'sport'. But many people might like to introduce both convenience and variety into it. Rather than try to schedule a trip to Illinois for one out of only four weekends of the year to visit the over-protective Wuebbels' 100-miles-from-nowhere cow-pasture (which apparently is largely unremarkable from any other of the 100,000 cow pastures in the state ); we can visit the Sears tower on any day, almost any time and be welcomed!

I enjoyed the Louisiana hp; and probably would not 'trade' it for a building in New Orleans (which undoubtedly is a fun city). But the FL neighborhood, and maybe even the non-descript IN hill might be ones that I would substitute if given a chance to visit the cities mentioned previously. Just a thought, in my humble opinion only.

Thank you for your thoughts!
I never thought of Highpointing as being (or even wanting it to be) "convenient". If you want convenience lets just claim an airplane ride at 30,000 ft as the alternate for the 50 states, lets make it for the seven sumits as well.

If you put half the effort in planning and scheduling a trip to Charles Mound as you have in finding a more "convenient" alternate man made point you would have been there and back already!!
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 21st, 2004, 6:08 am

April 5th, 2006, 6:22 pm #7

This subject has probably been brought up in the past: The owners of the IL hp and OH hp have been 'difficult' (to use a politically correct term; btw OH is closed on Sundays). So: I would submit that the highpoint of a state is THE HIGHEST POINT, manmade or natural! We highpointers do not condone trespassing; so to heck with the Wuebbels(sp?) in IL; because the Sears Tower Skydeck is OVER 714 FEET higher in elevation than their sorry little hill in NW BFE Illinois...for only $11.95, not only do you get the highpoint of IL, but an incredible view, close lodging, good food, and a great time in Chicago...

Of course, the manmade highpoint would be an "alternate". If you hit the natural one, then fine; but remember, this 'sport' is about enjoying oneself and that will include pristine natural areas as well as beautiful views of some cities (personally, I wish that Delaware had a building that was 20' or 30' taller, because the trailer park that I went to...was less than spectacular...)

There are 6 places where alternates would apply:
FL: hp elev:345' Four Seasons Hotel(Miami) building height is 789'+7' for mean land level=796' (451' difference!)
IL: Sears Tower Skydeck is taller by 714'
IN: Hoosier Hill=1257' but Chase Tower(Indianapolis)=1528' (271'difference)
LA:hp=535'; One Shell Square(New Orleans)=708'(173'difference)
OH: hp=1550'; Key Tower(Cleveland)1637' (87' difference)
Wash.DC: hp=429'; Washington Monument Observation deck:515' (86' difference)

IL & DC are measurements to the observation deck.
All of these measurements include the mean elevation of the city in their height.
If, generally, we can agree on this, then it might take a little more research on the four other buildings to determine what the highest level the public can reach in the buildings in question.

Lastly, there are a LOT more opportunities for enjoyment and entertainment in each of these cases instead of travelling to B.F.E. IL, IN, FL, OH, and even Louisiana... I've been to IN, OH, & LA, and if you read anything about IL or FL, you'll know that you're not missing ANYTHING if you tag the "alternate" highpoint. (LA was...mildly interesting, nothing more)

Lastly, for the purists, if you get the 'natural' highpoint...it still counts...

I would appreciate the thoughts of the forum!
I have been to 22 highpoints so far with 5 more to be done this year.
I posted something about this a while back myself. Since then I've done a bit of work on it, but it's by no means complete.

First of all, rather than trying to figure out average heights of cities, I've been using altitude above MSL (mean sea level), which is something that I would imagine would make determining this stuff easier by using pilots' maps. In contrast, AGL (above ground level) seems more like what you're saying.

Second, you're going to run into problems when you try to visit some of the really tall radio & tv antennae out there. From my research, the "alternate" DE HP would be the WBOC tower (read: "antenna") at about 1,002' MSL, as compared to Ebright Azimuth's 448.' At 2,407,' Alabama's Cheaha Peak doesn't even retain it's crown when compared to the WTTO tower, which reaches about 2,656' MSL. The best you could do in these cases (legally, I suppose I should add) is visit the base & look up at a really tall antenna.

A couple of resources I've used (in addition to my MapSource software to get ideas of ground elevation) are:
http://www.skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/index.php
http://www.emporis.com/en/

Unfortunately I can't find the link right now to the radio tower info, but I'm pretty sure it was either contained in the above sites or linked from there.

E-mail me off-list if you want to combine efforts on this.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 21st, 2004, 3:15 pm

April 5th, 2006, 7:27 pm #8

probably higher than the butte
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 21st, 2004, 3:15 pm

April 5th, 2006, 7:31 pm #9

Thank You!

Yes, I've downloaded the 'tallest building in each state' list; and it (so far) seems that the tallest building is also the highpoint. There is the possibility that in 4 of the states, that this 'alternate' highpoint may be with a building that is not the tallest, but the not-so-tall building may be in a city that has a higher elevation than the tallest building that happens to be in a lower city...but I digress... I have a spreadsheet comparing the listed highpoints with the combination building+mean city elevation; more research does need to be done, and I will continue as time and $ allow.

As you mentioned: WA, AK, and even CA, possibly OR have limited access to keep unprepared individuals from either killing themselves or in CA's case overcrowding the place. Unfortunately, these are rules that we have to follow to get to the highest point in those states.

Again, thanks for your comments, when I have a more definitive list of 'alternates' I'll submit it!
In addition to a Higher Points list, I recall a list of better/best places to visit in each state. Perhaps this was trashed about by the county highpointers chat group. Although I like personally like Charles Mound, there are some pretty good county highpoints in Illinois that have better views, and certainly are more remote. Hiking effort/quality is just one of many considerations for this list. I think most would agree that there may be "better" peaks than Elbert in Colorado.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 20th, 2004, 9:07 pm

April 8th, 2006, 6:44 am #10

I posted something about this a while back myself. Since then I've done a bit of work on it, but it's by no means complete.

First of all, rather than trying to figure out average heights of cities, I've been using altitude above MSL (mean sea level), which is something that I would imagine would make determining this stuff easier by using pilots' maps. In contrast, AGL (above ground level) seems more like what you're saying.

Second, you're going to run into problems when you try to visit some of the really tall radio & tv antennae out there. From my research, the "alternate" DE HP would be the WBOC tower (read: "antenna") at about 1,002' MSL, as compared to Ebright Azimuth's 448.' At 2,407,' Alabama's Cheaha Peak doesn't even retain it's crown when compared to the WTTO tower, which reaches about 2,656' MSL. The best you could do in these cases (legally, I suppose I should add) is visit the base & look up at a really tall antenna.

A couple of resources I've used (in addition to my MapSource software to get ideas of ground elevation) are:
http://www.skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/index.php
http://www.emporis.com/en/

Unfortunately I can't find the link right now to the radio tower info, but I'm pretty sure it was either contained in the above sites or linked from there.

E-mail me off-list if you want to combine efforts on this.
I'm planning my trip to the WBOC tower and i have some questions for any highpointers local to there. Are there any viable alternates to the standard route of climbing the pinnacle from it's base? I was thinking that i could swing in from a fire truck line to the east end of the antenna and still climb the majority of the prominence. Also, is there any legal camping on the tower? I have my bivy hammock and am flexible...i just need to sleep somewhere ON the structure. Thanks for any replies.
Quote
Like
Share