BELLEVUE | Projects and Updates! - Page 13

Hans Gruber · #**241** Posted **Feb 13, 2007, 8:45 PM**

Bellevue also lacks Oakland's violent street gangs. I used to watch Dynasty and there's no way Denver had 50+ story buildings in the 1980's.

Downtown Bellevue is not long enough or wide enough to be larger than most downtowns in America. However, density wise and building wise, it will be quite significant in 10 years. Let's hope the 450ft building cap is removed in the near future.

northface · #**242** Posted **Feb 15, 2007, 5:47 AM**

haha, wow, i sparked debate between bellevue, oakland and denver....but concidering they were even compared....makes it definetly seem that bellevue is moving up there...those are big name cities (kinda).

testdrive · #**243** Posted **Feb 15, 2007, 6:42 AM**

I think the Hanover crane is finally going up........saw a truck with part of a crane on it taking the 8th st exit this morning heading that way....

JiminyCricket II · #**244** Posted **Feb 15, 2007, 8:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hans Gruber

I used to watch Dynasty and there's no way Denver had 50+ story buildings in the 1980's.

first off, I can't believe you actually think Bellevue has a bigger skyline than Denver. Second, all of Denver's tallest buildings were built in the 80's, and as mhays mentioned, some are over 50 stories:

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=...-denver-co-usa

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=...-denver-co-usa

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=...-denver-co-usa

mhays · #**245** Posted **Feb 15, 2007, 8:53 PM**

The Denver thing isn't debatable. Hans can think what he wants based on his...TV watching. Jesus christ.

goldstar133 · #**246** Posted **Feb 15, 2007, 9:08 PM**

Denver's skyline is much bigger but not as attractive as Bellevue.

horatio_the_hermit · #**247** Posted **Feb 16, 2007, 12:48 AM**

i think goldstar summed it up quite nicely. Lets, then, leave it at that.

horatio_the_hermit · #**248** Posted **Feb 16, 2007, 12:50 AM**

Also, check that out. Its on the bravern's commerical web site. Snazzy?

JiminyCricket II · #**249** Posted **Feb 16, 2007, 1:53 AM**

that's pretty sweet, when are the residential towers "supposed" to start?

horatio_the_hermit · #**250** Posted **Feb 16, 2007, 2:16 AM**

theyre already under construction. Cranes should be going up in the next 2 weeks.

northface · #**251** Posted **Feb 16, 2007, 2:54 AM**

I LLOVE THAT PIC! i saw it before but VERY small version....thats awesome though!!!

testdrive · #**252** Posted **Feb 16, 2007, 3:16 AM**

That is a great pic, would be great if someone could somehow superimpose the City Center bldg in the left hand corner and the Ashwood Commons phase 2 buildings in the right corner. (kinda like the standing in front of the microwave thinking faster faster syndrome) oh and the Hanover crane is up and ready to go......... yay

James Bond Agent 007 · #**253** Posted **Feb 16, 2007, 3:57 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by horatio_the_hermit

Also, check that out. Its on the bravern's commerical web site. Snazzy?

Awesome! Can't wait to see it like that in "reality!"

mSeattle · #**254** Posted **Feb 16, 2007, 6:24 PM**

Good grief, that's nice!

InlandEmpire · #**255** Posted **Feb 21, 2007, 3:18 AM**

wow... that looks great! I do think that while Bellevue's downtown is too small to support an expansive skyline, it will have one of the most aesthetically pleasing skylines in the country. It will be a nice companion to Seattle's impressive look. It would be good to have maybe a couple towers over 450' to create more of a stepped skyline. Maybe one 550-600'??

Hans Gruber · #**256** Posted **Feb 21, 2007, 8:01 AM**

The city of Seattle has to approve a highing zoning rule higher than 450ft. Fortunately, those in power are vain, and have big ego's. I think 600FT would be a nice new limit. Probably high rise condo's.

NW Mike · #**257** Posted **Feb 21, 2007, 6:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by horatio_the_hermit

Also, check that out. Its on the bravern's commerical web site. Snazzy?

I Love it!!! They are really going to add to the skyline a nice new look. Not just boxes of mirror finishes. The roof line is great. The angles the colors..wow.

WonderlandPark · #**258** Posted **Feb 21, 2007, 6:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hans Gruber

The city of Seattle has to approve a highing zoning rule higher than 450ft. Fortunately, those in power are vain, and have big ego's. I think 600FT would be a nice new limit. Probably high rise condo's.

Why would the city of Seattle have any sort of jurisdiction over what Bellevue builds? I can see King County or the FAA having some say, but another city, and one far across the lake?

InlandEmpire · #**259** Posted **Feb 21, 2007, 11:29 PM**

That's what I was thinking.... maybe Hans thought I was referring to Seattle's height restrictions. I meant to say that I think Bellevue would look great with maybe one 600' tower toward the center of the skyline to create a nice stepped look. As great as 450' towers are, when there gets to be a few of them I wonder if it will make the skyline look stunted even though it is actually pretty tall. Either way, I think the Bravern residences are some of the nicest looking tower renderings I've seen in awhile.... besides the Bellevue towers at least.

testdrive · #**260** Posted **Feb 22, 2007, 1:37 AM**

Is the Summit Building C still a go? There is currently a 5 story building where it looks like the C building would go or am I looking at the wrong corner? I was wondering because the current building looks like it was built in the 70's which doesn't seem too old but I guess that may not be a consideration.