HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #361  
Old Posted Nov 18, 2006, 4:44 AM
NewAtlantisMiami NewAtlantisMiami is offline
Atlantis Rises Again!
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 554
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobdreamz
^ I used to help Emporis in updating their list but the editor for Miami lived in Brooklyn and no longer comes to SSP.
I don't know who updates Emporis now, but depending on what I hear from the World Almanac people, we might all end up participating in editing it. If they invite me, I will invite input from the Forum online. It should be fun. The World Almanac is a renowned desk reference book for looking up miscellaneous facts, sort of like a miniature encyclopedia. I would love it if they sent me the Miami list to look over before the 2008 edition went to press. With what was left off this year's list of Tall Buildings, along with what is scheduled to start construction in the first half of next year, the list for 2008 should be really incredible. All we would need then is a supertall to top it all off! I think Tibor Hollo will pull it off relatively soon after getting Villa Magna up! He's not as young as he used to be!

Last edited by NewAtlantisMiami; Nov 18, 2006 at 3:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #362  
Old Posted Nov 18, 2006, 12:34 PM
Domo Arigato Domo Arigato is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33
Tower Construction Photos

Has anyone got any fresh pics of the construction along the west side of Brickell? I know the "off in the distance" Ten Muse, and MarinaBlew are topped off, but I cannot really get good shots of the construction in the Financial district from my office, like someone said the views suck because of the One Miami project which looks like some sort of object that belongs at Sea World or something... Anyway, how about it fellas? Any good centerfold pics? Spicy ones?

Spread eagle from above would be good too.

Shalom
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #363  
Old Posted Nov 18, 2006, 2:14 PM
Miami Jim Miami Jim is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 21
Its funny Steve but I used to look at that book all the time and check out Miami and I remember always being sad. All these other cities have these long lists and Miami had like 5 or 6! Truly saddening. And maddening. But if what you say is true about it being the third longest list I will just have to take a moment to check it out. That would certainly bring a smile to my face! But, thanks for trying to get the list on here. I do appreciate the effort.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #364  
Old Posted Nov 18, 2006, 3:12 PM
NewAtlantisMiami NewAtlantisMiami is offline
Atlantis Rises Again!
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 554
Jim, it's true! Recently, the Miami list of Tall Buildings in the World Almanac has been getting longer and longer each year. This year, it is longer than any other city's list of tall buildings except New York and Chicago, even with what was left off. We did it with so many buildings under construction in the 400-500 feet tall range, but we have a lot of buildings under construction taller than what is listed there, that should have been listed, as well as a new crop of very tall buildings starting construction late this year or in the spring of next year. After setting them straight, the list should be very impressive next year. Just add and subtract per the letter I wrote them, include Paramount Bay, and you pretty much have what next year's list will look like, unless more projects start construction in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd quarter of next year that haven't announced a date yet. As I said, we just might see Element finally starting construction in its second reincarnation. In just a few years, we've gone from having a negligible skyline to soon blowing 3rd place clear out of the water

Last edited by NewAtlantisMiami; Nov 18, 2006 at 9:34 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #365  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2006, 4:32 PM
dave8721 dave8721 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Miami
Posts: 2,914
A new building for Brickell. This is 1451 Brickell (not to be confused with the 1450 Brickell office building proposed across the street). The City of Miami development report has it listed initially at 430 feet tall. From the Kobi Karp site:





Reply With Quote
     
     
  #366  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2006, 4:51 PM
bobdreamz's Avatar
bobdreamz bobdreamz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Miami/Orlando, FL.
Posts: 7,102
so now there will be two office towers at the entrance of the Brickell district...the design looks more residential than office, at least in the top pic though..do you know the status?....thanks for the info dave.
__________________
Miami : 45 Skyscrapers over 500 + ft. | 152 + meters | 5 U/C !

Last edited by bobdreamz; Nov 21, 2006 at 5:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #367  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2006, 5:14 PM
Dale Dale is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Orlando
Posts: 3,675
I like the glass, but is that a periscope up top ?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #368  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2006, 6:00 PM
brickell's Avatar
brickell brickell is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: County of Dade
Posts: 9,365
It's a ho-hum design for the location. Would love to see more dark glass walls like ESP, 4 seasons and the new 1450.
__________________
That's what did it in the end. Not the money, not the music, not even the guns. That is my heroic flaw: my excess of civic pride.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #369  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2006, 7:58 PM
dave8721 dave8721 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Miami
Posts: 2,914
It beats the little 2-story retail thing they were planning at first though.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #370  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2006, 4:18 PM
vasklar vasklar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 17
Low-density urbanity outside CBD winning out!

I am so happy to report as a rsident of Miami District 2 (CBD, Edgewater, Wynwood, Grove, and Brickell) that Marc Sarnoff has won the Miami Comission Seat runoff election against incumbent Linda Haskins who had replaced Johnny Winton! Finally, the voters spoke that we do not want overly tall buildings ruining the character of our mid to low rise neighborhoods! Check out this article! If Sarnoff's proposals pass, this will mean a denser CBD, and more distinctive urban neighborhoods like Edgewater. My only sad point is that this vote probably means the demise of the light rail line along NE 2nd Ave.

MIAMI CITY COMMISSION DISTRICT 2
Sarnoff unseats Haskins in Miami District 2 raceA new face joined the Miami City Commission: Coconut Grove activist Marc Sarnoff, who defeated incumbent Linda Haskins.
BY MICHAEL VASQUEZ AND TANIA VALDEMORO
mrvasquez@MiamiHerald.com
Miami City Commissioner Linda Haskins had the advantage of incumbency, an unprecedented amount of campaign cash -- nearly $729,000 -- and the strong support of Miami Mayor Manny Diaz.

It wasn't enough.

In a result that demonstrated significant levels of voter unhappiness with Diaz's leadership and the city's building boom, Haskins lost her District 2 commission seat Tuesday to Coconut Grove activist and attorney Marc Sarnoff. Sarnoff's decisive margin of victory: 64.5 percent to 35.5 percent.

The district encompasses affluent waterfront communities such as Coconut Grove, Brickell and Morningside, along with much of downtown. Commissioners appointed Haskins to the seat in June to replace suspended Commissioner Johnny Winton.

''It feels like a long journey has come to an end and an awesome responsibility is upon my shoulders,'' Sarnoff said at his victory party at Coconut Grove's Greenstreet Café.

District 2 has been the epicenter of a hi-rise condo development boom that radically reshaped the city during the past few years. The boom swelled Miami's tax base, but some longtime residents were put off by what they saw as city leaders' willingness to allow developers carte blanche for building heights and location, even if it meant casting shadows over single-family homes.

''I am very unhappy with the overbuilding that's going on here,'' said voter Suzanne Shiekman, a Sarnoff supporter. ``I don't think they care about the natural beauty of Miami. I think it's being destroyed.''

Diaz has been the architect of Miami's building frenzy. Haskins has been a close Diaz ally during Miami's transformation.

''The legacy of the Manny Diaz administration is not appreciated today -- but it will be,'' Haskins said Tuesday night. 'Because you can't run a city on negativity and `say no to everything.' ''

Sarnoff campaigned on a platform that included a 35-foot height limit for new development in some neighborhoods.

He also vowed to be a counterweight to the City Hall influence of Diaz.

Diaz's support was key to Haskins' fundraising success. Sarnoff, meanwhile, raised more than $182,000 -- only about one-fourth of the incumbent's total.

Despite having a comparatively small campaign account, Sarnoff, in the closing days of the election, did get some help from an unlikely source: the Miami-Dade Democratic Party.

The party sent a pro-Sarnoff mailer to voters declaring him the only Democrat in the race.

''On November 7th We Won Congress!'' the mailer states. ``On November 21st We Can Win the City of Miami.''

Not only are City Commission races non-partisan, but on the campaign trail both Sarnoff and Haskins told voters they were Republicans. The district, however, leans Democratic.

Sarnoff said he switched from Republican to Democrat more than a week ago but added he's voted exclusively Democratic in the last 10 years. Sarnoff said he never knew his newfound party was going to take such an active role in the race.

''They came to me when they found out I changed my party affiliation and told me they'd provide me some campaign workers,'' he said. ``I don't know anything about the flier.''

David Treece, a member of the Miami-Dade Democratic Executive Committee and a Haskins supporter, accused Sarnoff of a politically motivated ``death-bed conversion.''

Sarnoff had his own harsh words for a last-minute Haskins campaign mailer -- one linking him to $39 million in no-bid capital-improvement contracts awarded by the city in 2004. Most of the companies who got work under that no-bid award were clients of lobbyist Steve Marin, a friend of Mayor Diaz and then-City Manager Joe Arriola. The mailer stressed the fact that Sarnoff has turned to Marin for free campaign advice, but left out Haskins' own, arguably more significant, ties to the heavily criticized deal.

Haskins was Miami's chief financial officer when contracts were awarded, and at times, defended the process when city Auditor General Victor Igwe scrutinized it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #371  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2006, 4:24 PM
bobdreamz's Avatar
bobdreamz bobdreamz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Miami/Orlando, FL.
Posts: 7,102
^ he's only one out of five commissioners right?....he alone can't stop the streetcar system just because it's in his district.
__________________
Miami : 45 Skyscrapers over 500 + ft. | 152 + meters | 5 U/C !
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #372  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2006, 4:47 PM
brickell's Avatar
brickell brickell is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: County of Dade
Posts: 9,365
Sarnoff seems like a "know-nothing" nimby, who only speaks in negatives. Does he have any original thoughts, or is he just against everything everybody else says?
__________________
That's what did it in the end. Not the money, not the music, not even the guns. That is my heroic flaw: my excess of civic pride.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #373  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2006, 5:50 PM
vasklar vasklar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 17
Explanation of Viewpoint

Well, I actually got to personally interview Sarnoff and Haskins a month ago to decide on endorsements from the organiation I work for. It seemed clear that they were both very accomplished candidates with a good understanding of the city and of governement. However, they had very different opinions on what is good for a city and specifically, on what is good for miami. I think in the end it breaks down to this:

1) Linda Haskins prefers seeing most all of District 2 increase in its density. She has a very fixed view on the bottom line economically for the City of Miami and does not seem to have much of an opinion on aesthetics or much of an understanding of the diversity of urban environments. She seems also to be very pro-developer and not necesarily critical (either pro or con) of how the development will impact the urban organism other than in its economic impact.

2) Sarnoff, on the other hand, has a vision of walkability, greenspace, and density that embraces a community centered approach to development. He favors more infill housing and brownstones in Edgewater and Wynwood and the Grove, and a restrcition on building heights above 35 feet outside of the central business district. This would mean that the residents of Edgewater, the Grove, and Wynwood would enjoy the open space and sky and bay and tree canopy that makes their neighborhoods enjoyable, while developing and building in a low-rise infill fashion that will allow the neighborhood to imporve and move forward at the same time. Like I said, though, I do not like the fact that he opposes the light rail project.

People that are NIMBY's are not automatically ignorant to issues of city planning and urban development. Many times, they merely have an alternative concept of what constitutes the "urban good." Clearly with this elections, the voters have said they would like a change of that vision (results were 65% to 35%).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #374  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2006, 7:19 PM
brickell's Avatar
brickell brickell is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: County of Dade
Posts: 9,365
I'll agree that not all NIMBY's are ingorant to city issues, but I would guess most of them are and they fall more into the BANANA category (Build Absolutely nothing anywhere near anyone). These are the people supporting Sarnoff. That's what I've come across in the Grove at least.

I made a snap judgement, but I've not heard anything but negativy coming from him. Now that he's on the commission, it's a perfect time to show what he's about. I'll take your word on his character and give him a chance, but I'm don't have much hope. Like you said, it's about the voters. Will these BANANAs support him when they find out more and more brownstones and rowhouses will be invading their neighborhood? I don't think they'll ever be happy.
__________________
That's what did it in the end. Not the money, not the music, not even the guns. That is my heroic flaw: my excess of civic pride.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #375  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2006, 8:01 PM
dave8721 dave8721 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Miami
Posts: 2,914
Quote:
Originally Posted by vasklar
Well, I actually got to personally interview Sarnoff and Haskins a month ago to decide on endorsements from the organiation I work for. It seemed clear that they were both very accomplished candidates with a good understanding of the city and of governement. However, they had very different opinions on what is good for a city and specifically, on what is good for miami. I think in the end it breaks down to this:

1) Linda Haskins prefers seeing most all of District 2 increase in its density. She has a very fixed view on the bottom line economically for the City of Miami and does not seem to have much of an opinion on aesthetics or much of an understanding of the diversity of urban environments. She seems also to be very pro-developer and not necesarily critical (either pro or con) of how the development will impact the urban organism other than in its economic impact.

2) Sarnoff, on the other hand, has a vision of walkability, greenspace, and density that embraces a community centered approach to development. He favors more infill housing and brownstones in Edgewater and Wynwood and the Grove, and a restrcition on building heights above 35 feet outside of the central business district. This would mean that the residents of Edgewater, the Grove, and Wynwood would enjoy the open space and sky and bay and tree canopy that makes their neighborhoods enjoyable, while developing and building in a low-rise infill fashion that will allow the neighborhood to imporve and move forward at the same time. Like I said, though, I do not like the fact that he opposes the light rail project.

People that are NIMBY's are not automatically ignorant to issues of city planning and urban development. Many times, they merely have an alternative concept of what constitutes the "urban good." Clearly with this elections, the voters have said they would like a change of that vision (results were 65% to 35%).
Whats far more likely to happen with Edgewater and Wynwood is there wont by any development at all if a 35 foot limit is imposed. Keep in mind the reason it was all upzoned to highrise in the first place is because it had become a haven for prositutes and drug dealers and the city was giving developers an incentive to clean the place up, and the nieghborhood is now moving in the right direction. Its no coincidence that the parts of the areas that the highrise developers haven't gotten to yet are still havens for crime and violence and not exacly places you want to be walking alone at night (much of Wynwood & Overtown). I agree the height limit north of the 112 would be fine (even in the Grove excluding Bayshore) but Edgewater & Wynwood should be excluded.

Of course all of this is what Miami21 is for anyways.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #376  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2006, 8:54 PM
vasklar vasklar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 17
Dave, thanks for your response. I will agree that the initial reason for the liberal zoning in Edgewater is that the city was desperately seeking to attract developers to an area overrun by prostitues and drug dealers. However, I do not believe the only way developers are attracted to it now is the prospect of supertalls or that their are parts of Edgewater that are still uber-dangerous. As a matter of fact, I live in Edgewater, in an apartment complex on a street as of yet untouched by the latest development sweep. I walk around at night even until 2am to go to small bars that are now opening on NE 2ave and to the local Latin Cafe. My car has never been broken into. My building is a five sotry building built in the 70's and is currently undergoing remodeling. Other buldings on my street of 3 or four stories were built in the 30's and 40's and are very beautiful historic gems. Particulary, there is also a yellow four story building on biscayne and 25th street in Edgwater that was built in the 30's that would be a shame if it were not remodeled and restored. This part of the city, while there are many new highrises that have changed its landscape, also has many architectural and historical buidlings still standing of value. It would be to our benefit, as has been shown by the example of south beach, to further develop with these building and with historic preservation in mind. Any area can build super densely. I do not think it is in Miami's area to have a completely homogenous city. Areas with historic buidlings can easily distinguish themselves as having character and viability if preservation and planned development is considered. I look forward to anymore comments on this subject. (PS... I am also really excited by the rennovation of an older building on NE 2nd Ave and approximately NE 19th Street just South of the Miami Cemetery. These type of projects are really making that little strip there look good!)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #377  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2006, 9:57 PM
brickell's Avatar
brickell brickell is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: County of Dade
Posts: 9,365
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave8721
Of course all of this is what Miami21 is for anyways.
Dave,
Didn't you say Sarnoff was also against Miami21? This is part of the conundrum we face with this guy.
__________________
That's what did it in the end. Not the money, not the music, not even the guns. That is my heroic flaw: my excess of civic pride.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #378  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2006, 8:24 PM
bobdreamz's Avatar
bobdreamz bobdreamz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Miami/Orlando, FL.
Posts: 7,102
Everglades on the Bay on the rise downtown




^ Everglades on the left & the Loft towers on the right with the Metromover running through Lofts 2.



glad to see these finally gaining some significant height on the skyline!
thanks to umiami305 for the link.
__________________
Miami : 45 Skyscrapers over 500 + ft. | 152 + meters | 5 U/C !
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #379  
Old Posted Nov 25, 2006, 3:44 AM
arch photographer's Avatar
arch photographer arch photographer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 17
Does that 35 ft height limit apply to buildings already approved, is that approval being recinded? If not then we could still get Platinum on the Bay and Element, Lyghte and Soleil and a few others, and I think that would be what Edgewater needs. I don't think anyone wants to see tower pressed against tower everywhere. But a handful of distinctive tall buildings will bring up that area, with land prices as they are, no one is going to build 3 story buildings.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #380  
Old Posted Nov 25, 2006, 3:47 PM
NewAtlantisMiami NewAtlantisMiami is offline
Atlantis Rises Again!
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 554
Very Talls in Edgewater

Quote:
Originally Posted by arch photographer
Does that 35 ft height limit apply to buildings already approved, is that approval being recinded? If not then we could still get Platinum on the Bay and Element, Lyghte and Soleil and a few others, and I think that would be what Edgewater needs. I don't think anyone wants to see tower pressed against tower everywhere. But a handful of distinctive tall buildings will bring up that area, with land prices as they are, no one is going to build 3 story buildings.
Well, I tried to keep my mouth shut for this page, but here I go! Approved is approved! It is just not likely that we will see anything else of significant height approved for Edgewater. I think we can have the best of both worlds in Edgewater. The already approved towers going up where they are planned I think will improve Edgewater while preserving the character of where Vasklar is talking about. (Let's not forget Onyx2, Arch. That site is important to balance out the skyline.) I'm totally against demolishing anything of what might be considered historical or architecture merit, just as no high rises are permitted on South Beach between 5th and 15th streets along Washington and Collins Avenue and Ocean Drive. Build a few blocks away or around the older buildings or incorporate them into the overall design of the high-rise without tearing down the older buildings, maybe like a Freedom Tower type of thing. I think the already approved very tall buildings are fine for Edgewater, just no more than that. Steve

Last edited by NewAtlantisMiami; Nov 25, 2006 at 3:54 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:09 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.