HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals


    One Bayfront Plaza in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Miami Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #181  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2012, 3:56 AM
RobertWalpole RobertWalpole is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,911
Isn't this going to require a massive, pre-lease before construction starts?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #182  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2012, 4:01 AM
RobertWalpole RobertWalpole is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadcruiser1 View Post
The new design is terrible. What the hell did these architects do to it? It's disgusting .
I prefer the original design but like this too.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #183  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2012, 4:28 AM
Onn Onn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: The United States
Posts: 1,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadcruiser1 View Post
The new design is terrible. What the hell did these architects do to it? It's disgusting .
They made the tower economical, so it could actually be built. Maybe not as pretty, but still over 1,000 feet!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #184  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2012, 5:30 AM
Roadcruiser1's Avatar
Roadcruiser1 Roadcruiser1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onn View Post
They made the tower economical, so it could actually be built. Maybe not as pretty, but still over 1,000 feet!
Trust me. Even though I am studying architecture I am certain I can design a building that looks way better than this, and still make it cheap and economical. You don't have to make it look like this to save money. You can use a box design, but make a beautiful facade that would allow it to be unique and still be cheap and economical. You can pick a circular, or oval like design and if you make it attractive it would still be cheap and attractive saving money. Changing a design into a roundish One World Trade Center like building isn't a good idea. It just makes the building look fat.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #185  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2012, 5:55 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
Looks like a 2015 start, but still a solid 1,000 foot tower.






__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #186  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2012, 6:22 AM
bobdreamz's Avatar
bobdreamz bobdreamz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Miami/Orlando, FL.
Posts: 8,123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadcruiser1 View Post
The new design is terrible. What the hell did these architects do to it? It's disgusting .
I prefer the old design as well since it would finally have given Miami a tower with a "pointed" top in it's skyline.
__________________
Miami : 62 Skyscrapers over 500+ Ft.|150+ Meters | 14 Under Construction.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #187  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2012, 8:33 AM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
DENNAB
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NA - Europe
Posts: 6,043
YESSSS!!!


I love it, hopefully some other projects will emerge within the next 3 years before this goes up.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #188  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2012, 8:34 AM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
DENNAB
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NA - Europe
Posts: 6,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobdreamz View Post
^ great so now we have to wait another 3 years before even constructions starts now? So by the time this building opens it will have been a total of 11 years since it was first proposed to opening day.


Yea it sucks but at least it will likely get built, and the design is amazing.


It should be like 200 feet taller though, that would be better.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #189  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2012, 4:20 PM
bobdreamz's Avatar
bobdreamz bobdreamz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Miami/Orlando, FL.
Posts: 8,123
^ the FAA won't allow anything higher so an extra 200 feet would be nearly impossible.
__________________
Miami : 62 Skyscrapers over 500+ Ft.|150+ Meters | 14 Under Construction.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #190  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2012, 4:45 PM
futuresooner's Avatar
futuresooner futuresooner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,240
New design gets my
__________________
"When you don't want to Dallas your Austin, you just emulate the Bay Area."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #191  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2012, 4:51 PM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
DENNAB
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NA - Europe
Posts: 6,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobdreamz View Post
^ the FAA won't allow anything higher so an extra 200 feet would be nearly impossible.

for this site, or for the whole city of Miami?

It would be ashame to not see anything taller than this down the road, but you can't complain, this will be an amazing tower, and it looks like its getting built, plus a lot can happen in 3 years.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #192  
Old Posted Feb 4, 2012, 7:31 AM
N830MH N830MH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 2,967
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobdreamz View Post
^ the FAA won't allow anything higher so an extra 200 feet would be nearly impossible.
Because it was height restrictions. That's why FAA won't allow it. I think they have reduced the floor from 80 to 60 floors. They have stay low.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #193  
Old Posted Feb 4, 2012, 1:49 PM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
DENNAB
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NA - Europe
Posts: 6,043
the article states the building is 80 floors. ^


My question was, is it ever possible to see a building higher than this in Miami? or is 1010 feet the max. citywide?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #194  
Old Posted Feb 4, 2012, 3:56 PM
bobdreamz's Avatar
bobdreamz bobdreamz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Miami/Orlando, FL.
Posts: 8,123
^ the original height for this building was 1,049 feet and zoning allows up to 1,050 feet in the central CBD. I suppose a taller building outside of downtown and not in the flight paths of the airport could be built but I doubt the zoning laws would allow it. This isn't like Houston and their 900 foot Williams tower which is miles away from downtown.
__________________
Miami : 62 Skyscrapers over 500+ Ft.|150+ Meters | 14 Under Construction.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #195  
Old Posted Feb 4, 2012, 5:55 PM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
DENNAB
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NA - Europe
Posts: 6,043
But Houston already has two ~1000 footers in the CBD, why would they need to go so far out to build a shorter tower?

They said the building is 1010 feet and 80 floors so it shouldn't have a height decrease or anything. It has gotten approved already hasn't it?

That's dissapointing that Miami can't build higher than 1050 in the CBD, but it could still allow for some pretty big buildings to be built there. After all, Singapore has a 919 foot limit (280 meter) and has a great skyline, so it's not all bad, still hope there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #196  
Old Posted Feb 4, 2012, 11:04 PM
patriotizzy's Avatar
patriotizzy patriotizzy is offline
Metal Up Your !
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 1,585
I definitely like the design. Is it better than the previous? I don't think so. However, they're on par with each other, in attractiveness I suppose.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #197  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2012, 6:10 PM
exMiami exMiami is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 3
The new renderings are not yet detailed enough to form an opinion as to whether or not the new design is superior to the old.

It certainly is not either eye-poppingly beautiful or hideous though, but rather something in between.

Either way, it is a great project for Miami.
__________________
http://exmiami.org
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #198  
Old Posted Feb 19, 2012, 2:48 AM
jd3189 jd3189 is offline
An Optimistic Realist
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Loma Linda, CA / West Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 5,571
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobdreamz View Post
^ the FAA won't allow anything higher so an extra 200 feet would be nearly impossible.
Hopefully that might change, since it changed to accommodate this tower. Then we'll still another major American city with supertalls. Miami is a neat location for them. It's like a tropical Chicago by the ocean.
__________________
Working towards making American cities walkable again!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #199  
Old Posted Feb 19, 2012, 3:43 AM
mthd mthd is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadcruiser1 View Post
Trust me. Even though I am studying architecture I am certain I can design a building that looks way better than this, and still make it cheap and economical. You don't have to make it look like this to save money. You can use a box design, but make a beautiful facade that would allow it to be unique and still be cheap and economical. You can pick a circular, or oval like design and if you make it attractive it would still be cheap and attractive saving money. Changing a design into a roundish One World Trade Center like building isn't a good idea. It just makes the building look fat.
until you've actually designed a supertall building, i wouldn't say that.

the previously proposed design was awkward and likely tremendously inefficient. the new one, while perhaps not terribly well represented in these renderings, is simple and potentially elegant.

this is not shenzhen. it's miami. simple is better.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #200  
Old Posted Feb 19, 2012, 4:14 AM
Roadcruiser1's Avatar
Roadcruiser1 Roadcruiser1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by mthd View Post
until you've actually designed a supertall building, i wouldn't say that.

the previously proposed design was awkward and likely tremendously inefficient. the new one, while perhaps not terribly well represented in these renderings, is simple and potentially elegant.

this is not shenzhen. it's miami. simple is better.
I have seen simple buildings that are better than this. Examples include the original World Trade Center Twin Towers, and the Sears/Willis Tower. I didn't say that this building should have a more complex design anyway. I am saying that even a simple building like this one can have a better design.
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 > Proposals
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:54 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.