Hi Guys. Don't know if you know me, > I made also the construction thread of Miami in city/metro complications. Have a look there 2 :) I also made some thread months ago in the highrises section ;) I made a list of buildings in Miami.. Wrong info? Tell me, I will change it :)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3237/2516205479_89b73df954_b.jpg

Updates/Edit:

-----

Renders:

-----

I will update it soon :)

:cheers:

Say, that looks pretty good, keep up the good work. :)

I need exact heights from you Miami guys! :) And I'm not sure about the status of some projects..

Cool.

Honestly, there are too many buildings in Miami to just start listing them and all their information. There's a Wikipedia article with skyscrapers over 400 feet (122 meters) in Miami. Here's the article and it has everything and anything you'll need to know about Miami's skyscrapers. Have fun! :)

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

I have to say that list is pretty awesome though. Nice job.

Tnx :)

why is met 3 proposed?

you should change met 3 status in on hold or design change.

you should change met 3 status in on hold or design change.

I'm not sure those categories are really used in lists like that (Emporis or whoever). "Proposed" kinda fits right now since we have yet to see whether or not it's even real...even a scaled-down version. Let's not forget we're talking about years since it was first proposed at this point regardless of all the "they'll start it after this or after that" stuff that really isn't any more iron-clad than the "nice sales lady" guarantees.

Here's a question (without making it a real poll) I'd ask you fellas. Would you prefer a scaled down Met3 on that site or just see it finally die as a project? I ask that because that parcel happens to be one of the VERY few in Miami where genuine height is possible.

Not that there's any guarantees, of course. For all I know, Met3 could officially crap out and a Brazilian fast-food chicken outlet could wind up there but I tend to doubt it. Much better to see something iconic and gorgeous rise on that site...Miami deserves it.

So which is it? Scaled down Met3 or let the site sit and wait for something better (hopefully)? You already know how I'm voting. :lol:

Seriously, though, interested in YOUR take on this and any reasons why I should still want the Met3 option.

no scaled down version. MET 3 should be MET 3. Not a scaled down crap shoot. We have only a few great lots that can be built high. So either the original version of MET 3 or nothing at all and we all wait for a real project to come along and deserve that lot.

well met 3 could improve my apartment's view also met2 my view could be more like manhattan i think i want met 3 to be built.

I'd rather have it built as is at 836 feet or whatever it was or nothing at all. I would settle for anything higher than 700ft though and mixed-use. Also, you guys do know that there is a lot of land that can be built to 1,010 feet right, it's not just the immediate area around the Wachovia. Just by looking at the FAA heights map, everything in between Port Blvd to the north, Miami Avenue to the west and Broadway to the south can be developed to 1,010 feet, with the exception of One Bayfront Plaza at 1,049ft.

Understood there's more areas where a potential 1000-footer could go (I didn't word it too well in my previous post) but what I meant was that a lot of that area has existing structures that likely won't be going anywhere for a long time whereas this is one of those prime spots still sitting undeveloped pending what happens with Met3.

It's a tough question either way. If Met3 goes belly up there no guarantee at all that anything memorable would rise there. After all, as primo as that location is it sat vacant for decades and things like that can still happen. On the other hand, do you go with a scaled-down 3 just for the sake of having something there---even though it erases the chance of something grander? Tough call, but I tend to agree with you kevin that anything less than 700 feet (I'd even say 800) is wasting the site.

Little tangent with the "height" thing. I'm as much as a scraper geek as the rest of you guys but for the first time I'm having mixed-feelings about a supertall. Specifically, the 1500-footer proposed here in Philly. Part of me loves the idea, obviously (I'd be able to see it from my house) but the thing is SO damn tall that I'm not so sure it wouldn't ruin the very nice symmetry of the Philadelphia skyline as it would be over 500-feet taller than anything else. Not sure that works...but don't worry I'm not becoming a "NIMBY." :lol:

Understood there's more areas where a potential 1000-footer could go (I didn't word it too well in my previous post) but what I meant was that a lot of that area has existing structures that likely won't be going anywhere for a long time whereas this is one of those prime spots still sitting undeveloped pending what happens with Met3.

It's a tough question either way. If Met3 goes belly up there no guarantee at all that anything memorable would rise there. After all, as primo as that location is it sat vacant for decades and things like that can still happen. On the other hand, do you go with a scaled-down 3 just for the sake of having something there---even though it erases the chance of something grander? Tough call, but I tend to agree with you kevin that anything less than 700 feet (I'd even say 800) is wasting the site.

Little tangent with the "height" thing. I'm as much as a scraper geek as the rest of you guys but for the first time I'm having mixed-feelings about a supertall. Specifically, the 1500-footer proposed here in Philly. Part of me loves the idea, obviously (I'd be able to see it from my house) but the thing is SO damn tall that I'm not so sure it wouldn't ruin the very nice symmetry of the Philadelphia skyline as it would be over 500-feet taller than anything else. Not sure that works...but don't worry I'm not becoming a "NIMBY." :lol:

I'm not so crazy about supertalls as much as I'm crazy about the vibe on the street levels and density. I'd rather have a lame skyline but a kick ass energy on the streets with lots of people, restaurants, etc. I think Miami's restriction of 1,010 is a nice number. It allows a supertall but not a super supertall.

There's so much land to develop in Miami, that we should continue to build on them. It's better to have the vacant lots built than have 3 supertalls and a sea of surface parking lots.

I'm not so crazy about supertalls as much as I'm crazy about the vibe on the street levels and density. I'd rather have a lame skyline but a kick ass energy on the streets with lots of people, restaurants, etc. I think Miami's restriction of 1,010 is a nice number. It allows a supertall but not a super supertall.


Couldn't agree more, kevin.

I dream about living someplace like Rome or Amsterdam (with nary a supertall in sight) while at the same time you couldn't PAY me to live in Dubai. Tall buildings are fine but ultimately they don't mean a heck of a lot. Like you said, it's what's happening at street level that really matters.

Me too. Ill take 100 2-3 story buildings over 2 or 3 100 story buildings. What matters is street interaction. The sky is only for a select few, the street is for everyone...

So, if you ask would I mind if Met 3 is cut down? No I dont as long as there is a wholefoods in Downtown. THATS WHAT is going to make downtown succesful and allow for the possibility of a real supertall in the future. More people enjoying downtown as a livable place means more demand.. Anyways, I am always of the opinion that supertalls should be office buildings as they are more representative of the city, as an icon.

Me too. Ill take 100 2-3 story buildings over 2 or 3 100 story buildings. What matters is street interaction. The sky is only for a select few, the street is for everyone...

So, if you ask would I mind if Met 3 is cut down? No I dont as long as there is a wholefoods in Downtown. THATS WHAT is going to make downtown succesful and allow for the possibility of a real supertall in the future. More people enjoying downtown as a livable place means more demand.. Anyways, I am always of the opinion that supertalls should be office buildings as they are more representative of the city, as an icon.

Amen to that.