daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > General Urban Developments > DN Archives



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old April 17th, 2006, 02:04 PM   #21
PattieMIA
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 14
Likes (Received): 0

You misunderstood...NOBODY is asking for the Parking Lots as Parks...the project is not the one someone showed pictures of...it is EAST of the parking lots and it is the existing WATERFRONT, SHORELINE where the Miami Herald buildings now exist along the WATER...not the project West of the shoreline.
PattieMIA no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old April 17th, 2006, 02:28 PM   #22
Paul305
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 891
Likes (Received): 1018

You wake up too early.

Paul305 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 17th, 2006, 02:42 PM   #23
Paul305
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 891
Likes (Received): 1018

Quote:
Originally Posted by PattieMIA
Are you a Native of Miami? I am.
"Born and raised in the county of Dade" (to the tune of Trick Daddy's "Take it to the House").
Quote:
Originally Posted by PattieMIA
The one and only park now existing in the center of Downtown Miami is Bi-Centennial Park.
What about Bayfront Park?
Quote:
Originally Posted by PattieMIA
Planning green space for the BOOM IN POPULATION, people LIVING in the Downtown Miami corridor is essential.
They are creating greenways around Miami to help solve that problem. I actually just made a post about it on the Miami Forum, which you should definately check out. Here's a map of the Greenways:

Quote:
Originally Posted by PattieMIA
it goes against the present layout of the land with the shoreline now...the Herald land is now zoned C-2 which calls for a MAXIMUM height of 120 FEET...
Don't worry Pattie the FAA has got your back. They will likely crop these towers to 30 floors like they've done with other projects on the shoreline. This would match the height of the Venetia across the street which is 33 floors.
Paul305 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 17th, 2006, 05:39 PM   #24
archifreese
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Center City - Philadelphia
Posts: 341
Likes (Received): 129

^ what about margaret pace park only 3 blocks from this site to the northeast? that is one of the most successful recreational parks around with basketball, soccer, jogging, tennis and volleyball. thats a park i actually see people in. bicentennial is the least used park by the general public, except for james and his plane, the homeless, cirque du soleil for like 2 months a year and concert goers that often leave the park a mucky mess and even less desirable than it was before (if thats possible). the heart of that park was gutted years ago when they put the grand prix racetrack through it.

but either way i still think these building are better than the herald or the parking or both at any point in time. i see public access and amenities on the water in the renderings, the herald doesn't exactly have a plush hangout, i see an ugly 60s building and a massive antenna - how quaint. Verticality along the waterfront doesn't do anything to the waterfront but allow the density of attractions it draws to be realized. creating density at the core of the city (the waters edge in miamis case) is what makes cities walkable and livable.

and to constantly refer to the new manhattan yet than contradict yourself by saying it cant be a concrete jungle - where do you think that term was invented? in manhattan outside of central park the rest of the city IS a concrete jungle, and the parks plazas and squares of the city are bound by a concrete frame. theres not lush treelined streets everywhere, in fact a tree on broadway or sixth avenue or 5th avenue are rare sights. i hate when people compare manhattan density and quality of life to miami as is or proposed its not even 1/2way there.

also i think preserving cesar peli's desired views of his object architecture has already been done from the south (by eliminating opus towers) and east (causeway) enough, and i think we are overdoing the emblem of an awkward facility in the first place. Plus peli considered the view corridors and object in a field condition years before there were 10 let alone 130+ proposed towers in downtown, (people quickly forget this building was originally slated to open in 03/4 and was designed in 98/9 - thats why they have issues with parking as all the previous parking lots around it are being sold or developed, but thats another story....

Last edited by archifreese; April 17th, 2006 at 06:14 PM.
archifreese no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 18th, 2006, 12:29 AM   #25
The Mad Hatter!!
P.E.C.K CREW
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: miami
Posts: 2,994
Likes (Received): 631

Quote:
Originally Posted by PattieMIA
MIAMI - The Jewel by the Bay, "The Magic City"...
Most of us are enjoying the architectural progress in Miami.
Over 130 high-rise projects in and surrounding the Downtown Miami
area....


HOWEVER, now comes the time to HAULT and put on the BRAKES!
Why? The Miami Herald WATERFRONT land is the last remaining property,
privately owned, in the City, that is threatened to be ravaged by another
project of 2 mega-structure condo high-rise buildings, 62+ stories EACH.
I dont get you're comment, how is it the last remaining property privately owned on the waterfront? I find it quite hilarious since the miami waterfront is about 10miles long and 80%of it is privately owned, yet you dont care about those pieces of land?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PattieMIA
They are out of scale to the land considerations which is directly on Biscayne Bay and will DWARF the new and not-yet opened PAC (Performing Arts Center), as well as the other existing waterfront buildings within 2 blocks. This proposed condo project threatens to destroy the quality of life relative to INFRASTRUCTURE, particularly the TRAFFIC considerations and SCENIC aspects. And, inadequate GREEN SPACE!
I love your use of SEMANTIC SLANTING, inorder to try and convince us that this is a right and just cause. Your argument talking about dwarfing the new and unopened PAC is quite rediculous especially since the city has already approved 5towers above 50stories in a 5 block radius of the PAC, SO its already going to be dwarfed.Also it will not dwarf existing buildings because most buildings in the area are 400ft and up, so a building thats 600ft will make an minimal impact on the surrounding buildings. Also you live in miami, theres traffic everywhere,i mean everywhere. Scenic aspects? have you noticed how ugly the Miami herald building is, that thing is disgusting.Also there are 3 parks in this area, within a 5 minute walk, what more green space do you want?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PattieMIA
If Miami is the "New Manhattan", where is OUR CENTRAL PARK, where is our SUBWAY SYSTEM or other Transportation modes to move the masses of people? The HISTORIC Venetian Causeway is at serious risk of decline due
the inevitable TRAFFIC which will overflow to her bridges...surely, the residents of these Venetian Causeway bridges see the problem as HUGE!
new manhattan, since when, where is our empire state building?, when we build it, we'll make a central park. knowing that your just an average citizens, i'll explain to you the fact that it would cost probably 3x more in miami to build a subway than in new york, due to water levels and soil conditions.Let me guess you live on venetian, you rich person, let me guess you also complained about island gardens and every project in miami beach just because you're traffic might be impacted get over it like you said were the next manhattan , take a taxi.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PattieMIA
The Miami Herald people owe it to the PEOPLE of the City of Miami to review their steps and any sale to projects which will destroy, long-term, Miami's
last remaining privately-held WATERFRONT land...the City leaders,
Zoning Board, Commissioners, Mayor Diaz and others in Planning, MUST
be visionaries to what is looming to be a serious mistake. The Developer, The Terra Group, should consider they already have SEVERAL mega-structure high-rise projects in the works, 2 of which are only 1 block from this proposed WATERFRONT land, and RESPONSIBILITY to our environment and City is theirs to hold.
Environment? What does a building do to endanger the environment, if you haven't noticed the herald building is currently sitting on the property. You keep on mentioning this last privately owned waterfront property but did you care when they sold off, the villa magna site-no, when they sold the icon brickell site-no, the blue site-no, the island gardens site -no, you only care now because its going to block your views, its might have an increase of a few more cars in your area, and other very minimal impacts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PattieMIA
ATTEND the Miami Zoning Board meeting to OPPOSE this MIAMI HERALD WATERFRONT project:
Monday - 08MAY 06 7PM - City Hall - 3500 Pan American Drive - Miami - FL

Please don't assume others will attend...your voice is needed.
going to city hall isn't going to do anything, sorry but anyone can go to city hall and propose a project, and they will probably be approved.
__________________
"Architects are pretty much high-class whores. We can turn down projects the way they can turn down some clients, but we've both got to say yes to someone if we want to stay in business"Philip Johnson

Boycott the La forum-Worse forum in SSC
The Mad Hatter!! no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 18th, 2006, 12:42 AM   #26
The Mad Hatter!!
P.E.C.K CREW
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: miami
Posts: 2,994
Likes (Received): 631

Quote:
Originally Posted by PattieMIA
My... The WATERFRONT land where the existing Miami Herald building is now and the sliver of their parking area north of the existing Herald building...2 mega-structure high-rises of over 62 stories each is not reasonable along the shoreline...it goes against the present layout of the land with the shoreline now having low-rise and no buildings...the Herald land is now zoned C-2 which calls for a MAXIMUM height of 120 FEET...this was reasonable planning for shoreline. ...ie. the new PAC (Performing Arts Center) which the Architech had hoped would be visible from our Biscayne Bay for all to enjoy. .
You seem to getting this wrong, first off the terra group does not own this land, yes they are going for approval of this project but do not own the land. They are going for approval of the project inorder to fulfill the wishes of knight ridder which stated that if the herald building was sold to someone, the terra group has the right to enforce them to build the project which is approved.

That being said the herald isn't going anywhere the amount of money they spent on that building is a lot, the building they occupy is a good 250k sqft meaning to move into another building would cost them around 20-100million depending on whether they leased or built a new building. they currently have a 99year lease on they're building, which ends in 2025 i believe, until then they're not going anywhere.so you opposition to this project is quite uncalled for.
__________________
"Architects are pretty much high-class whores. We can turn down projects the way they can turn down some clients, but we've both got to say yes to someone if we want to stay in business"Philip Johnson

Boycott the La forum-Worse forum in SSC
The Mad Hatter!! no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 18th, 2006, 12:58 AM   #27
The Mad Hatter!!
P.E.C.K CREW
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: miami
Posts: 2,994
Likes (Received): 631

Pattie, if you want to continue your argument, it might be better if we took it to the miami forum. as you'll be able to talk to the people who you're trying to convince.
http://skyscrapercity.com/forumdispl...s=&forumid=513
__________________
"Architects are pretty much high-class whores. We can turn down projects the way they can turn down some clients, but we've both got to say yes to someone if we want to stay in business"Philip Johnson

Boycott the La forum-Worse forum in SSC
The Mad Hatter!! no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 18th, 2006, 01:57 PM   #28
PattieMIA
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 14
Likes (Received): 0

Yes, thank you...Bayfront too...all are too little space for the tens of thousands yet to live in Downtown Miami...the shoreline is of major concern...other cities plan their waterfronts so that from the water towards inland it comprises land, roadway (for all to drive upon to SEE the water, THEN the beginning of buildings...). Also, former Planning members in Miami were wise to keep shoreline zoning codes at UNDER 120 FEET (less than approximately 12 stories). To go higher creates the CURTAIN/WALL that prohibits the scenic visual of the water that most of us cherish and crave. It's bad for the people of Miami, visitors, just bad planning in general to rise higher along the waterfront. What are the Planning, Zoning and Commissioners thinking?
PattieMIA no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 18th, 2006, 02:06 PM   #29
PattieMIA
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 14
Likes (Received): 0

Reading is fundamental and comprehension a matter of not skimming.
The Herald land is the last privately held land along the waterfront...
(as I emphasized before: in the central Downtown core from NE 15th Street SOUTH
to the Inter-Continental Hotel...central Downtown).
All the other come-backs you replied to have already been addressed and "your"
interpretation is clearly mean to disuade others but, more seriously, misrepresent.
The concern is for the Waterfront and shoreline of this specific downtown area.
High-rise structures do indeed create walls that eliminate the scenic aspect to the water...the PAC concern is from the water...everything relates to the water and the shoreline. Miamians need to be alert and wake up to the fact that few are comprehending the long-term effects. WHAT ABOUT WATSON ISLAND?
PattieMIA no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 18th, 2006, 02:10 PM   #30
PattieMIA
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 14
Likes (Received): 0

...a 99-year lease from 1958 would make it 2057...the Herald has purchased land in Broward County...the "Broward Herald"? They have already said they are not going to stay in that building...only the printing press building may remain.
PattieMIA no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 18th, 2006, 06:49 PM   #31
Paul305
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 891
Likes (Received): 1018

So are you now saying that you want the property to be turned into a street? Or are you arguing that the building should be trimmed to 120 ft. so that people can see the water better? Because, there is no difference between 120 ft. and 600 ft. when you are driving behind a building unless you are 120 ft tall. If, however, you are trying to argue that an old, ten-floor building with surface parking, on the waterfront is more scenic than having two 60-floor buildings on the waterfront, then you have come to the wrong place. Most people here would agree that the latter is more scenic. Just look at Victoria Harbor in Hong Kong. It is, in my opinion, one of the most scenic places in the world and you won’t find any Herald Buildings on the waterfront there.

Last edited by Paul305; April 18th, 2006 at 07:06 PM.
Paul305 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 18th, 2006, 09:39 PM   #32
dave8721
Registered User
 
dave8721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Miami and Boston
Posts: 6,484
Likes (Received): 6388

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul305
So are you now saying that you want the property to be turned into a street? Or are you arguing that the building should be trimmed to 120 ft. so that people can see the water better? Because, there is no difference between 120 ft. and 600 ft. when you are driving behind a building unless you are 120 ft tall. If, however, you are trying to argue that an old, ten-floor building with surface parking, on the waterfront is more scenic than having two 60-floor buildings on the waterfront, then you have come to the wrong place. Most people here would agree that the latter is more scenic. Just look at Victoria Harbor in Hong Kong. It is, in my opinion, one of the most scenic places in the world and you won’t find any Herald Buildings on the waterfront there.
It should also be noted that unlike the current Herald building the proposal contains a space between the biuldings where people can see the bay from the street and also contains a public plaza along the bay, which the Herald of course does not have.
dave8721 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 19th, 2006, 04:40 PM   #33
PattieMIA
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 14
Likes (Received): 0

CONCERNS REMAIN...

Most may prefer the vertical without limits at this forum, I too am enjoying the city changes for the most part...however,
many do consider the importance of correct planning, as relates particularly
on the water...Chicago/Lake and Boston/River plans are right-on
with first water, then land, then roads, then buildings...

It's too late for most of the downtown Miami coastline for this to change
to the "ideal", however, ALL waterfront projects must be considered so as
not to create the vertical walls on the shoreline lands.
Yes to high-rise projects AWAY from the shoreline, NO to the waterfront
cement curtains.

It's pretty simple and not too much to ask for of our Planners and Developers...build responsibly. Build in proper stepped-scale formula...from the shore, lower heights with increases in height inland. MONEY is a great Capitalist society bonus but responsibility a factor to hold dear...waterfront needs special planning considerations.

Biscayne Bay is our natural "swimming pool" and to lose access and sight of it anywhere along our shores is a shame and careless lack of vision. To also lose scenic vision FROM the Bay is also irresponsible.
PattieMIA no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 19th, 2006, 08:08 PM   #34
Paul305
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 891
Likes (Received): 1018

The thought of turning this into a park is absolutely ridiculous and I'm amazed that you are still proposing it. If you look at the plan for this development, it includes a corridor with leads to the water where there is a public waterfront area. I think this is the best thing for the area as far as pedestrians are concerned. There is currently no public access to the water and if this project is approved there will be. So by opposing this project you are opposing a waterfront view. Here's the rendering again, that shows what I am talking about.

I really wish I took pictures the last time I was at Venetia, because currently, the Herald property is hideous and very pedestrian un-friendly. I dunno how else to convince you. I believe that your argument is flawed at all levels except maybe that we should have our towers tiered so that the inland buildings can be seen. My solution to this problem would be to put two 90 floor buildings behind the 60 floor buildings.
Paul305 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 19th, 2006, 08:20 PM   #35
DGM
Registered User
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Basel/SF/Miami
Posts: 715
Likes (Received): 570

I have a better solution. Put a Zaxby's franchise right there on the bay. They are really short, at only one story tall. You could see right over it if you found your way onto the roof of the PAC (don't jump). Plus, everyone loves Zaxby's and there aren't any in South Florida yet.
DGM no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 19th, 2006, 08:47 PM   #36
dave8721
Registered User
 
dave8721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Miami and Boston
Posts: 6,484
Likes (Received): 6388

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul305
My solution to this problem would be to put two 90 floor buildings behind the 60 floor buildings.
Now thats a solution we can all live with, except for those FAA folks
dave8721 no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 09:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu