Joined
·
2,892 Posts
NYC got the Empire in, what, 1933? Chicago got the John Hancock Center in 1969. Hong Kong got the Bank of China in the late eighties. The Sears and WTC also came in the early seventies.
Miami needs a signature super tall skyscraper as its "personality" bldg. The Sears is big, black, broad, and overpowering. The WTC was unique-- twins, broad, bulky, way bigger than the surrounding bldgs.
Miami needs the same. Met 3 is nice. Four Seasons is nice. Wachovia is good. But, those buildings need to be the secondary supporting skyscrapers, not the primary level of scyscrapers.
Pretty soon, downtown Miami, uptown, and Brickell will resemble the general layout of Chicago's downtown with the residential to office mix of midtown Manhattan. Collins, Brickell, and Biscayne will be Miami's answer to Chicago's Lake Shore Drive and Sheridan Road.
The Metromover is Miami's Chicago Loop; The Miami River is just like its Chicago counterpart; The MIC will be Miami's Union Station; Biscayne Bay is Miami's Lake Michigan (but much better); Port of Miami is like Navy Pier/Meigs Field (only better); Dadeland is Miami's Rosemont area near O'Hare; Sawgrass is South Fla's Gurnee Mills; etc...
The comparison is remarkable. But, Miami needs a John Hancock Center/ Sears Tower. The thing about Chicago, is, after the Hancock was done, when they were building the Sears Tower, they also threw in the Standard Oil Bldg. (which was taller than the Hancock) for shits and giggles.
Enough of the essay and preaching to the choir (did I spell that right?). I love the Lynx and Met 3 projects. Worst case scenario, Miami will just be a really dense downtown without supertalls; a smaller version of Chicago's downtown--- but large in its own right.
Miami needs a signature super tall skyscraper as its "personality" bldg. The Sears is big, black, broad, and overpowering. The WTC was unique-- twins, broad, bulky, way bigger than the surrounding bldgs.
Miami needs the same. Met 3 is nice. Four Seasons is nice. Wachovia is good. But, those buildings need to be the secondary supporting skyscrapers, not the primary level of scyscrapers.
Pretty soon, downtown Miami, uptown, and Brickell will resemble the general layout of Chicago's downtown with the residential to office mix of midtown Manhattan. Collins, Brickell, and Biscayne will be Miami's answer to Chicago's Lake Shore Drive and Sheridan Road.
The Metromover is Miami's Chicago Loop; The Miami River is just like its Chicago counterpart; The MIC will be Miami's Union Station; Biscayne Bay is Miami's Lake Michigan (but much better); Port of Miami is like Navy Pier/Meigs Field (only better); Dadeland is Miami's Rosemont area near O'Hare; Sawgrass is South Fla's Gurnee Mills; etc...
The comparison is remarkable. But, Miami needs a John Hancock Center/ Sears Tower. The thing about Chicago, is, after the Hancock was done, when they were building the Sears Tower, they also threw in the Standard Oil Bldg. (which was taller than the Hancock) for shits and giggles.
Enough of the essay and preaching to the choir (did I spell that right?). I love the Lynx and Met 3 projects. Worst case scenario, Miami will just be a really dense downtown without supertalls; a smaller version of Chicago's downtown--- but large in its own right.