The Hub on Causeway (née TD Garden Towers) | 80 Causeway Street | West End

My evolving interpretation of your informed post:

Ahh, at first i thought you phrased the question as if to explain why they should not do it....

But then you explain that they could... or even should (my subjective interpretation).

Then you gave the reason why New York has it, but here they just VE stuff like this: (Bostonification).

i wonder if they even had a costlier design on their clean sheet of paper (Newyorkification).

We must assume BP had a superlative 3D model, and showed it to the spendthrifts at Delaware North.... You know, the swell folks that traded away half of the last 43 NHL All Star teams, and made over a billion dollars exploiting the fans searching for Bobby Orr.... oh, and there was that rink they forgot to build for the kids in some neighborhood they couldn't give a rats ass about.....

Good analysis. I visualize the posting progression on archboston to be akin to or as a result of a drinking game. Which is funny because I think some of the architecture and planning around here follows a similar methodology for likely similar reasons.
 
Could heated floors pitched towards drains be used to reduce the impact of snow blowing in? Personally, I think a giant door sounds ridiculous and impractical

Radiant slabs are really really expensive, though the price is probably comparable to the custom glass roll up/parting mega doors being discussed & all the HVAC needed to properly control the indoor climate of a winter garden (remember, enclosing the space has more implications than just doors).
 
Good analysis. I visualize the posting progression on archboston to be akin to or as a result of a drinking game. Which is funny because I think some of the architecture and planning around here follows a similar methodology for likely similar reasons.

i spoke in room 900 on Boston TV about the 11th hour change at Winthrop Square to 'twin towers' being "more New Yorkish" to collective gasps. The architect spoke to me after. He was simultaneously thrilled by the compliment and the subdued looks by the horrified nimby onlookers.....

i'm trying to get my carnival barker rep to help prepare the way for "the Big One."

This Hub is a repeat of 345 Harrison Avenue built about twice as tall. Appropriate for today's cellphone seduced pedestrian, that need a bit of extra stimulation to have the slightest chance of 'looking up.' The architect knew this, and 'went for it.' People will look up.... and possibly admire it for its novelty (carnival) style.

Cheap? Maybe. But i don't think that's the real problem with this project.

It's the lack of height variance of the 659' resident tower and far more attractive 'wharf-topped' low a/r office tower not making the final cut/s.
 
Last edited:
I don't see the problem. This is essentially a partially enclosed plaza. I'd prefer the wide open entrance to a glass door.

I absolutely love the wide open "gateway". It reminds me of Rowes Wharf which, 30+ years later, remains one of the greatest things to hit Boston. Also Galleria Vittorio Emmanuelle in Milan https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galleria_Vittorio_Emanuele_II

Cities needs SOCIAL, CIVIC architecture that celebrates people coming together. North Station/TD Garden is a natural for this kind of exhuberant placemaking. People will congregate under that roof, be it on game days, or just to meet friends for shopping, etc. There will be a BUZZ. Just think of it, folks, real HUMAN NOISE - - the kind you get where things are happening.

I remember watching the NHL playoffs a few years ago and being jealous of the outdoor events during the games that were taking place outside the new Maple Leaf Gardens in Toronto. That area was archtecturally/urban-wise ALIVE - - and I kept thinking "Why can't North Station be like THAT.

Well the Hub (and the Converse HQ amongst other things) is making it all happen. With all respect to Odurandina and the Heightists, cities are not about buildings that are framed with people. They are about people framed by buildings. Just ask downtown Houston at 9:30pm on a Tuesday night.

.

.
 
Last edited:
I absolutely love the wide open "gateway". It reminds me of Rowes Wharf which, 30+ years later, remains one of the greatest things to hit Boston. Also Galleria Vittorio Emmanuelle in Milan https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galleria_Vittorio_Emanuele_II

Cities needs SOCIAL, CIVIC architecture that celebrates people coming together. North Station/TD Garden is a natural for this kind of exhuberant placemaking.

.

Throw me in that column of loving the wide gateway as well.

Btw, was exHUBerant an intentional misspelling? Even if not, it works.
 
I wish they had gone the full allowed height on the res tower just for the sake of being that much taller than the office tower, the difference in height would have been much more visually impactful. The renders i've seen have them close to the same height
 
I wish they had gone the full allowed height on the res tower just for the sake of being that much taller than the office tower, the difference in height would have been much more visually impactful.

This conversation that the The Hub of Causeway (which I feel is a spectacular development for the neighborhood and the city) had the variance to go higher but didn't, continues to pop up every so often. What's the actual story here, did Delaware North not have the funding, did they figure more height wouldn't have been profitable, was it neighborhood opposition? Why, exactly, didn't they go as tall as they were legally allowed to go?
 
This conversation that the The Hub of Causeway (which I feel is a spectacular development for the neighborhood and the city) had the variance to go higher but didn't, continues to pop up every so often. What's the actual story here, did Delaware North not have the funding, did they figure more height wouldn't have been profitable, was it neighborhood opposition? Why, exactly, didn't they go as tall as they were legally allowed to go?

As I understand it nimbyism killed the additional height and BP didn’t want to push for it. That being said I think the height is fine. It looks tall especially from the greenway and causeway. Dare I say 650’ would have been overwhelming for the neighborhood.

If MGH ever developed the parking lot behind the garden I’d support the FAA limit...anyone want to photoshop that????
 
The final height of 659' for the Hub resident tower was approved sometime in early 2015. But, in Oct, 2015 at a private meeting, Boston Properties and the BPDA decided to concede significant height to the North End flat earthers .... and the tower was reduced to 496'. The Office tower stayed at ~505', but they agreed to come back with a more attractive proposal (which we got a few weeks later).

Why did they agree to concede height? In the days/weeks prior to that, the BPDA resolved to drop the hammer and move ahead with the Garden Garage.... The height reduction was given with the 4th tower (GG) in mind.

The Garden Garage, once planned for 2 squat turds, was reduced to a single tall tower (46 stories) pushing ~530' in 2014....

With an extraordinary opportunity to build iconic height at North Station now conceded, the BPDA's attitude was as if to say; "ok, we listened to your bullshit about Hub resident tower: Now, we're moving ahead with Garden Garage. Shut up and go home." Their pending approval of GG would say; "Enough with the bullshit."

After a contentious public meeting in late October, the Globe began posting stories about the GG project being in serious doubt for gaining final approval (total BS of course).... At such time, i began posting on Skyscraper City and the Boston Globe (nov~dec '15), assuring the project was getting approved.

At the last private meeting on November 7th, 2015, ER extended an olive branch; offering to reduce the tower by 2 additional floors, but no more (485' total height), reduced floor to floor height, took back a bit of width, and cut some parking spaces. Something like 40 or 50 nimby's walked out of the meeting in protest, claiming the developer "wasn't serious." The nimby's issued a statement to the Press and BPDA:

[IT IS DIFFICULT TO PARTICIPATE IN A PROCESS THAT HAS ONLY GIVEN LIP SERVICE TO OUR COMMUNITY’S OVERWHELMING CONCERNS. THIS IS BORNE OUT BY THE RECENT NEW NOTICE OF PROJECT CHANGE THAT DELIVERS NOTHING MEANINGFUL FROM THE DEVELOPER IN THE FORM OF REAL “CHANGE.”]

In the January 14th, 2016 BPDA Board meeting, the atmosphere got extremely heated again, requiring the meeting be tabled to give to give the angry stakeholders some time to 'calm down.'

At the next Board meeting on February 11th, 2016, the nimby opposition took on an angry, aggressive tone, Naturally, when the Board voted 5-0 to approve, the nimby's, now in collective shock, went into full meltdown.

That's how the height for the 2 resident towers went down.
 
Last edited:
but the fact remains that the Hub resident tower didn't HAVE to reduce the height, they were approved for 659. They could have gone ahead and built that. Again, i'm not advocating for taller here for the sake of height, but specifically for taller as a tool for better appearance/perspective in context to its surroundings. I just dont think it looks as good with the office tower being almost the same height.
 
I just dont think it looks as good with the office tower being almost the same height.

Not just the office tower. There will be 4 buildings in the cluster, all with (essentially) flat roofs and all between 449'-510'. Boston hasn't gotten the memo that peaks and valleys are aesthetically pleasing.
 
Not just the office tower. There will be 4 buildings in the cluster, all with (essentially) flat roofs and all between 449'-510'. Boston hasn't gotten the memo that peaks and valleys are aesthetically pleasing.

Boston likes buzz cut construction. Look at the Theatre District, Chinatown towers.

Part of it is the NIMBY influence, where every new building has to prove it is no worse (aka taller) than the others recently constructed.
 
Not just the office tower. There will be 4 buildings in the cluster, all with (essentially) flat roofs and all between 449'-510'. Boston hasn't gotten the memo that peaks and valleys are aesthetically pleasing.

And when they do build something different, you end up with 111 Huntington.
 
We are 60% through October.
How's the "October" CR-Subway connection?
 
Not just the office tower. There will be 4 buildings in the cluster, all with (essentially) flat roofs and all between 449'-510'. Boston hasn't gotten the memo that peaks and valleys are aesthetically pleasing.

The TD Garden area will have 4 towers of that height?
 

Back
Top