11-21 Bromfield Street | DTX | Downtown

uxvHZFh.jpg


http://www.bostonglobe.com/business...nnium-tower/trp33TPlCnINryqzTTDgRO/story.html
 
Last edited:
BRA must have said, 'if you build it tall, build it round.'
 
Yes please. I love the part that cantilevers out.
 
Need more angles, but it looks a little like Lake Point Tower (Chicago) went on a diet.

LakePointTower-0090512-001a.jpg
 
I'll say it first......Copley Tower on steroids!

The design might be derivative but it will still look incredible from the Common and other angles...
 
Is that a masonry-clad podium? If the Payless building has to go, that's what I'd like to see in its place.

I'm struck by how much this dwarfs 45 Province.

Edit: Nope, podium is mostly glass:

dh1g77V.jpg
 
KentXie said:
Yes please. I love the part that cantilevers out.
Click to expand...

Actually, I think it cantilevers on two sides (and maybe on 3).

EDIT: Why would the Globe even say 683'? Why does anyone report anything other than structural height?
 
The bases on those two renders are pretty clearly not the same.
 
2 thoughts:

1. I don't understand why they can't give Payless the facadectomy it deserves. The base is so huge and the tower already cantilevers. Why not keep Payless on that corner?

2. I wonder if the 683' mark includes any mech on top, or if this will really be 2' shorter than Millennium across the street. (with 678' South Station and a slightly shortened Winthrop Square, we'll be looking a brand new plateau... again!!!)
EDIT: Looks like it's definitely taller than Millennium. Over 700'.
 
DZH22 said:
2 thoughts:

1. I don't understand why they can't give Payless the facadectomy it deserves. The base is so huge and the tower already cantilevers. Why not keep Payless on that corner?

2. I wonder if the 683' mark includes any mech on top, or if this will really be 2' shorter than Millennium across the street. (with 678' South Station and a slightly shortened Winthrop Square, we'll be looking a brand new plateau... again!!!)
EDIT: Looks like it's definitely taller than Millennium. Over 700'.
Click to expand...

Wasn't the Millennium Tower listed at something like 625' when proposed? I hope we get that extra boost here too.
 
DZH22 said:
2. I wonder if the 683' mark includes any mech on top, or if this will really be 2' shorter than Millennium across the street. (with 678' South Station and a slightly shortened Winthrop Square, we'll be looking a brand new plateau... again!!!)
Click to expand...

Very, very unlikely it's actually 683'. Renders of this in the skyline invariably make it look taller than Millennium by about 30', in keeping with the 710' prediction. There also appears to be about 30' of penthouse height in the program diagram.

Then again, they clearly photoshopped Millennium Tower into those renders (hilariously, in some cases), so...
 
Another note: They got a LOT of the elevations wrong on Page 6. Mellon Bank at 670'? Uhhhh no.

JSic said:
Wasn't the Millennium Tower listed at something like 625' when proposed? I hope we get that extra boost here too.
Click to expand...

Yeah when you see all the renders this definitely looks taller than the 683'. Towers over MT by a couple floors. I think the 683' is to the top of the highlighted section on Page 4 of the BRA document.

I have to say I actually love the tower, but very much dislike the base. Would like them to keep the Payless building (or façade) on the corner. Keep it "Boston".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top