South Station Tower | South Station Air Rights | Downtown

Re: South Station Tower

That tower would be perfect for 300m in the Back Bay.
 
Re: South Station Tower

Personally I like the old proposal. The spire itself could use some tweaking but that's what design review is for. In any event, it's a dead proposal. Given FAA height constraints, we are not likely to get a spire here. It would be a great spot for a building with a spire and a welcome surprise though. Then we would have spires at both South and North Stations with Boston Properties proposed office tower.
 
Re: South Station Tower

Light that spire and I'm sold.
 
Re: South Station Tower

dirtywater said:
It would be nice to go back to the old proposal. Alas, it was scrapped I assume because of FAA height constraints.

southstationtower.jpg
Click to expand...

^^Too bad, that's a cool spire....Boston Properties could add something like to the top of the Prudential building, and we'd have a whole new Back Bay icon.
(sorry to derail a bit)
 
Re: South Station Tower

Both the original and the revised proposal are complete stiffs. The brooding Pan Am Building (often referred to as the most reviled tall building in Manhattan) is distilled artistry by comparison.

Pelli offered an inert prism wearing a cheap-looking tiara, or a vaguely art deco massing model. The great sweeping curve of South Station's facade should serve as inspiration to any competent architect.

Strangely, the curvy Congress Street Garage proposal would work better here.
 
Re: South Station Tower

datadyne007 said:
Actually it would!
Click to expand...

Don't agree. The One Congress tower has the same flaw this one does - it's sleek and pretty from the front and back and bloated and lazy from the sides. At One Congress this is okay, because the sides aren't all that visible, particularly because it will go up after the towers at the Garden - you get the front view from the Harbor and the rear view from the River. Here, you get the front view from Dewey Square, the rear from... nowhere really, and the lesser side view from the Harbor.

One Congress would be just as exposed. It's a strength of One Bromfield and One Dalton (I'm sensing a trend in these brand names) that they look equally good from all sides, and Brom manages it without being symmetrical.
 
Re: South Station Tower

Beton Brut said:
Both the original and the revised proposal are complete stiffs. The brooding Pan Am Building (often referred to as the most reviled tall building in Manhattan) is distilled artistry by comparison.

Pelli offered an inert prism wearing a cheap-looking tiara, or a vaguely art deco massing model. The great sweeping curve of South Station's facade should serve as inspiration to any competent architect.

Strangely, the curvy Congress Street Garage proposal would work better here.
Click to expand...

Equilibria said:
Don't agree. The One Congress tower has the same flaw this one does - it's sleek and pretty from the front and back and bloated and lazy from the sides. At One Congress this is okay, because the sides aren't all that visible, particularly because it will go up after the towers at the Garden - you get the front view from the Harbor and the rear view from the River. Here, you get the front view from Dewey Square, the rear from... nowhere really, and the lesser side view from the Harbor.

One Congress would be just as exposed. It's a strength of One Bromfield and One Dalton (I'm sensing a trend in these brand names) that they look equally good from all sides, and Brom manages it without being symmetrical.
Click to expand...

Brilliant post/s (sigh).
 
Re: South Station Tower

Globe: Plan for 49-story high-rise above South Station is on again
Boston Globe said:
The developer has been meeting regularly with staff members of the BRA and the Massachusetts Department of Transportation about the project, which would be along Atlantic Avenue between the station’s main entrance and the bus terminal, with the tower rising above the tracks.

Hines currently has approval for a 1.9 million-square-foot development, with an office tower of up to 677 feet and smaller buildings for a hotel and housing. However, the developer has been tweaking its plans for what the tower might hold, city officials said, and is considering including more housing and less office space.

Any major changes would need to be filed with the BRA and would be subject to public hearings and community meetings before approval, BRA spokesman Nick Martin said.
Click to expand...
 
Re: South Station Tower

Beton Brut said:
Both the original and the revised proposal are complete stiffs. The brooding Pan Am Building (often referred to as the most reviled tall building in Manhattan) is distilled artistry by comparison.

Pelli offered an inert prism wearing a cheap-looking tiara, or a vaguely art deco massing model. The great sweeping curve of South Station's facade should serve as inspiration to any competent architect.

Strangely, the curvy Congress Street Garage proposal would work better here.
Click to expand...

^I have to admit Beton's right. While I don't detest the overall look of the tower/spire, the modern look of the tower really does look out of place mated to the historic and majestic looking base. The tower pays no homage to the elegant structure below at all.
 
Re: South Station Tower

Can we stop pretending Pelli is a good architect. He had some good ideas once but he has been garbage for a long time. Same for I.M. Pei
 
Re: South Station Tower

meddlepal said:
Can we stop pretending Pelli is a good architect. He had some good ideas once but he has been garbage for a long time. Same for I.M. Pei
Click to expand...

^off thread but tonight's Jeopardy had an I M Pei category. On one of the questions a pic of "Boston's iconic blue glass Back Bay tower" was shown, question was: Which famous Boston area resident was this I M Pei designed landmark originally named for? Answer: Hancock (he got it correct)
(I'm not quoting exactly-only what I remember!)
 
Last edited:
Re: South Station Tower

meddlepal said:
Can we stop pretending Pelli is a good architect. He had some good ideas once but he has been garbage for a long time. Same for I.M. Pei
Click to expand...

Give him a break. This SST design was most likely a preliminary design, similar to how most projects have a ambiguous looking structure in the beginning until the details are fleshed out. We all know SST's at no time in its history, been far enough along the process where groundbreaking was imminent and thus never warranted a final design. Let's hope this time it would.
 
Re: South Station Tower

It was approved and under construction at one point with the foundation completed before it was halted. Although at the time it was being built to the current design which in my opinion looks good.
 
Re: South Station Tower

This was the last design I saw for this building sorry for the bad pic
 
Re: South Station Tower

lapradetom said:
^I have to admit Beton's right. While I don't detest the overall look of the tower/spire, the modern look of the tower really does look out of place mated to the historic and majestic looking base. The tower pays no homage to the elegant structure below at all.
Click to expand...

Dunno. If they'd gone to "mate" the tower to the base, I feel like that would ruin the scale of the station. I think we had this discussion back in 2006, btw. :)

Boston02124 - is that the 3D model the BRA had commissioned before the Olympics, or something from Hines?
 
Re: South Station Tower

Please, something with a spire. Or crown. Or even a "cheap tiara." Just something that is lit up at night. All these great new buildings in the works, but most have boring, flat roofs that aren't lit at night. Like the Hancock, they disappear in the darkness for the most part. Light it up!!
 
Re: South Station Tower

stick n move said:
It was approved and under construction at one point with the foundation completed before it was halted. Although at the time it was being built to the current design which in my opinion looks good.
Click to expand...

Don't think any particular project ever was under construction. It was more that when the station was last renovated, the necessary subsurface footings for any subsequent project were put in place. This was because the T or whomever has custody of the property knew the value of air rights over the tracks, but wanted to minimize disruption if and when those rights were ever developed.

I've been reading about air rights developments at this site for 50 years, ranging from a Three Rivers donut style stadium to these latest fantasies. I'll believe it when I see that last rivet hammered into the zeppelin mast.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top