Future Skyline

That diagram has had two updates shortpants128 who has done some beautiful drawings for the diagram has created a better image of the Accordia proposal and an updated One Bromfield has been added.

QSvhQ8l.png


New Skyline Render from the One Bromfield thread with the Accordia proposal added. I may be off on how tall it will appear, but I think it is about right.

8XeQD9v.jpg
 
Last edited:
Newscenter 5 @ 7pm tonight to have a piece on the BRA and trying to balance Boston's development boom.
 
balance it with what?

endless nimby infill on our last highrise parcels?
 
nothing about skyscraper construction or, really, much NIMBY related stuff. focused on maintaining and creating additional affordable living units.
 
chrisbrat said:
nothing about skyscraper construction or, really, much NIMBY related stuff. focused on maintaining and creating additional affordable living units.
Click to expand...

Chrisbrat -- actually I found it quite interesting -- especially the BIG Model of the core of the city

and the comments about improving the business culture of the BRA

http://www.wcvb.com/money/huge-model-of-boston-is-used-to-follow-city-developments/39385136
Huge model of Boston is used to follow city developments | Money - WCVB Home
Click to expand...
 
whighlander said:
Chrisbrat -- actually I found it quite interesting -- especially the BIG Model of the core of the city

and the comments about improving the business culture of the BRA

http://www.wcvb.com/money/huge-model-of-boston-is-used-to-follow-city-developments/39385136
Click to expand...

oh i absolutely found it interesting (and i'd love to see/mess around with that model).

i was just noting that there wasn't -- in last night's installment, anyway. i guess there's "part II" tonight? -- any big focus on how all these proposed tall (for Boston...) towers are going to cast the entire city into permanent shadow and ruin our character and charm, turning us into the Dallas of the Northeast.
 
Did anyone else notice they really need to change some of those models. There are a bunch of proposals that they have not updated the models of which just stuck out to me as odd.
 
chrisbrat said:
oh i absolutely found it interesting (and i'd love to see/mess around with that model).

i was just noting that there wasn't -- in last night's installment, anyway. i guess there's "part II" tonight? -- any big focus on how all these proposed tall (for Boston...) towers are going to cast the entire city into permanent shadow and ruin our character and charm, turning us into the Dallas of the Northeast.
Click to expand...

Sigh. Character and charm.

People realize Philly, a city with similar history and "charm" is building a 1,121' tower? They already have 975', 945', 848'. Meanwhile in Boston...
 
^^My official position; despite all the lovely infill and low highrises that we do so well;

Overall, our skyline is an embarrassment. The rest of the country is leaving us in the dust. It didn't have to be that way. If all these towers get built, we will have ascended to a relative safe zone, free from embarrassment...

But, until i see every damn one of these towers proposed to top 190m actually go up, yes, hold me to the fire for that one.

I was thinking a bit about it last night – and i came to the conclusion a good many of the ones set to rise above 190m, will not be built in this cycle – if ever.

Why i'm not optimistic; http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-12-24/58-facts-about-us-economy-2015-are-almost-too-crazy-believe

my list of those that run the range of less likely to 'not happening;'
1. Copley Tower 190m (highly questionable)
2. 111 Federal St 224m (unlikely)
3. 1 Congress Office 190-195m (highly unlikely)
4. 1 Bromfield 215m (highly unlikely)
5. South Station Tower 206m (very remote)
6. Harbor Garage Tower 183m (extremely remote)
 
Last edited:
odurandina said:
^^My official position; despite all the lovely infill and low highrises that we do so well;

Overall, our skyline is an embarrassment. The rest of the country is leaving us in the dust. It didn't have to be that way. If all these towers get built, we will have ascended to a relative safe zone, free from embarrassment...

But, until i see every damn one of these towers proposed to top 190m actually go up, yes, hold me to the fire for that one.

I was thinking a bit about it last night – and i came to the conclusion a good many of the ones set to rise above 190m, will not be built in this cycle – if ever.

Why i'm not optimistic; http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-12-24/58-facts-about-us-economy-2015-are-almost-too-crazy-believe

my list of those that run the range of less likely to 'not happening;'
1. Copley Tower 190m (highly questionable)
2. 111 Federal St 224m (unlikely)
3. 1 Congress Office 190-195m (highly unlikely)
4. 1 Bromfield 215m (highly unlikely)
5. South Station Tower 206m (very remote)
6. Harbor Garage Tower 183m (extremely remote)
Click to expand...

Despite ZeroHedge's list of economic indicators, for the most part, the people these developments cater to are immune. The system is pretty rigged you know.
 
odurandina said:
Overall, our skyline is an embarrassment.
Click to expand...

That may be the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard in my life. Go over to East Boston if you want the "money shot" skyline view. The skyline from there looks as good as any skyline Iv ever seen in my life and I did 5 years in the Marines so Iv been to almost every state and continent. Yea Manhattan has spires, and is tall n all that shit- everyone knows its a great skyline, if you have ever seen the skyline from the East Boston waterfront there is no way you can think that is an embarrassment. Everybody has seen the Cambridge view of Boston and thats no slouch either by any means. I lost the article which pisses me off because someone asked me what "balance" the back bay skyline has when we were talking about 1 Dalton. Years ago before I got a new computer I had pictures that showed exactly why the skyline is shaped the way it is and I think if you could see the beauty behind that maybe you would appreciate it more. If anyone knows what Im talking about or where to find it its a bunch of sight lines of the city drawn out and the future sight lines to its peaks and valleys why they are where they are and how to grow while maintaining them. It looks like the old skyline with a ton of lines going everywhere. Ill just make a crappy one if need be and try to remember what they said I have a general idea.
 
Do you skyscraper people jerk off to thoughts of tall towers and pictures of the skyline all day? I don't get this fetish at all.
 
meddlepal said:
Do you skyscraper people jerk off to thoughts of tall towers and pictures of the skyline all day? I don't get this fetish at all.
Click to expand...

No, and I feel pretty safe saying that for everyone here except maybe odurandina.

Some people like cars.
Some people like to read.
Some people obsess with crossfit.
Some people collect stamps. (probably still true)
Some people like sifting through statistics.
Some people eat/sleep/breathe politics.
Some people want to hike all of New England's 4000 footers.
Some people want to see all 50 states.
Some people enjoy bird watching.
Some people are diehard sports fans.
Some people like skylines.

Then there are some sad people who don't have any hobbies of their own, and feel the need to tear down things that other people like to fill some empty void. I guess their hobby is.... trolling?
 
money
surfing (i spent 10 days on Tavarua a few years ago. hope for a trip to P-pass soon).
real estate market
wifey killing me with med school bills (she just finished)
Doing what i can to inspire the BRA to show backbone against selfish, anti-development interests.
car addiction/try to do at least 1 track day at Willow Springs or Chuckwalla each winter

The reason we have endless stunted highrises, an awful skyline and no more land for building over 180m? imo, it's because no one gave a shit about actually getting in these militant loons' faces. There's a lot to indict there. i think the city's overall architectural massing is relevant if not flatly important to forming it's identity. i discovered by reading the Globe posts there were more than a few people who agreed with my point of view: the time has come for Boston to be bold, and start building tall again.

i know as architects, most of you find it's distasteful to hold strong affirmative opinions, to the point of arguing over the height of a city's skyline. But, i decided to do what little i could to raise awareness that the nimby narrative isn't true; we're not going to become a mini Manhattan or anything even close. i've publicly railed against Shirley Kressel and others and i'm just getting started. i take the nimby destroying the a/r of my city's architecture a too far. No question. It's my warped sense of civic pride coming through, perhaps a bit too loudly.

i lobbied the members of the BRA extensively that they should approve the 44 story tower at the Garden Garage. i got some face time and was assured that my opinions would be weighed.

I know there's another guy in town who's also fanatical about building tall, except he went out, worked his ass off, beat the odds, and actually did something to change Boston: The unsinkable Don Chiofaro. Guy kicks ass.
 
Last edited:
DZH22 said:
No, and I feel pretty safe saying that for everyone here except maybe odurandina.

Some people like cars.
Some people like to read.
Some people obsess with crossfit.
Some people collect stamps. (probably still true)
Some people like sifting through statistics.
Some people eat/sleep/breathe politics.
Some people want to hike all of New England's 4000 footers.
Some people want to see all 50 states.
Some people enjoy bird watching.
Some people are diehard sports fans.
Some people like skylines.

Then there are some sad people who don't have any hobbies of their own, and feel the need to tear down things that other people like to fill some empty void. I guess their hobby is.... trolling?
Click to expand...

drops mic

:cool:
 
All thats cool but that doesn't mean the skyline is an embarrassment. Short- sure, embarrassing-Fuck no. The Hancock is the reason cities all over the globe have curtain glass walls, custom house tower, 60 state st, international place, the millennium, the fed is a 1 of a kind and looks good doing it...etc. The thing is its not about the individual parts, its about the sum of those parts. Our human scale along with the color palette and the different peaks and valleys make our skyline unique and it looks great doing it. An often not realized but important piece of what makes our skyline look good is not at the tops of pictures...its at the bottom. All those little church steeples from hundreds of years ago, the red brick base throughout the city, the domes, the wharves, the terra cotta, all of it comes together to make the "skyline". Yea Im rooting for 1 dalton, 1 Bromfield, 111 fed... but I wouldn't trade what we have for anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top