Winthrop Center | 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

Equilibria said:
...For those of us - like me - who don't like the Millennium design, we're probably going to have to get used to it.
Click to expand...

Or hope that their early early-stage design will be refined over time...

Interestingly, while at the open house, I heard the Trinity group reps snickering about how certain competitor's designs were "all show and no go". They were literally bragging that they'd spent the least on the up-front design, with hopes of "offering the city a stronger value proposition" going forward. "Some developers spent a lot of money on a sexy design. We didn't," they said*. I found it funny that they felt the need to divulge that as if it were a secret.

*These are obviously approximate paraphrases.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

bigpicture7 said:
Or hope that their early early-stage design will be refined over time...

Interestingly, while at the open house, I heard the Trinity group reps snickering about how certain competitor's designs were "all show and no go". They were literally bragging that they'd spent the least on the up-front design, with hopes of "offering the city a stronger value proposition" going forward. "Some developers spent a lot of money on a sexy design. We didn't," they said*. I found it funny that they felt the need to divulge that as if it were a secret.

*These are obviously approximate paraphrases.
Click to expand...

Yes, well, an actual architect might have told them not to propose a driveway where their competitors put a Great Hall.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

Equilibria said:
I looked into the program of each proposal....

For those of us - like me - who don't like the Millennium design, we're probably going to have to get used to it.
Click to expand...


^^Great post. YES, That's painful to read.

i was just thinking before you posted which project i'd most hate to see lost.

i love the twin towers, but Accordia's proposal is THE ONE.

So, i'm thinking the city would fare better with 3 rounds instead of 2.

round 2: BRA

1. gives the developer/s the opportunity to change their upfront cash/gift offer/s.

2. design a better tower... because the original renders (except for Accordia) aren't very good.

give them 45 days.

Round 3: BRA announces the final 2 or 3 developers.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

Remember in context this is going to be around the same height of 1 bromfield (which is THE showpiece tower) if accordia does not win. Theres going to be a central trio of towers along with SST and GCG off to the sides. Its not like this tower is going to reign supreme over all of downtown. Ill be fine with a good enough Millennium if it comes down to it because the public realm is fantastic and it will not be the centerpiece per say. It will be a complimentary tower and I think it will be able to do it will if thats where this ends up going.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

Millennium is a little chunky, but I really dig the verticality and the crown lighting looks really good. Not jaw dropping, but its a handsome building that is going to look good on the skyline, from the street looking up, and from the street looking in.

The large square footage (tax base) and the Great Hall are going to be very strong selling points. Just poach the observation deck from Accordia and I would be satisfied.

That said, half the reason Accordia is so attractive is because it's half the size of Millennium. Its more graceful proportions may be its undoing.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

Wow, Trinity looks like complete shit.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

A couple of thoughts after digesting this new financial info:

1) fattony is spot on about Accordia - wonderful (yet unprofitable) proportions; probably an expensive SHoP design, too; looks fabulous + uses expensive materials; seems they did not do enough to account for profitability (unless the hotel is a far greater revenue stream than any of us are aware of) - maybe they know something we dont, but, you'd think their bid would have been higher if they did

2) Trinity - went 100% in a specific direction: cheap design and putting all their cards into wooing the city with massive affordable housing. I will be the first to commend them that it is noble to pursue affordable housing as a priority. But, even as a huge proponent of affordable housing in downtown, even I will say: why this particular parcel for 40% affordable?? The city made it clear from day one that this is a marque parcel from which it's looking for multi-dimensional benefit to the city. Marque location for skyline impact; marque location for bringing business/pleasure/residences/foot traffic together on one parcel. Affordable housing needs to be placed in good locations, but it doesn't need to be in a 725-fit signature tower. Even making one of the (shorter) new towers in the SS complex, or one or more shorter towers in the Steam Plant development affordable makes more sense than 111 fed.

3) Not a fan of Millenium's massing, but I can surely see how the design is more profitable and allows them to bid higher to the city. It pains me to shift my vote from Accordia, but there needs to be a "practical reality" aspect to this. I'd like to see them do something better with the top, and/or include the observation deck. Otherwise, I'll settle for it
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

fattony said:
That said, half the reason Accordia is so attractive is because it's half the size of Millennium. Its more graceful proportions may be its undoing.
Click to expand...

It's the same mechanism that gives us landscrapers and forces cities to legislate setbacks... air is money left on the table.

Millennium doesn't carry its weight poorly, BTW, though it's a bit of a monolith from the Winthrop Square side... They help with that a bit by stopping the ribbing three stories up and fronting the square with clear glass and retail. Just looking at this thing, though... it's huge. Looking up from Winthrop Square, you probably wouldn't even see the top.

2zqx6zb.png


2e3o010.png
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

How is the Great Hall going to be anything but a sanitized corporate lobby with some occasional programming? I don't get the love for this.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

Shepard said:
How is the Great Hall going to be anything but a sanitized corporate lobby with some occasional programming? I don't get the love for this.
Click to expand...

That's exactly what it will be and that's exactly how it felt in the VR demo. Just standing in the middle of a sterile, hard-surfaced, cold corporate lobby with fancy lighting.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

If it's anything like the galleria in Milan than its a huge positive for the city...of course for that there would have to be cafes etc inside the hall.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

bigpicture7 said:
A couple of thoughts after digesting this new financial info:

1) fattony is spot on about Accordia - wonderful (yet unprofitable) proportions; probably an expensive SHoP design, too; looks fabulous + uses expensive materials; seems they did not do enough to account for profitability (unless the hotel is a far greater revenue stream than any of us are aware of) - maybe they know something we dont, but, you'd think their bid would have been higher if they did

2) Trinity - went 100% in a specific direction: cheap design and putting all their cards into wooing the city with massive affordable housing. I will be the first to commend them that it is noble to pursue affordable housing as a priority. But, even as a huge proponent of affordable housing in downtown, even I will say: why this particular parcel for 40% affordable?? The city made it clear from day one that this is a marque parcel from which it's looking for multi-dimensional benefit to the city. Marque location for skyline impact; marque location for bringing business/pleasure/residences/foot traffic together on one parcel. Affordable housing needs to be placed in good locations, but it doesn't need to be in a 725-fit signature tower. Even making one of the (shorter) new towers in the SS complex, or one or more shorter towers in the Steam Plant development affordable makes more sense than 111 fed.

3) Not a fan of Millenium's massing, but I can surely see how the design is more profitable and allows them to bid higher to the city. It pains me to shift my vote from Accordia, but there needs to be a "practical reality" aspect to this. I'd like to see them do something better with the top, and/or include the observation deck. Otherwise, I'll settle for it
Click to expand...

I agree 100%. The city needs affordable housing, and tons of it, but making a signature downtown tower look like shit so you can stuff affordable housing into it is not the answer. I don't think the middle class necessarily needs to be living in the middle of downtown, build more low strung apartments and triple deckers in the outer neighborhoods. Im a reasonable person who wants people to be able to afford to live in the city, but its kind of obvious that that doesn't mean throw cheap units in the CDB. Theres plenty of room in the outer neighborhoods and they are free to commute downtown. It goes without saying that the closer you get to the core the more rent is going to be and I don't think anything is wrong with that. Whats wrong is that people cant even afford to live in the outer neighborhoods due to lack of stock. Build the new shiny stuff downtown build the affordable stuff in the outer neighborhoods.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

datadyne007 said:
That's exactly what it will be and that's exactly how it felt in the VR demo. Just standing in the middle of a sterile, hard-surfaced, cold corporate lobby with fancy lighting.
Click to expand...

I trust your opinion and I didn't see the VR, but in the renders it's lined with two levels of retail concourse. I could see it being like a mall, but how is it like a lobby?
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

617 said:
If it's anything like the galleria in Milan than its a huge positive for the city...of course for that there would have to be cafes etc inside the hall.
Click to expand...

..and if it's anything like the Galleria in Cambridge, then its a well-executed compact urban shopping mall
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

CSTH said:
..and if it's anything like the Galleria in Cambridge, then its a well-executed compact urban shopping mall
Click to expand...

It's neither of those.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

The great hall looks like a colonoscopy image, complete with hemorrhoids.

Still, Millenium has a track record.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

thank you Toby. i was too much of a pussy to say it was ok but...

oh, i had a thought. could nimby sentiment for massing help us get Accordia?
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

datadyne007 said:
That's exactly what it will be and that's exactly how it felt in the VR demo. Just standing in the middle of a sterile, hard-surfaced, cold corporate lobby with fancy lighting.
Click to expand...


what if the Great Hall included a restaurant/retail component similar to Eataly with many different options (both sit down and quick service) unique to that part of the city? I'm sure that would generate a ton of daily foot traffic.... Is there a competitor to Eataly?
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

^ That's called a food court.

A high end food court. Nothing wrong with that. A nice food court, maybe some sit-down too, is a freaking awesome thing.

But it's naive to think this is going to be a concert hall or something.

Maybe they'd throw a couple of events in the first year or two to demonstrate bona fides, but then the event coordinator would get promoted to a different job, the position would stay vacant for a while....

Not trying to be a hater. A food court / food hall deserves a thoughtful and well-executed architectural treatment as much as or even more than any other function. Just saying that believing that spaces generate programming is like believing that new office buildings create permanent office jobs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top