South Station Tower | South Station Air Rights | Downtown

mdd said:
I'm glad that it's being built, but it's really...boring. I wish they would have had some varying mullion sizes at select areas or different glazing patterns. Its just all one spacing and size all the way up the facade.
Click to expand...

The upper part that is residential will look different from the "cleaner" office floors below, for better or for worse. However, I'd rather have a cleaner looking building than something that resembles a Toronto reject. It's a classy building for a classy city.
 
Unfortunate that this is the last large skyscraper in the foreseeable future for Boston that contains a residential element to it while cities like Toronto are building what's probably equivalent to 2x to 3x the residential towers Boston built in this past cycle over the next few years. It's clear which cities are trying to solve their housing problem and which one is doing very little about it. Given that Boston has been losing population since 2020, the impact of high rent is negatively affecting the city.
 
I was in South Station yesterday and the tower has really changed the nature of the waiting area. It’s now a perpetual state of twilight in there.

I really hope they have plans to redo it to accommodate the lack of direct sunlight.
 
photo_2024-02-22 17.13.22.jpeg
 
Somehow I just cant get excited about this building, which is funny, because I think it was getting giddy over the prospect of a big tower over South Station that was one of the googling episodes that led me to archboston in the first place many years ago. Maybe it's just that it's not going to be all that tall, or maybe since we've already had a handful of glass towers go up in the interim. And it seems like, for all the hopes and dreams for this tower that everyone used to post about long before it finally became a reality, this tower isn't generating much excitement on aB generally, either. It's funny just remembering when Millennium finally started construction since that one had such constant attention. Perhaps we are collectively "over" the big towers and focused more on other projects that make more of a difference to the city and region?
 
FK4 said:
It's funny just remembering when Millennium finally started construction since that one had such constant attention. Perhaps we are collectively "over" the big towers and focused more on other projects that make more of a difference to the city and region?
Click to expand...

Having been on aB for a while now, I think your assessment is very correct. For every tall (for Boston) tower that *doesn't* really enhance the street-level experience (1 Dalton, for example, as much as I quite like it), those that -- despite whatever height or design negatives -- really change the pedestrian and overall "urban fabric" experience for the better (Verizon Tower/Hub on Causeway, for example, which I still think looks absolutlely hideous) are, overall, regarded as being a more meaningful, positive addition.

SST is (for me) particularly frustrating not b/c it's glass, but because it's *yet another* flat-topped, "crown-less" highrise. Why this city is so afraid of/averse to spires or anything remotely playful to "cap off" a tall building is confusing and a missed opportunity to me.
 
chrisbrat said:
Having been on aB for a while now, I think your assessment is very correct. For every tall (for Boston) tower that *doesn't* really enhance the street-level experience (1 Dalton, for example, as much as I quite like it), those that -- despite whatever height or design negatives -- really change the pedestrian and overall "urban fabric" experience for the better (Verizon Tower/Hub on Causeway, for example, which I still think looks absolutlely hideous) are, overall, regarded as being a more meaningful, positive addition.

SST is (for me) particularly frustrating not b/c it's glass, but because it's *yet another* flat-topped, "crown-less" highrise. Why this city is so afraid of/averse to spires or anything remotely playful to "cap off" a tall building is confusing and a missed opportunity to me.
Click to expand...
Yeah, agree. If it had a crown it would be a much more significant contribution... At least it will cover over the track at SS, but otherwise this doesnt add much.
 
FK4 said:
And it seems like, for all the hopes and dreams for this tower that everyone used to post about long before it finally became a reality, this tower isn't generating much excitement on aB generally, either.
Click to expand...

Personally, I'm very satisfied with the way SST is coming out, although I completely understand why many of you are disappointed or dissatisfied with the result.

Under basically any other circumstance, I'd say new glass towers aren't exciting or desirable because we've gotten so many of them recently. But I love the juxtaposition between the old headhouse and the new glass tower.
 
Last edited:
I think the lack of crowns downtown is pretty obvious... it's because of the FAA limitations due to Logan being right next door. Might as well maximize the height you can get with space that can actually be used. Maybe this argument holds weight in Back Bay, but not here.
 
Chickenman said:
I think the lack of crowns downtown is pretty obvious... it's because of the FAA limitations due to Logan being right next door. Might as well maximize the height you can get with space that can actually be used. Maybe this argument holds weight in Back Bay, but not here.
Click to expand...
The original proposal included a spire but was chopped because of airport height restrictions.
 
FK4 said:
It's funny just remembering when Millennium finally started construction since that one had such constant attention. Perhaps we are collectively "over" the big towers and focused more on other projects that make more of a difference to the city and region?
Click to expand...

Here's the 15 tallest buildings the metro built between 2005-2015, an 11 year span of relative futility. (even worse, a bunch were originally listed at the wrong lower heights, leaving off the crowns, which is why so many of the drawings are wrong)

1708666813292.png


Compare that to 2016 onward. MT was the tallest building in 40 years and 1st 200m building in 40 years. If this one was built first out of the same grouping, it would have had the most fanfare. It still will have plenty within a few more floors. It didn't help that the building was visually stuck (except for the glass) for 3-4 months or however long that was.

1708666879140.png
 
Last edited:
andrew.816 said:
I am mostly excited about the new concourse area, which I hope will lead to improvement of the old concourse and tracks.
Click to expand...
Agreed, but unfortunately the operator is terrible so I am not optimistic about improvements of the concourse. I think the developer of the tower is keeping control of the area they are building, so hopefully that part will stay better?
 
Chickenman said:
I think the lack of crowns downtown is pretty obvious... it's because of the FAA limitations due to Logan being right next door. Might as well maximize the height you can get with space that can actually be used. Maybe this argument holds weight in Back Bay, but not here.
Click to expand...
Well if you make it a bulbous tiara instead of a pointy spire, you can shove some HVAC in it and kill two birds with one stone 😜

111-h-1.png

https://maps.app.goo.gl/cp2d5Sh8HMAeGUaE7
 
they are bumping up the the cocoon wrap. It will be interesting to see the setback peaking up now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top