Search results

My best guess: neighbors complained that the lights would cast shadows on the streets below. Or on the Common; Trinity Church; etc.

Does anybody know (approximately) when public comments on this wretched incarnation/proposal will be formally invited?

From last Thursday (Aug 11). Apologies for the low image quality; taken with an Iphone 6.

This image makes me wish that 40 Trinity Place had a thin spire on it (or something to complement the Prudential). Alas.

FWIW, Parcel 12 will be/is 324.80" to the tip-top, according to Emporis [https://www.emporis.com/buildings/1550170/parcel-12-office-building-boston-ma-usa]

Guess we'll have to wait and see; hopefully it'll be covered (or is there any chance it's a temporary structure?), but there's nothing evident from the 2 plan images below:

Notably, last week the Arlington town government officially approved a zoning change, from a FAR of 2 to a FAR of 3. I'll provide a link later for those interested in the comments made prior to the vote, but they were 80% positive (commercial sustainability/density/equity/etc.).

Latest update on South Station construction progress (from the project managers); bold-face added for emphasis: Activity on Tracks and Platforms The contractor is currently erecting a steel structure that will cover the entire railyard, which will support the expanded bus terminal. The new...

Beeline posted the photo of the sampler on March 28th, so let's hope the construction company was setting up the sampler as part of an elaborate April Fool's joke.

A minor update: S&F just posted the following on their Facebook page: " We have begun work on the massive cap beams at the South Station project. The 2 tower cranes have yet to be installed. However, our team has managed to kick off at an impressive pace. There is much to do. But a great...

If you click on the picture to see the larger version, the Hancock is absolutely stunning.

While nowhere near as sublimely, I could imagine a similar type of facade - with the interplay of the fins and that one strip of solely windows as an example - being turbocharged to create a somewhat similar visual affect as the rightfully famous 'Aqua' building in Chicago (see below).

It's odd that the two views that are most prized (in a general sense) are "water views" and "skyline/city views" -- and that's for the general public. It's fairly straight forward; or perhaps I've spent too much time at Arlington's 'Skyline Park', where the difference between a small number of...

398....32 feet taller than 177 Huntington; this [WOULD] decidedly push the "skyline" westward a couple of blocks. (but here's hoping....)

Maybe those apartments are targeted towards nudists who value privacy but disdain window shades?

Here's hoping!: "The city in 2016 highlighted the stretch of Dorchester Avenue between the Broadway and Andrew MBTA stations as an area that could house denser, taller buildings, and projects to create them are starting to move forward." (from the article posted above).

From the Design Review document that Equilibria helpfully posted in Post #94: As proposed, the building will be 476' to the top of the mechs [p. 36]. I like the proportions and the lighting plan is great, but the building's exterior looks way too much (to my untrained ideas) like 115 Winthrop...

All 4 buildings reduced to under 200', with 2 of them originally as high as 249' and 259'. What exactly is that supposed to accomplish, other than a squatter, more monotonously proportioned development? I think the OP's point is what they stated: "a squatter, more monotonously proportioned...

I know I've got issues, but a not-so-little-part-of-me wishes there was a similar building nearby in the shape of a T-Rex. Just saying.

Any chance you can ask about the tower the next time you are on-site or are in touch with someone affiliated with The Huntington?