Search results

Ok - original design, but with the cantilever extended downward. It kind of messes up their whole "More sunlight" thing, but It looks much better from afar.

Here's a new version... I think this looks significantly better. I will try another version with the original top, but the cant on the bottom extended down to the ground.

Good point! Except Phoenix skyline REALLY sucks a fat one and would never have something this daring or this tall. One of the worst skylines for a major city I have ever seen (I went to school out there so I saw it for 3 years).

My version of 1BF with a spire. The uppermost cantilever continues up above the building core to add balance and additional height. Of course this means, due to FAA regulations, that the core would have to be shorter to allow for the extra height on the the cantilevered spire.

^^ Bad exchange IMO.

If the highest 111 Fed (or this presumably) can go is 735', what the hell was Tommy smoking when he was pushing a 1000' tower 10 years ago? Is the 735' a new revelation? Was the FAA not yet involved at that point? Had they not given their 2 cents to the conversation? If they were involved...

I don't know if this is true or just my perception - but I feel like we owe Millenium some credit for taking the roof off of the financial district. Before they went big (big for Boston) I doubt anyone else would have either, particularly after what happened with 111Federal round 1. We may end...

I agree that this is true. However, removing those bulges has the same effect, just without something to show the Nimbys that they are trying to do the right thing. A slimmer tower, with added SqFootage at the top has the same environmental impact, just without being showy about it for the...

Good man! I'm sure it will get revamped along the way anyway. edit: I can't find a link/portal to a pending approval diagram on the website. I'm obviously missing something. Can you provide?

Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2 YES! A thousand times, YES! A-men... preach it! I just posted something similar in the Bromfield thread.

citylover... you got this sucker drawn up and submitted to the skyscraper diagram page yet or what? ;)

Maybe when everyone was clamoring for something "bold" it was a case of "careful what you ask for". Is this new design too bold? Is it too retro/futuristic? With Boston's conservative architectural nature/history in mind, why don't we ever get something like this? This is a perfect design...

It's got a little Seafirst Center in Seattle to it. The tint is similar, except everything is convex instead of concave. The protruding sides seem too exaggerated from some angles. The best elevation view is from the East and West, where it is most slender. The car-port is terrible and needs...

Ok - uninformed question time. What prevents someone that is building a skyscraper from throwing ornamentation on the top of their building? For example, 1 Dalton - why the flat roof? Why not a spire of some kind? Is it particularly cost-prohibitive? Is it more difficult to get the building...

I actually thought that coffee shop was meant as a temporary structure. It is an awful waste of a parcel.

Is there anything planned to cap off the triangle on the flat side of this building? It looks as though they are building that side with the expectation of something else being built there.

I really hope either 111 Federal or Bromfield are not flat top. One of them should be pointy orhave some sort of spire.

Well played, sir. Well played.

Old Top 10 for comparison:

Thanks CL94. I saw your drawing on the skyscraper diagram page. Nice work on filling out so many developing projects. And thanks for reposting here. I think was throws it off are the black beams/brackets. In the renders from street level, the second step isn't quite as dramatic because from...