101 Seaport Blvd (PwC) | Parcel L1@Seaport Sq. | Seaport

If the parcels were broken up into smaller sections, the whole area would look completely different
 
Galactic said:
I get that you want to see more interesting buildings, but the only thing that really makes financial sense is these big boxes.
Click to expand...

I've been saying this for years. Let's get real. Real estate development is by its very nature driven by profits. It would be nice if someone built something on the seaport that wasn't a big box but when you are limited to around 20 stories, no one in their right mind is going to build a slender tower and lose a large chunk of usable living/office space. It's just pure economics coupled with the unfortunate FAA height restrictions.
 
Galactic said:
The whole Seaport district has a hard deck over it due to FAA regulations, so its not like these guys can go out and build awesome highrises like they can in downtown or Back Bay. They have to maximize floor plate size and try to do something interesting in the process.I get that you want to see more interesting buildings, but the only thing that really makes financial sense is these big boxes. Other buildings are smaller parcels should hopefully look better, but the big parking lots are going to become big boxes.
Click to expand...

I dont' think Height has anything to do with the "overall design"- there are "great-well designed boxes" & there are"dumb boxes"...
OTOH The box shape is directly proportional to the "business orientated model market" & the developers, in order to maximize profits at the expense of good design. As far as parking- I'm aware of the potential problem in case of flooding to promote it underground, but this eternal issue should have been addressed in a Master Plan (If there is such) to call for a permanent solution, rather than relocating the problem that Boston already has with it....

Galactic said:
In that context, it is a decent design. I'm having a hard time thinking of something that could look better here within the price range. Nobody is going to build the CCTV headquarters in Beijing in Seaport... it's not valuable enough real-estate to justify. Although that would definitely look pretty cool.
Click to expand...

I don't believe a CCTV-like project would ever fit Seaport Blvd either, but rather a more thoughtful planning with mix uses will create a better environment & embrace better design for these new structures.
 
Hufer said:
I dont' think Height has anything to do with the "overall design"- there are "great-well designed boxes" & there are"dumb boxes"...
OTOH The box shape is directly proportional to the "business orientated model market" & the developers, in order to maximize profits at the expense of good design. As far as parking- I'm aware of the potential problem in case of flooding to promote it underground, but this eternal issue should have been addressed in a Master Plan (If there is such) to call for a permanent solution, rather than relocating the problem that Boston already has with it....

I don't believe a CCTV-like project would ever fit Seaport Blvd either, but rather a more thoughtful planning with mix uses will create a better environment & embrace better design for these new structures.
Click to expand...

Kind of interesting you guys bring up the CCTV building and this is on the other thread of the Seaport: http://www.archboston.org/community/showpost.php?p=218874&postcount=1941

Looks like a smaller, Americanized version!
 
If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, than DC should be pretty flattered by what it sees going up on the Boston seaport.

I know it has been mentioned before, but this area is shaping up to be a slightly taller, slightly more mixed use version of downtown DC.

CityCenterhotel.jpg

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...dcs-hotel-and-fashion-lineup-come-into-shape/


900NYAve_exterior.jpg

http://tsarchitect.nsflanagan.net/?tag=development

AAMC.png

http://realestate-real-estate-home-house.blogspot.com/2012/04/today-in-pictures-new-york-avenue.html

rendering-penn-ave_courtesy.jpg

http://www.cpexecutive.com/cities/w...a-usa-to-develop-square-75a-3/1004097142.html

imrs.php

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...d-c-bridges-to-be-site-of-mixed-use-projects/
 
Last edited:
BussesAin'tTrains said:
That's a flaw in the redevelopment process. The big parking lots (or at least some of them) should have been broken up and developed separately. That would have provided a much more diverse landscape.
Click to expand...

Busses -- you seem to suggest that there needs to be a Gruber to model the process for us and tell us how to do it

The real world doesn't work that way -- in the case of the Seaport District:

1) somebody number one* bought up the old warehouses and rail remnants that littered the landscape, took the structures down and made parking lots that were leased to some operator until the right time
2) somebody number two bought up the old parking lots and sold them or developed them into buildings**

Each of the parts of the Seaport had different somebodies* but in no place was there any financial incentive for the owner to subdivide the lots and sell off things piecemeal

* & ** Papas, McCourt, Athanas, Massport, USPS, BCEC, etc.

In general in an older community the challenge is to acquire and aggregate into big enough lot for successful development -- not to break something up
 
whighlander said:
Busses -- you seem to suggest that there needs to be a Gruber to model the process for us and tell us how to do it

The real world doesn't work that way -- in the case of the Seaport District:

1) somebody number one* bought up the old warehouses and rail remnants that littered the landscape, took the structures down and made parking lots that were leased to some operator until the right time
2) somebody number two bought up the old parking lots and sold them or developed them into buildings**

Each of the parts of the Seaport had different somebodies* but in no place was there any financial incentive for the owner to subdivide the lots and sell off things piecemeal

* & ** Papas, McCourt, Athanas, Massport, USPS, BCEC, etc.

In general in an older community the challenge is to acquire and aggregate into big enough lot for successful development -- not to break something up
Click to expand...

Well I guess that's that. The free market has spoken. Boring, super-blocks are the future... *snores*
 
BussesAin'tTrains said:
Well I guess that's that. The free market has spoken. Boring, super-blocks are the future... *snores*
Click to expand...

Busses -- Not necessarily forever

Look at Kendall nee Cambridge Center -- all the boring super blocks are changing in big {Google), 88 Ames, perhaps soon Volpe and myriad smaller ways

Over time the ownership and occupancy will change and so will the ground floors and perhaps some of the rest as well

you just might need to wait 15 to 30 years or so
 
whighlander said:
Busses -- Not necessarily forever

Look at Kendall nee Cambridge Center -- all the boring super blocks are changing in big {Google), 88 Ames, perhaps soon Volpe and myriad smaller ways

Over time the ownership and occupancy will change and so will the ground floors and perhaps some of the rest as well

you just might need to wait 15 to 30 years or so
Click to expand...

Unlikely in the main part of the seaport, since most of the oceanward plots are either developed, under construction or soon to be built. The Seaport is developing more quickly than Kendall and it essentially a blank slate, whereas there is at least a semblance of mixed history in Kendall. It would be nice if there were some leftover parcels in the Seaport for smaller, sleeker boxes, but that will at best be the case only for parcels much closer to Congress Street and away from the waterfront, which is where I think the damage is biggest. I'd be happier with boxes back along by the BCEC - the waterfront deserves better. But, as some say, we really will have to wait and see the end result. I do think it will be less horrid than some of the more negative forecasts. Street improvements and street level retain can go a long, long way.
 
BussesAin'tTrains said:
Well I guess that's that. The free market has spoken. Boring, super-blocks are the future... *snores*
Click to expand...

Don't forget the Seaport has very strict height limits that don't necessarily exist elsewhere in the city. It's also essentially developing a new neighborhood from scratch. The free market here is too specific to really extrapolate to any other areas of the city/country/planet.

However, if you look at some of the new Chinese cities being built from scratch (ex. Tianjin's financial districts and Shenzhen) many of those cities do seem to be developing as super-blocks. They just happen to be on gargantuan scales compared to Boston.

I do think that outside of these brand new developing cities, you still need that (im)perfect storm to end up with strictly super-block development.
 
DZH22 said:
Don't forget the Seaport has very strict height limits that don't necessarily exist elsewhere in the city. It's also essentially developing a new neighborhood from scratch. The free market here is too specific to really extrapolate to any other areas of the city/country/planet.

However, if you look at some of the new Chinese cities being built from scratch (ex. Tianjin's financial districts and Shenzhen) many of those cities do seem to be developing as super-blocks. They just happen to be on gargantuan scales compared to Boston.

I do think that outside of these brand new developing cities, you still need that (im)perfect storm to end up with strictly super-block development.
Click to expand...

One pair of words DuBuy [yes I know] and Vegas
 
Lets not kid ourselves, the boxes are partially driven by maximising profits, yes. But the real driving force is that it's EASY.
 
Hmmm....yes.

A wonderful example of neo-cubism and minimalism.

Hrm, hrm, hrm.
 
Calm down AB.org. This is a quality building. Glass boxes are not to be maligned ... or are glass buildings just going to be another alucobond for this place.

If you look at this with a sharp eye, you can see that the design is strong, the materials are good, and the detailing is thoughtful.

You will be happy in the end. I am just trying to help you save some energy complaining about something beforehand.

cca
 
Never noticed that the entrance to this building is off-center. Not sure what that adds, but it does serve to break up its symmetry.



Like a mini tribute to the Hancock Tower.



 
Folks,

This is high quality glass and curtainwall. Very sharp. If you hate glass than disregard.

cca
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top