11-21 Bromfield Street | DTX | Downtown

The gigantic carport had no friends. That's why the project was DOA.
 
I think now that this is going back to the drawing board they should aim for a 30 park place tower here. It would add a lot of class to the view from the common/city as a whole. The same with the hub on causeway they could also use a spire to make up for some height/aesthetics of the art deco era while making the tower shorter creating less shadows.

New school tower

30pp.0.jpg


11925447313_0fe40ac5b6_b.jpg



But noone has done one with a spire yet. I think we could really make a huge statement doing this.

70_pine_deborah_berke_05.jpg


CueSqihXYAAziPn.jpg


This would add so much to the skyline after the 20s almost missed us. Boston has always deserved one of those towers.
 
I'm very skeptical that this project will ever get built if it requires a variance...the opposition/neighbors are simply too numerous and too wealthy. They are also organized. Unless the area is rezoned I think this is DOA.
 
sidewalks said:
I'm very skeptical that this project will ever get built if it requires a variance...the opposition/neighbors are simply too numerous and too wealthy. They are also organized. Unless the area is rezoned I think this is DOA.
Click to expand...


what neighbors are organized beyond 45 Provence? Most of the Millennium owners either haven't closed on their units yet or have yet to move in. Regardless, the Millennium owners certainly cannot be considered "organized" at this point. I'm not aware of any other significant residential buildings in the immediate area but perhaps I am missing something. Lastly, I think there are only 100 or so units in 45 Provence so the opposition can't be that strong even if every single owner was vocally opposed to building at the Bromfield st site.
 
BosDevelop said:
what neighbors are organized beyond 45 Provence? Most of the Millennium owners either haven't closed on their units yet or have yet to move in. Regardless, the Millennium owners certainly cannot be considered "organized" at this point. I'm not aware of any other significant residential buildings in the immediate area but perhaps I am missing something. Lastly, I think there are only 100 or so units in 45 Provence so the opposition can't be that strong even if every single owner was vocally opposed to building at the Bromfield st site.
Click to expand...

There were a number of people who lived in the Ladder District, aside from those who lived in 45 Province, at the original BCDC meeting raising hell.
 
Last edited:
DD,

As a seldom provider of hard-hitting opinion.... in a best case scenario of all other issues at the tower base being resolved as best as could be done from a practical point of view: how tall do you believe 1 Bromfield should actually go?
 
^
I'd be happy if they knocked 50-100 feet off the tower and improved the ground level dramatically. A 600 ft tower could work well here.
 
odurandina said:
DD,

As a seldom provider of hard-hitting opinion.... in a best case scenario of all other issues at the tower base being resolved as best as could be done from a practical point of view: how tall do you believe 1 Bromfield should actually go?
Click to expand...

I'm not really sure what to make of this "As a seldom provider of hard-hitting opinion" statement directed at me, but I really don't care how tall this goes. It would be nice to see it around 600-700, but lopping off hundreds of feet will make it more likely to get approved and I have no problem with that if it ends up around 400'. All I care about is the ground level treatment & how it reactivates dying Bromfield St. The massing & materiality of the facade are critical too. I hated this most recent go around. The massing was just weird & color was strange.
 
Thank you. Yes, i think you offer a lot of clarification and 'data' side of things rather than getting into the mud at the base (on either side of the bell curve)... ...it's the either side of the bell curve that gets into the hard-hitting territory in stuffy Boston.
 
odurandina said:
Thank you. Yes, i think you offer a lot of clarification and 'data' side of things rather than getting into the mud at the base (on either side of the bell curve)... ...it's the either side of the bell curve that gets into the hard-hitting territory in stuffy Boston.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I'd say that's an accurate assessment. I'm less inclined to express strong personal opinions than I am with technical clarifications, statistics & facts (that end up influencing my informed opinion, contrary to some uninformed ones). I'd say that comes from actually being in the AEC industry for over 5 years (+4 of education) now. I've learned a lot through experience.

The zoning in this entire city is a piecemeal disaster and needs to be fixed. One Bromfield in this past go around made that painfully obvious. We can't develop the city by using PDAs on every single parcel (which was not even an option here because the site is too small).
 
I actually loved the most recent tower design and so did everybody I showed it to. It's more bold than any of the Winthrop Square proposals.

The base, on the other hand, was an unmitigated disaster. I'd like to see that fixed, Payless incorporated into it, with the current tower design. (maybe slightly tweaked but at least 90% the same, full height 700'+)
 
Not really any news but I made a render of if we got a liberty mutual/30 park, with a crown. I think this is exactly what Boston needs, if not here somewhere else. The greatest skylines in this country overall have a good art deco stock. They recently proved they can pull off new art deco very well. I think we should be the first to have one of these new towers with a crown, like the greats. In this spot the neighbors don't want it to be as tall, and as big overall. I figured we could kill 50 birds with one stone here. Make it shorter, pleasing to the eye, improve the skyline, be the first with a crowned new art deco tower, and be THE example of how to do art deco right in the present time. Don't even use the spire as a cheater for height. Use it because the tower will be shorter and we will be able to gain a great addition to the skyline.




Obviously its a crappy render and a copy paste tower, in reality it would be much better. Use liberty mutual type limestone precast and a copper crown and we have a winner.
 
datadyne007 said:
I hated this most recent go around. The massing was just weird & color was strange.
Click to expand...

I was a bit surprised to read this because I recall you liking Adrian Smith + Gordon Gill. The tower is a bit of a departure for Boston, but the cantilevered elements aren't unprecedented (100 Federal), and overall has a slick 70s vibe -- our skyline could use a little Ziggy Stardust. The gold cladding actually reminded me of a tragic architectural icon from 70s cinema. If built, let's hope for an improved pedestrian experience on Bromfield, and plenty of sprinklers.
 
Beton Brut said:
I was a bit surprised to read this because I recall you liking Adrian Smith + Gordon Gill. The tower is a bit of a departure for Boston, but the cantilevered elements aren't unprecedented (100 Federal), and overall has a slick 70s vibe -- our skyline could use a little Ziggy Stardust. The gold cladding actually reminded me of a tragic architectural icon from 70s cinema. If built, let's hope for an improved pedestrian experience on Bromfield, and plenty of sprinklers.
Click to expand...

Lol, I love The Towering Inferno. I was reminded of the same thing. And it's not the 70s anymore. It looked dated & overbearing.

And no, I wasn't fan of AS+GG, especially after the conversation I had with them. Just typical dismissive architects who think they know what's best for the public good, but really have no clue. They didn't understand Boston and they didn't deserve to build here.
 
datadyne007 said:
And it's not the 70s anymore. It looked dated & overbearing.
Click to expand...

For me, architecture was a lot more interesting and imaginative in the 70s, and this struck a chord with me. It's just a cool, organic form, like a ficus or a saguaro. I'll put away my lava lamp...

datadyne007 said:
I wasn't fan of AS+GG, especially after the conversation I had with them. Just typical dismissive architects who think they know what's best for the public good, but really have no clue.
Click to expand...

That's a shame. I had a similar experience speaking with David Manfredi a few years ago.
 
It was that stupid carport. I figured that they'd put that out there just to see what they could get away with, and then quickly return with the real deal with a decent street level.

The rest of it was fine.

These guys must be very tone deaf.
 
Perhaps my affinity is a product of my childhood, often in a car on the highways of the North Shore.

bregman_hilltop_01.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top