115 Federal St. (Winthrop Square)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tommy?s Tower cost could top $1B

By Scott Van Voorhis
Tuesday, May 30, 2006

It is not just the height that is towering in Mayor Thomas M. Menino?s proposal for a 1,000-foot-high tower.

Menino?s grand idea for a new, centerpiece Hub skyscraper could carry a towering price-tag as well.

How much?

One of Boston?s best known builders said the project could cost a bundle.

?It?s in excess of a billion-dollar project,? said Dean Stratouly, builder of the 33 Arch Street tower, not far from where Menino wants a signature tower built.

?This isn?t going to be done with a wing and a prayer,? Stratouly said. ?It will take substantial equity.?

The estimate comes as City Hall prepares to release today a formal call for proposals from developers eager to take on Menino?s challenge. The so-called request for proposals will spell out what kind of tower Boston officials are looking for on a key Financial District site now covered by a run-down, city-owned parking garage.

The document, eagerly awaited, will spell out the height, square footage and architectural expectations developers will need in drawing up their proposals.

City Hall is likely to seek a variety of uses that would include office, residential and retail, real estate executives say. However, developers interested in the site are already calculating the construction cost of building a skyscraper that could dwarf even the Hancock and the Pru.

Stratouly calculates that a 1,000 foot tower would likely contain 2 million to 3 million square feet of space, given typical tower floor-plate sizes. With downtown high-rise construction costs as high as $500 a square foot, that adds up to anywhere from $1 billion to $1.5 billion, he said

Stratouly has had a hand in some of the city?s top projects in recent years, including the city?s $800 million South Boston convention center.

The sheer size and cost of Menino?s tower plan is likely to lead to companies teaming up to share costs, Stratouly said.

?Anyone doing this will be joint venturing with some big money source,? Stratouly said. ?This is a pension fund deal. It will be extremely expensive to build.?

Development heavyweights expected to take a look a the site include: Prudential Center owner Boston Properties; Chicago-based Equity Office Properties Trust, the nation?s largest office tower owner; New York-based Vornado Realty Trust, which has a deal for the Filene?s building; veteran Boston developer John Hynes, who built State Street?s new tower headquarters near South Station; International Place builder Don Chiofaro; and local business magnate Steve Belkin, who owns an office building next door.
 
I was thinking something like the Signature Tower would fit well in Boston, but that other thing in NYC would be too ostentatious. It's good as a small part of the skyline, but not the dominant building in it.
 
Mayor launches push for iconic tower

By Chris Reidy, Globe Staff | May 31, 2006

Mayor Thomas M. Menino is appealing to developers from around the world to design an iconic tower that could be Boston's tallest building, rising as high as 1,000 feet above the Financial District.

Menino initially proposed the tower in February, saying he wanted a structure that would ``symbolize the full scope of this city's greatness."

The city yesterday issued a formal request for proposals for a 47,738 square feet of city-owned land in Winthrop Square that is currently the site of a four-story garage.

The city also paid for ads in major newspapers to entice as many developers as possible to bid on an opportunity to ``transform Boston's skyline." Ads ran in the US, European, and Asian editions of The Wall Street Journal, as well as in the global editions of The New York Times and the Financial Times and in the Globe. ``We're reaching out to the world and telling them they could miss an opportunity if they overlook Boston," said Mark Maloney , director of the Boston Redevelopment Authority.

He could not put a price tag on the ads, but said it was a ``significant amount."

``We want developers to know we're serious about this project," he said.

Yesterday's request for proposals, for what the city is calling One Fifteen Winthrop Square, is open-ended to encourage creativity, but the winning design is likely to feature a mix of housing, offices, stores, restaurants, and possibly a hotel.

``The canvas is clear, so people can paint an incredible painting," Maloney said.

The city wants the tower to have ``civic" space that would bring more nighttime activity to the Financial District. Possible ideas include space for concerts and lectures or an indoor winter garden.

The winning design also must help connect the site to Downtown Crossing and the Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy Greenway, and ``it should be recognized for breaking new ground in green building design and technology," the request for proposals said.

The lobby should be ``one of Boston's grand public spaces," the request said; ``architecture should acknowledge its place at the beginning of the 21st century" and the building ``must be expressive of Boston's long-standing reputation as a center of innovation."

``This will be a megaproject that requires deep pockets and sophistication in mixed-use planning," said David Begelfer , chief executive of the Massachusetts chapter of the National Association of Industrial and Office Properties.

``The question is, is the market able to accept that amount of space?" said Begelfer, who added that it could be seven to 10 years before a new tower could be ready for occupancy. City officials are confident the market can absorb such a project.

The deadline for initial proposals is mid-November. ``It would be great if we got seven or eight proposals, and then we'd have two to four finalists," Maloney said.

Chris Reidy can be reached at reidy@globe.com.
 
Why is this project being proposed? By all accounts, not for economic reasons: while commercial real-estate in Boston is doing well right now, whatever demand there will be in the near-to-mid term is amply catered to by mid-sized projects currently in the pipeline.

No, this project is being proposed as a 'symbol', something to make a statement and raise Boston's profile in the world. Picking some anodyne design that fits in with the overall lack of inspiration in Boston's crappy skyline is precisely not the way to achieve that.

Now I know there are people here who will disagree, but I can't appreciate a skyline in complete abstraction from the buildings that constitute it. Boston's doesn't have the grace of individual buildings that make up Chicago's skyline, nor the sheer mass the make NYC's look like a natural mountain range. Ours, sadly, is neither here nor there in the worst sense of the phrase. What we need now is a radical departure, both for its intrinsic visual appeal and to set a precedent for futher development. It's the only thing that would justify this boondoggle.

justin
 
The Globe said:
Yesterday's request for proposals, for what the city is calling One Fifteen Winthrop Square, is open-ended to encourage creativity, but the winning design is likely to feature a mix of housing, offices, stores, restaurants, and possibly a hotel.

``The canvas is clear, so people can paint an incredible painting," Maloney said.

The city wants the tower to have ``civic" space that would bring more nighttime activity to the Financial District. Possible ideas include space for concerts and lectures or an indoor winter garden.

The winning design also must help connect the site to Downtown Crossing and the Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy Greenway, and ``it should be recognized for breaking new ground in green building design and technology," the request for proposals said.

The lobby should be ``one of Boston's grand public spaces," the request said; ``architecture should acknowledge its place at the beginning of the 21st century" and the building ``must be expressive of Boston's long-standing reputation as a center of innovation."
Click to expand...

"It should also end world hunger, lead to peace in the Middle East and cure cancer.
Oh, and have pony rides. "
 
justin said:
Now I know there are people here who will disagree, but I can't appreciate a skyline in complete abstraction from the buildings that constitute it. Boston's doesn't have the grace of individual buildings that make up Chicago's skyline, nor the sheer mass the make NYC's look like a natural mountain range. Ours, sadly, is neither here nor there in the worst sense of the phrase.

justin
Click to expand...

Downtown Boston has a sky lump which is a function of topography and our 17th century street pattern. A 1000 foot tower isn't going to change the lump--rather, it will just make the rest of the buildings look stubby. If this project were going to be on the high spine where some sort of separation from other buildings could be achieved, I might be more impressed. Iconic architecture by nature demands to be set apart and can't be bothered with context which makes this site a poor choice.

My money is on a Cesar Pelli design with Gale Company as the developer if this thing gets built.
 
I'm really only hoping to be distracted from the rest of the skyline, which has its problems even from the harbor side, where topography isn't an issue.

justin
 
A building of this magnitude and quality can only be a good thing for Boston. The existing skyline is not that bad and has numerous good and decent buildings. It looks stubby due to height limits, NIMBYs, the FAA you name. it. This tower would set a precedent for other tall buildings that would definitely improve the skyline.

I can't understand what's so depressing about this project. It's just one of many that has some basis in civic pride. We have constant complaints about other civically inspired projects like the Greenway and the SBW. Yet even though those projects don't meet the desires of any single individual they all are far better than what was there before them. Good riddance to the central artery and the empty South Boston wasteland. Good riddance to the Winthrop street parking garage.

Hooray for someone with vision and the guts to push forward with a tall building to define and renvigorate the DT skyline even in the face of dowdy naysayers, NIMBYS, bureaucrats, would-be-great architects and self-appointed saviors of the city. After all, it's only a building, and at the very least it will be better than a heap of ugly concrete where cars can be stowed for the day.
 
tocoto said:
A building of this magnitude and quality can only be a good thing for Boston.
Click to expand...

This is a rather premature statement isn't it?

I can't wait to see the traffic projections and the changes that are going to be required to get traffic in, out, and around the site.

I'm not sure why so many people have so much emotion wrapped up in the Boston skyline. Civic pride? Boston doesn't need a 1000 foot tower to rally around. I guess that puts me in the category of "dowdy naysayers, NIMBYS, bureaucrats, would-be-great architects and self-appointed saviors of the city."
 
The best way to avoid a traffic impact is to require that the building not include any parking garage. The site is a short walk from every subway line.
 
Just think if all this effort and money was going somewhere useful, like to the schools or police/fire fighters.
 
The taxes that this building will pay to the city helps pay for schools, fire and police services, etc. Unfortunately for Boston, the population of school age children continues to drop! The city really needs to push for, literally, thousands of additional housing units to bring new families and residents back into the city.
 
Why are Bostonians so scare of the new? Scott Van Voorhis writes that
the cost's for such a building could be taller then the building itself. What does that mean? So let me get this straight: We should not build this because of the high cost involved? So I guess San Fran, Phillie, NY and Baltimore are all going to halt any plans of construction. NOt! These cities think big and have been doing so for a while. continuing to think small is going to keep us outpaced by all other towns attracting jobs and people. PEople are attracted to iconic buildings, beautiful works of art in the sky. I'm not say let do Manhattan in Boston. let's just do big in our own way. Some say that contrast between traditional Boston and modern structures is an ugly thing. Its actually a great thing if done with taste. Look at how the sky line dramatically decrease from the financial district towards beacon hill and the Common. and then you have
the Hancock tower reflecting the blue sky! we should not over do it of course not but buildings like the Hancock are great standing offset there by itself and smaller buildings surrounding it. This Menino tower needs to be built. we need at least one really tall building to say to the world we got muscle bitches! and we are just flexing them a little.
I agree with the person who said that if this is built it would just make the rest of the fin district look stubby. but we have a lack of options in places to build due to the Boston backward mentality. Why designate only the financial district for tall buildings. now that something real big is going up ppl start crying foul.

I wont be happy until these buildings are done.
1. Menino tower
2. South station tower
3.Aquarium tower
4.Boylston square tower - over MAss pike. A long shot but Would be a nice
ending to the Boston skyline. hopefully a slim building.

Forget the a loose or tight commercial market. Providence RI went on a building boom in the past decade and people eventually filled the space in these structures with residential and office.

Grow some balls Boston.
 
Yes, once all those buildings are built all of Bostons problems will be solved.
 
ralman83, you have one unhappy life ahead of you...

justin
 
ralman83 said:
So I guess San Fran, Phillie, NY and Baltimore are all going to halt any plans of construction. NOt! These cities think big and have been doing so for a while.
Click to expand...

Have you been to Baltimore and Philadelphia? I hardly think either city qualifies as thinking big and just wait until Philadelphia builds its classy waterfront casino--Atlantic City on the Delaware baby!

SF is hardly a high rise city either, but has been doing some very interesting things on the waterfront, helped by an earthquake which demolished much of their awful elevated highway. I do like the Yerba Buena and Moscone Center project.

NYC is just going to end up with another hard to fill tower in lower Manhattan, just like the original twin towers.
 
My three year old has an early design entry for the Winthrop Square site. You can see that she likes working in a Danish aesthetic and her plan allows for a certain slender gracefulness. Fabrication is easy as well: the exterior is injection molded and snaps together on site. She may rethink the color scheme however.

 
lol, I will be unhappy if the buildings i mentioned dont go up.
and they wont solve Boston's problems. I just cant stand the waiting process around here. I have not been to Phillie or Baltimore. only seen pics and their skylines seem to have more modern day towers and face less scrutiny then Boston proposals do.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top