115 Federal St. (Winthrop Square)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Piano vs. Rudolph Fight Called Off

vanshnookenraggen said:
I had no idea he [Piano] had quit.
Click to expand...
Now brace yourself for WORLD CLASS MEDIOCRITY.
 
Scott said:
Imo, that was world class mediocrity.
Click to expand...
Yeah, the overall form didn't have much punch. The hope was that someone with Piano's taste would have put a lot of moxie into the details and smaller scale decisions.

On the other hand, you look at something like the Morgan Library ...
 
Scott said:
Imo, that was world class mediocrity.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I think that the abandonment of Piano's design is a great loss to Boston.

With Piano's buildings, its all about the impeccable details. These are things that you cant really convey through renderings. This building wouldve been a modern day Hancock, but even more elegant and beautiful --a thousand-foot shimmering tower, lighter than air.
 
I agree with Briv...the Piano tower was great. It was very sleek and tall and was going to bring so much to downtown.
 
agreed with the last two posts. Renderings tend to be misleading and for the most part that's not a good thing; in this situation, i think it would have been welcome. The rendering was OK, but i believe the real one would have been awesome.

I don't know what everyone expects... buildings that look good elsewhere wouldn't look good here. The new one planned for Nashville, Charlotte's BOA tower, Cleveland's Key Tower, LA's Library tower, San Fran's Transamerica Pyramid are all Very intricate buildings with nice spires or crowns that simply wouldn't do Boston justice.

Piano's design was boxy, yes, but it wasn't an ordinary box. which is what we love about the Pru and even the Hancock to an extent. Piano's box was distinct, but not over the top. i'll miss the design.
 
So...let me get this straight. 115 Winthrop is just a wish, right? It hasn't been given the go-ahead or the shut down by the city? I certainly hope that we get a 1,000 footer in the city. If I had a dream for Boston, it would be for the skyscrapers in Boston to rival those of Chicago, New York, and Dubai. Oh wait, I'm in Boston. I was in Miami last week, and when I looked at the skyline (even though it is all condo towers), there were a good 10-18 high-rise towers in development, if not more.

So yes, I'll miss Piano's design. But who is to say another architect won't come along and design a building even better? Skidmore, Owings, and Merrill? Santiago Calatrava? HKS?
 
Just to set things straight: CBT was the local architect working with Piano on the Project. Now that Piano has resigned from the job, CBT is the lead architect. Belkin owns the design produced by Piano, and the intent is to stick with the basic design, but CBT will refine and reshape it (no pun intended) as the project proceeds through design review. What we will end up with (if anything) remains to be seen.
 
Does anyone know when we could expect to see the next batch of renderings?
 
I'm guessing that the renderings will be similar to what's already there only a little fatter probably. As was mentioned above, Belkin owns Piano's renderings, and CBT worked with Piano initially so they'll be going with what they're familiar with most likely.

Piano left because he didn't want to change his design at all to be larger (not taller). So expect some sort of bastardization of his original design. I don't mean that to be too pessimistic, but it's going to be interesting to see.
 
But I don't think this situation is uncommon. I've heard that Philip Johnson walked off the 500 Boylston Street project. The original design had two of that building connected at the rotunda and it was taller. The city/developers didn't want that so Johnson left the project and it was tweaked to what we now have.
 
Fatter? Why would they want it fatter? Now I really miss Piano's design.
 
@Kennedy- if you read through the thread, I believe what it comes down to is that Belkin wants to expand the building to be a bit wider as he owns the lot adjacent to 115 Winthrop (part of the reason he was the only bidder). so he wants to combine the lots to create a larger footprint for this and in-turn, a larger tower. Piano didn't want to alter his design, but as callahan said, it happens a lot.
 
I've heard that Philip Johnson walked off the 500 Boylston Street project.
Click to expand...
Philip Johnson didn't walk off the job. The original design was modified because many neighbors objected to the proposal. (Some things never change.) The two identical towers which were originally proposed were shortened in an attempt to mollify the neighbors, which also resulted in fattening of the towers to preserve the square footage and economics of the project. The neighbors were not satisfied, formed a group called "Citizens for a Better New England Life" (New England Life was the proponent of the project and the intended lead tenant), and sued challenging the zoning of the project. Even though the developer (which included Hines) prevailed in all respects, New England Life agreed to be a good neighbor and redesign Phase 2 of the project (i.e., the second tower) and brought in a new architect - Robert A.M. Stern - to design it. The result is what you see today: 500 Boylston by Philip Johnson and 222 Berkeley by Robert A.M. Stern.
Fatter? Why would they want it fatter?
Click to expand...
From a design perspective, no one wants it fatter; from an economic perspective, making it fatter is probably necessary if it is to be marketable as an office building. Modern office towers require a sufficient floor plate to be marketable. The original design of the Piano tower, sleek and attractive as it may be, is probably unfeasible since the floor plates, I believe, are around 22,000 square feet. To make it work, the floor plates must probably be at least 27,000, depending upon the efficiency of the space. If the tower has any chance of being built, the design has to change in some respects.
 
I stand corrected. But I have also heard that the original design was actually sold to another developer. ( Maybe in Chicago?) In any case, I guess my point is that it's common that architect's originals get tweaked.
 
Reading through the thread? I'm sorry, but I don't have time to read through fifty pages. I read the last three. I understand he owns the lot next door, but if he makes it fatter he ought to make it taller.
 
Are there any text-bases resources on this? I'm at school, and the computer can't handle the video. Are there any renderings?

Shouldn't this be a new post?
I'll go make one...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top