115 Federal St. (Winthrop Square)

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't think this building NEEDS to be torn down but I won't care a bit IF it is torn down.
 
kz1000ps said:
And about making 115 wider, that request from Belkin doesn't surprise me one bit. 140 x 140 ft (20ksf) does not provide for the floor plates that tenants prefer these days, which are usually more up around 40ksf.
Click to expand...

Where did you hear about him asking to make the building wider? If that's the case I think it could throw of the design a bit....it looks great b/c it's tall and skinny. Maybe they could make it wider by having a little bit of a wider base and then having setbacks on the way up.
 
It's in the NYT article near the bottom.

lexicon506 said:
Yet Mr. Piano added that he was under pressure from Mr. Belkin to increase the tower?s width, something he said he could not agree to do. That conflict leaves the project?s outcome even more unclear.
Click to expand...

A wider bottom with setbacks is a good idea, but as the program stands now, they might use the lower floors for residential space, which wouldn't work if the base were made fatter, i.e. it should be big office /small residential floor plates. Then again I'm sure the program has changed significantly since the original RFP was submitted.
 
I can't believe what I am reading. There should be no debate to keep 133 standing at all. 133 Federal is a piece of crap, and I should know as I work on th 9th floor. Has anyone actually used the elevators in this building? If not, I recommend you come by and try them out so that you can wonder like myself if you will make it alive to your floor. And don't worry about security, because anyone can get in. There is no badge checking or anything like that.

For anyone who has worked here, this building will be missed by no one especially given what is going in its place. I don't care if this is an architectural masterpiece or not. This city needs a swift kick in the A.
 
Would someone mind posting a picture of 133 Federal? I can't think of what it looks like.

Thanks
 
img0548ju1.jpg
 
i like 133. is cosi still there selling those overpriced sandwiches. not sure when that pic was taken.
 
^That one's my pic and it was taken on January 3rd this year, so two months old now.
 
type001 said:
I can't believe what I am reading. There should be no debate to keep 133 standing at all. 133 Federal is a piece of crap, and I should know as I work on th 9th floor. Has anyone actually used the elevators in this building? If not, I recommend you come by and try them out so that you can wonder like myself if you will make it alive to your floor. And don't worry about security, because anyone can get in. There is no badge checking or anything like that.
Click to expand...

Poor maintenance and management shouldn't determine a building's architectural or historic merit. Both are correctable flaws.

Having said that, I'm not sure the merit for preservation is there.
 
Does anyone know why this building isn't listed on Emporis? Also does anyone know if there's a diagram coming up on SkyscraperPage?
 
tmac9wr said:
Does anyone know why this building isn't listed on Emporis? Also does anyone know if there's a diagram coming up on SkyscraperPage?
Click to expand...
It is but the height isn't listed so its on like the 6-8th page
 
Rudolph Building, Eyed for Piano Skyscraper, Gets Temporary Stay of Execution

March 15, 2007


Paul Rudolph?s Blue Cross/Blue Shield Building, labeled one of the most controversial structures in the U.S. when it opened in 1960, is making headlines again. The Boston Landmarks Commission voted earlier this week to delay the building?s demolition, which the owner is seeking so that it can construct an 80-story office tower, New England?s tallest, designed by Renzo Piano.

Rudolph?s design is recognized as a significant step in the evolution of Modernism. The precast concrete ribs in its facade bucked the then-prevalent International Style aesthetic of steel and glass. Although its iconoclastic looks initially attracted criticism, the 13-story structure also drew praise for sensitively matching the scale and character of its downtown context. Developer Steve Belkin?s Trans National Properties plans to construct a 1,000-foot-high tower on its site. Preliminary designs include a rooftop garden and sun reflectors to mitigate shadows.

Preservationists at a public hearing on Tuesday criticized what they characterize as a rush to demolish Rudolph?s building. They noted that the proposed tower faces a long permitting process with no guarantees it will be constructed.

The new building resulted from a request for proposals that the city issued last year to construct a signature skyscraper and civic space on the site of a municipal parking garage in Winthrop Square. Trans National, which was the sole respondent, owns the Blue Cross/Blue Shield Building on an adjacent parcel at 133 Federal St., allowing it to expand the tower?s footprint.

The developer?s team testified on Tuesday that 133 Federal St. must come down so that Piano?s tower can include a spectacular landscaped plaza that is open on all sides. But members of the Landmarks Commission expressed their belief that the two buildings could coexist.

Preservation groups questioned whether or not security requirements for the new tower can be met while maintaining public access?and if Boston needs such a large open space in the relatively small Winthrop Square, especially given the fact that several new parks are currently under construction nearby. They added that Piano is uniquely qualified to incorporate Rudolph?s building within the new scheme, pointing to his success at marrying old and new structures at the Morgan Library in New York City and the High Museum in Atlanta.

The 90-day stay on demolition opens the way for possible revisions to Piano?s design plan but does not mandate preservation of the Rudolph building. Commissioners requested more information from Trans National and are also soliciting ideas from other groups.

Ted Smalley Bowen


Link
 
^Is it just me, or does the tower seem slightly wider than in previous renderings? Is it the angle, or did Piano give in to Belkin's demands?
 
It's just the angle. I posted the same rendering (albeit as seen through a cell phone camera lens) back when I raided the BRA for info on this project in November.
 
Mike said:
Preservation groups questioned whether or not [...] Boston needs such a large open space in the relatively small Winthrop Square, especially given the fact that several new parks are currently under construction nearby.
Click to expand...

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to bizzarro Boston. :shock:
 
These so-called preservationists, IMO, are nothing more than architectural pack rats. I happen to be a very big fan of Paul Rudolph, but I wouldnt go so far as to declare that everything he ever touched should be sacrosanct. This building is certainly not one of his best. I personally find it to be a dumpy eyesore. To force Piano's new tower to defer to this insignificant concrete stump as if it were Trinity Church would be absurd.
 
I do wish Piano's design looked a bit less than an overgrown Pru tower. I hope he modifies the crown a bit to make a more compelling "hat." He may as well go for broke on this one. I too will not miss the Rudolph building, though nostalgically significant, for I remember when it was built amid a depressing and dreary downtown still covered with 19th c. soot.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top