171 Tremont Street | Downtown

Time to stop referring to this as a "skinny" tower. That's based on the height-to-width proportion, not on the absolute width of a footprint. Hell, it's almost time to stop referring to this as a tower at all. This wouldn't even be noticeable in Providence, let alone Boston.
 
DZH22 said:
Time to stop referring to this as a "skinny" tower. That's based on the height-to-width proportion, not on the absolute width of a footprint. Hell, it's almost time to stop referring to this as a tower at all. This wouldn't even be noticeable in Providence, let alone Boston.
Click to expand...

Agreed. The one at Felt is more of a "skinny" or "pencil" tower, but still not even that tall...
 
the one that states we are building 235~336' forever more in the City of Boston (sarcasm but not really).

another one bites the dust.

1 Bromfield: you're next.... (it was nice dreaming for a week).
 
Last edited:
It's not worth getting our panties in a twist over this ... height directly on the Common or Public Garden has been a hot-button for decades, and anyone who thought much more was on the table here was dreaming. Logically it makes sense to build taller a few blocks away, and for the fanboys with the skyline fetish, remember that results in a better aesthetic. Taller buildings directly on parks or waterfront often trigger a "Down in front!" experience ... if you layer a bit, you maximize the number of units with great views while also ensuring that shadows are attenuated. This isn't just a Boston thing, it's a central tenet of zoning in many cities.
 
All kidding aside, you are absolutely right on everything and I agree.
 
StillInTheHood said:
Logically it makes sense to build taller a few blocks away, and for the fanboys with the skyline fetish, remember that results in a better aesthetic. Taller buildings directly on parks or waterfront often trigger a "Down in front!" experience ... if you layer a bit, you maximize the number of units with great views while also ensuring that shadows are attenuated. This isn't just a Boston thing, it's a central tenet of zoning in many cities.
Click to expand...

What do you suggest at Harbor Garage, that the city hand Don Chiofaro a $350M check to fund the sinking of the garage + a 12 story boutique hotel tower? When you layer at many build sites in Boston, you just back yourself into more mid-rise only zoning. Not saying you're wrong - just saying we end up with more nothing height everywhere. I wonder how much shade 355' would have put on the Common from early spring to late fall, when it matters.

What to do w/ the Harbor Garage (think of the children).... http://www.archboston.org/community/showthread.php?p=260083#post260083
 
Last edited:
stick n move said:
Shrunk from 255' to 235'

http://boston.curbed.com/2016/4/14/11430700/171-tremont-street-tower-boston
Click to expand...

here's the original headline from the BBJ
Swiss developer proposes luxury boutique condos on Tremont Street
Click to expand...

My new headline --
only in Boston Episode X -- Final Approval by Design Commission after the withdrawal from the Shadow Bank was reduced
Click to expand...

the actual story from the May 10, 2016 BBJ with my highlights in [bold]

Shadow games: Proposed tower on Boston Common has height reduced for third time
May 10, 2016, 6:29am EDT

Catherine Carlock
Real Estate Editor
Boston Business Journal

A real estate development entity owned by Swiss investor Maurice Dabbah last week received design approval for a 235-foot residential tower on Tremont Street that faces the Boston Common, moving forward a project that has been reduced by about 120 feet since its original proposal.

Dabbah’s 171 Tremont LLC has proposed a $70 million, 18-unit residential tower at 171 Tremont St., a corner lot located across Avery Street from the AMC Lowes movie theater that’s currently home to a four-story office. Dabbah had first proposed a 355-foot tower in late December 2014, but has twice decreased the tower’s height since......The project's total development will cost $70 million and feature building materials such as bronze, glass and limestone, an April 29 filing to the Boston Redevelopment Authority shows.
Click to expand...

But interrupting the article for an editorial comment -- usual NIMBY opposition -- but here is the crux -- of why it is an episode of Only in Boston

resuming the quote from the BBJ

The renewed design for the tower has decreased its total shadow area to 2,987 square feet from 5,135 square feet, a 41 percent reduction from the original proposal, said Ross Cameron, a senior associate with Elkus Manfredi, who serves as the project’s architect.
Click to expand...

Sorry -- can't resist this further editorial comment -- Who Knew -- :eek:

Returning to the most amazing part of the article -- finally a discussion of the legalism of the Shadow Bank -- as in
Only the Shadow Bank Knows ....[subtle low chuckle]
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:

Now back to the actual article
State law restricts the area of both the Boston Common and Public Garden that can be covered by shadow at any given point during the day through an allocation called a “shadow bank.” 171 Tremont’s original proposal took up almost all of the shadow bank left for development around the Common — some 10,400 square feet, Cameron said. The reduction to 2,987 square feet of shadow space now leaves 7,413 square feet of shadow space left for additional development around the Common.

“Building in this location, everybody gets kind of scared that it’s going to unleash a whole number of developments at that height, when in actual fact they’re all studied very carefully,” Cameron said.

At the BCDC meeting, a representative from the project’s impact advisory group expressed concern about the project’s height as well as the amount of shadow space the building takes up.

“The question is should one building be allowed to take one-third of the shadow space that’s left?” the representative said.

Meanwhile, a resident who said he sits on the board of the nearby Ritz-Carlton condominiums said his concern about shadows wasn’t just about the 171 Tremont project, but the impact of all the proposed development in Downtown Crossing, including the proposed 59-story One Bromfield tower and the proposed 30-story tower at the former Felt nightclub on Washington Street.

“We’re kind of addressing these projects one by one,” the resident said. “We’re not sure how all the projects combined will impact a very busy community. ... It is an extremely active area, and we don’t feel it has been addressed.”
Click to expand...
 
Im not mad about this at all. Its still a great development and will be a great addition. Well get height somewhere else. No biggie.
 
stick n move said:
Im not mad about this at all. Its still a great development and will be a great addition. Well get height somewhere else. No biggie.
Click to expand...

Stick -- I agree -- the materials and the look are appropriate for a nice building at a nice location

By the way by Googling Boston Common Shadow Bank -- I found a scholarly article on the topic

Unregulated Shadow Banks Are a Ticking Time Bomb
By Eugene Ludwig
March 15, 2016
......The shadow banking sector does not lack for innovative and valuable practices, nor does it lack for skilled and accomplished participants. But the current anomaly of regulating only one portion of the financial system in and of itself gives rise to substantial risks and troubling incentives.

I believe the “like kind, like size, like regulation” principle would be an important step in solving the problem, and yet that concept alone may still not be enough to fix the problem completely of how to regulate risk in financial markets. Given the consequences for the real economy, the stakes couldn’t be higher. We need our great financial thinkers and our nation’s regulators to pay serious attention to this emerging trend and develop ways to manage these deep risks. Whatever the solution, we must act with urgency.

Eugene Ludwig is the founder and chief executive of Promontory Financial Group. He was comptroller of the currency in the Clinton administration.
Click to expand...


Oops -- wrong kind of Shadow Bank -- Nevermind ;)
 
They know what's best for you, our city and for 1 Bromfield.... And we'll just have a wall of 500' buildings with it's middle finger sticking up at 111 Fed.

Yes this is galactically stupid. Planning run amok. Socialism; Planned outcomes... Mutually shared poverty on height has been going on all over the city... and it's had a very negative effect on our skyline. Who made up this rule that we can't have but 4 or 5 tall buildings in the entire city? I'm allowed to say this (i hope).

1 Bromfield + 111 Fed + IP would go a long way to correcting the downtown mistake of too many 1.5~2:1ish a/r towers.

If 1 Bromfield is going to be the next 40 Trinity, then the developer should walk.
 
Last edited:
odurandina said:
They know what's best for you, our city and for 1 Bromfield.... And we'll just have a wall of 500' buildings with it's middle finger sticking up at 111 Fed.

Yes this is galactically stupid. Planning run amok. Socialism; Planned outcomes... Mutually shared poverty on height has been going on all over the city... and it's had a very negative effect on our skyline. Who made up this rule that we can't have but 4 or 5 tall buildings in the entire city? I'm allowed to say this (i hope).

1 Bromfield + 111 Fed + IP would go a long way to correcting the downtown mistake of too many 1.5~2:1ish a/r towers.

If 1 Bromfield is going to be the next 40 Trinity, then the developer should walk.
Click to expand...

Its not that big of a deal, we have a great skyline with good human scale and proportions. If you want height just go to NYC its only 3.5 hrs away. I like watching tall shit go up as much as the next man, but Boston is its own place and it plays by its own set of rules. Thats just the way it is and you either have to appreciate what we have for what it is or your never going to be happy. Thats reality.

Everybody keeps saying Boston is a ground level city, its the truth. Anybody can throw up a supertall whenever they want, almost nowhere can have what we have at ground level-especially in the United States. Thats something to be proud of. Boston is one of the only "european streets" cities in America, thats what makes it unique and gives it that charm. Just observe other cities from a distance give em a nod when they build a nice tower and know in the back of your head that their new tower will not make up for the lack of urban space at street level.

We have something special here your just not seeing it. How many cities in America have a north end with their downtown a 30 second walk away? Or a Beacon Hill? Or a common right in the middle of downtown, a greenway, an emerald necklace, an esplanade, a charles river filled with sail boats, a harbor filled with ships? What about a Harvard, MIT, Suffolk, Babson......etc. Or a newbury st, boylston st , washington st, tremont st, beacon st the list goes on. Now mind you we have all of this right against the Atlantic Ocean, so we have a harbor as well. That knocks off dozens of cities right away. Theres beaches close by and the charles river for running, kayaking, sailing. Boston is about balancing a good skyline with a world class base, all against the ocean. Thats a million times better than a NYC skyline with a Dubai ground level. Trust me. Nobody comes to Boston to look at the spires, they come for the nooks and crannies, the cobble stones, the history, the water, the sports. Thats what it is learn to appreciate it or your going to be miserable. Theres a TON to be proud of here and honestly our skyline is no slouch. Yea its not tall but the high spine is a wonderful concept, and the way it flows into downtown and doesn't overwhelm you with claustrophobic high rises everywhere is a good thing in my opinion. Be PROUD to be from here, we have a LOT more to offer than just run of the mill tall buildings. Theres a reason people want to live here and visit, and its all right in front of you.

One more thing too- One mans "mistake" is another mans human scaled proportionate city.
 
Last edited:
stick n move said:
Its not that big of a deal, we have a great skyline with good human scale and proportions. If you want height just go to NYC its only 3.5 hrs away. I like watching tall shit go up as much as the next man, but Boston is its own place and it plays by its own set of rules. Thats just the way it is and you either have to appreciate what we have for what it is or your never going to be happy. Thats reality.

Everybody keeps saying Boston is a ground level city, its the truth. Anybody can throw up a supertall whenever they want, almost nowhere can have what we have at ground level-especially in the United States. Thats something to be proud of. Boston is one of the only "european streets" cities in America, thats what makes it unique and gives it that charm. Just observe other cities from a distance give em a nod when they build a nice tower and know in the back of your head that their new tower will not make up for the lack of urban space at street level.

We have something special here your just not seeing it. How many cities in America have a north end with their downtown a 30 second walk away? Or a Beacon Hill? Or a common right in the middle of downtown, a greenway, an emerald necklace, an esplanade, a charles river filled with sail boats, a harbor filled with ships? What about a Harvard, MIT, Suffolk, Babson......etc. Or a newbury st, boylston st , washington st, tremont st, beacon st the list goes on. Now mind you we have all of this right against the Atlantic Ocean, so we have a harbor as well. That knocks off dozens of cities right away. Theres beaches close by and the charles river for running, kayaking, sailing. Boston is about balancing a good skyline with a world class base, all against the ocean. Thats a million times better than a NYC skyline with a Dubai ground level. Trust me. Nobody comes to Boston to look at the spires, they come for the nooks and crannies, the cobble stones, the history, the water, the sports. Thats what it is learn to appreciate it or your going to be miserable. Theres a TON to be proud of here and honestly our skyline is no slouch. Yea its not tall but the high spine is a wonderful concept, and the way it flows into downtown and doesn't overwhelm you with claustrophobic high rises everywhere is a good thing in my opinion. Be PROUD to be from here, we have a LOT more to offer than just run of the mill tall buildings. Theres a reason people want to live here and visit, and its all right in front of you.

One more thing too- One mans "mistake" is another mans human scaled proportionate city.
Click to expand...

Actually reality is that you can have both while making sure the mistakes of the past are not repeated. While you are correct in what you write, it wasn't that long ago that Boston was a pretty dirty, grimy, seedy and generally uninteresting place more on par with the likes of a Cleveland than San Francisco.

The fact of the matter is that this city has long been plagued by ill-conceived laws and other rules and regulations, corrupt politicians, mingling power brokers (the Vault, now the Billionaire suddenly interested in the waterfront, etc.), overly enabled nimbys (hello Harbor Towers residents, Ned, Shirley), special interests, and landuse issues ranging from an incredibly close international airport to a significant portion of the central city being unstable fill.

Boston will never morph into Manhattan and any cries to that effect are simply red herrings. What we must do however, is encourage developments that will have a long lasting and positive effect. Instead, we have been plagued with uninteresting square stumps that is the result of proposals being VE'd to death to make the numbers work. Boston is a small expensive place which requires economies of scale to exist in any major development.

While I do understand the shadow law, in reality it should only have been implemented on the southern and western edges. The sun rises here earlier than all of the US except for coastal Maine. Therefore for at least 75% of the year, the Financial District shadows are irrelevant past 7AM. And that doesn't even factor the number of clear mornings vs. cloudy ones or foggy ones.

With the changes in the mayor's office we now have developers who never would have considered doing business here proposing some very interesting and striking structures that will add another dimension to the city and enhance it, not destroy the elements we already have. If, and it's a big if, we let them.
 
Thanks. You all speak far better than me about the treasures, history, parks, trees, waterways, preservation, street life, culture, arts and education available to make it possible for everyone to prosper in Boston. I don't mention it as much because i'm outclassed. But it's in there.

Yes, i side with the Developer of 1 Bromfield. Yes i'm very upset with Boston's fear of height and the endless clipping of buildings. We can build a tower right THERE to the FAA determined limit granted from above. The gravesites and Boston Common next door won't be any worse for it's construction. This crap about rationing shade is utter lunacy. If you make significant shade after March 1st a.m. hours, then it needs to go. This is 1 building that might produce a tad amount on a corner. Make it the last that ever does.

i would love to see 10-12 skyscrapers (13, well if you insist) built that reach 656' w/ a few topping 700' to go along with all that street level grandieur. Add a few more 600' towers and i think we're done. Rest of the city, will be getting a few dozen towers in the 300-375' range... to go along with all the great infill (i hope for really great architecture everywhere). Add about 10~11.355% density to the city followed by a long pause. I'll be with those for less development.
 
Last edited:
Trust me I get it. Whats done is done though and were getting plenty of tall new shit soon and you never know whats right around the corner after that. We cant change the past so no sense getting upset over it. It looks like were on the right path now and all of these additions are going to be great and then maybe on the other side of the city by the garden well get something really tall up to the FAA limit, who knows. Yea some towers got a buzz cut but that just means they'll be a great supporting cast in the future. All Im saying is the past is the past, the skyline still looks good, and we have a bright future. Don't worry bout it.
 
COMMENT PERIOD ENDS TOMORROW.

Share support: http://www.bostonredevelopmentauthority.org/projects/development-projects/171-172-tremont-street

--

Shadow impacts reduced over 40% since the PNF version:

https://twitter.com/171_Tremont/status/739063157906362369

CkGuBOGUkAE9EGu.jpg:large


And ground level:

https://twitter.com/171_Tremont/status/738730980714946561

CkB_50QUUAE7glj.jpg:large
 
i noticed last night the BRA agenda wasn't up yet for this Thursday's meeting.

i pondered, maybe 171 Tremont might be finally get....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top