[ARCHIVED] Harbor Garage Redevelopment | 70 East India Row | Waterfront | Downtown
- Status
Suffolk 83
Senior Member
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2007
- Messages
- 2,976
- Reaction score
- 2,319
Re: New tower at Aquarium parking lot.
Ablarc, I don't always agree with you, but you generally know your stuff.... I can not find 5 good reasons why this IS NOT a good location... it might not be what Boston is used to, but I can't find ANY reason why this is not a good local for a building: short or tall, fat or slim, intelligent or streetsmart.... granted something intelligent and provacative would be very nice.
I disagree with anyone saying no height is servicable... I don't see the negatives of such a project.
Ablarc, I don't always agree with you, but you generally know your stuff.... I can not find 5 good reasons why this IS NOT a good location... it might not be what Boston is used to, but I can't find ANY reason why this is not a good local for a building: short or tall, fat or slim, intelligent or streetsmart.... granted something intelligent and provacative would be very nice.
I disagree with anyone saying no height is servicable... I don't see the negatives of such a project.
KentXie
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 25, 2006
- Messages
- 4,192
- Reaction score
- 756
Re: New tower at Aquarium parking lot.
Wait, I'm confused? I sound like a NIMBY? And yes I do wish that it will be possible to pacify NIMBYs with that technique. But right now, I'm looking towards the design of the skyscraper because frankly I'm sick of seeing boring boxes. Copley Place is a good first step. I would love to see some more innovative designs similar to that in this location, where it is quite visible, especially if its going to be tall.
Wait, I'm confused? I sound like a NIMBY? And yes I do wish that it will be possible to pacify NIMBYs with that technique. But right now, I'm looking towards the design of the skyscraper because frankly I'm sick of seeing boring boxes. Copley Place is a good first step. I would love to see some more innovative designs similar to that in this location, where it is quite visible, especially if its going to be tall.
Re: New tower at Aquarium parking lot.
The examples above are really very different cities from Boston with very different waterfronts. Feels like we're comparing apples and oranges. Bigger cities with bigger waterfronts don't share our challenges.
I'm not for or against height there. What I hope for that spot is an architectural icon. It's one of the few times I would request such a thing.
A great statement does not absolutely require height, not really, just good design.
But a little height there might work too.
The examples above are really very different cities from Boston with very different waterfronts. Feels like we're comparing apples and oranges. Bigger cities with bigger waterfronts don't share our challenges.
I'm not for or against height there. What I hope for that spot is an architectural icon. It's one of the few times I would request such a thing.
A great statement does not absolutely require height, not really, just good design.
But a little height there might work too.
Ron Newman
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 30, 2006
- Messages
- 8,395
- Reaction score
- 11
Re: New tower at Aquarium parking lot.
That's the Chicago River. But Chicago's lakefront towers are set well back from the shoreline, with large parks and a highway in between.
That's the Chicago River. But Chicago's lakefront towers are set well back from the shoreline, with large parks and a highway in between.
Re: New tower at Aquarium parking lot.
And in Boston, there is a 40 story skyscraper in between this site and the water.
The garage is partially obscured by the right Harbor Tower from the classic skyline photo angle.
I really don't even understand the debate about stepping back from the water.......if someone wants to argue about scale over the greenway, that's fine, but I feel like most have already stated that the greenway needs more height to make it feel more intimate due to the relative width of it.
I'm a fan of facadectomy's, and though there is nothing historic about the existing parking deck, I would like to see the first few floors make an attempt at sharing context with the brick buildings across the greenway. But as far as overall height, I see no reason that this site needs to be limited. Again, it's a block from a T station, and fronts a road that has relatively decent capacity. This parcel make more sense to me for density/height than Belkin's parcel once people get past their hard-on for a pyramid shaped downtown skyline.
And in Boston, there is a 40 story skyscraper in between this site and the water.
The garage is partially obscured by the right Harbor Tower from the classic skyline photo angle.
I really don't even understand the debate about stepping back from the water.......if someone wants to argue about scale over the greenway, that's fine, but I feel like most have already stated that the greenway needs more height to make it feel more intimate due to the relative width of it.
I'm a fan of facadectomy's, and though there is nothing historic about the existing parking deck, I would like to see the first few floors make an attempt at sharing context with the brick buildings across the greenway. But as far as overall height, I see no reason that this site needs to be limited. Again, it's a block from a T station, and fronts a road that has relatively decent capacity. This parcel make more sense to me for density/height than Belkin's parcel once people get past their hard-on for a pyramid shaped downtown skyline.
Re: New tower at Aquarium parking lot.
how can anyone compare Hong Kong and Chicago to Boston? They are entirely different...as NM88 said
Boston needs to develop along the lines of it's own strengths...which is not and never will or should be a dominant skyscraper array
looking at the Boston Harbor picture the glaring blotch is imo the Harbor Towers... their only negative visual impact is from that dead on water shot...or from a view facing the water
if you stick a 40 story building where the garage is and; it will block out numerous buildings from different angles...for some of them it doesn't matter but others it would negatively impact previously nice views imo....
Not to mention the effect on the Greenway, which I don't think in itself suffers from being too wide...what it suffers from is a monocromatic background that makes the green lose a sense of density....what it needs is more sidewalk activity/ ground level density, night lights and contrasting colors along the route...height itself provides no positive benefit especially since that building would stick out from numerous angles like a middle finger out of a fist...it would be better to keep the Green Way streamlined with a fairly uniform height than to plop a dramatic tower place in the middle so chaotically.
I think that a tall building would only help is if it is something very sleak, curved and is cast with a glass tint that easily blends with the sky...another angular building wont benefit the area at all...so I also dunno why, unless you believe that the developer would contract some celebrity firm to design the building, you post pictures of the type of skyscrapers that would probably not go there...
I really wanna see the design
how can anyone compare Hong Kong and Chicago to Boston? They are entirely different...as NM88 said
Boston needs to develop along the lines of it's own strengths...which is not and never will or should be a dominant skyscraper array
looking at the Boston Harbor picture the glaring blotch is imo the Harbor Towers... their only negative visual impact is from that dead on water shot...or from a view facing the water
if you stick a 40 story building where the garage is and; it will block out numerous buildings from different angles...for some of them it doesn't matter but others it would negatively impact previously nice views imo....
Not to mention the effect on the Greenway, which I don't think in itself suffers from being too wide...what it suffers from is a monocromatic background that makes the green lose a sense of density....what it needs is more sidewalk activity/ ground level density, night lights and contrasting colors along the route...height itself provides no positive benefit especially since that building would stick out from numerous angles like a middle finger out of a fist...it would be better to keep the Green Way streamlined with a fairly uniform height than to plop a dramatic tower place in the middle so chaotically.
I think that a tall building would only help is if it is something very sleak, curved and is cast with a glass tint that easily blends with the sky...another angular building wont benefit the area at all...so I also dunno why, unless you believe that the developer would contract some celebrity firm to design the building, you post pictures of the type of skyscrapers that would probably not go there...
I really wanna see the design
Last edited:
underground
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2007
- Messages
- 2,390
- Reaction score
- 3
Re: New tower at Aquarium parking lot.
We're seriously going to argue that city planning should be conducted so that boaters have something nice to look at?
We're seriously going to argue that city planning should be conducted so that boaters have something nice to look at?
Ron Newman
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 30, 2006
- Messages
- 8,395
- Reaction score
- 11
Re: New tower at Aquarium parking lot.
The title of this thread is "New tower at Aquarium parking lot". Does this mean the surface lot next to Harbor Towers, rather than the Harbor Garage?
The title of this thread is "New tower at Aquarium parking lot". Does this mean the surface lot next to Harbor Towers, rather than the Harbor Garage?
Re: New tower at Aquarium parking lot.
Parking "lot": it causes me no end of despair that this phrase is coming to refer in popular usage equally to surface parking and structure parking. This kind of linguistic sloppiness has potential to do great harm.
There's all the difference in the world between a wretched parking lot and a parking garage with shops on the ground floor. If we confuse the two linguistically we'll come to think of them as equal.
Reminds me of that old oxymoron "urban sprawl." Got the whole country thinking cities sprawl --when the real culprit was the suburb all along. It took decades to repair the damage caused by this linguistic faux pas. Let's not repeat it.
A lot is a lot and a garage is a garage.
Mr. Moderator?
Parking "lot": it causes me no end of despair that this phrase is coming to refer in popular usage equally to surface parking and structure parking. This kind of linguistic sloppiness has potential to do great harm.
There's all the difference in the world between a wretched parking lot and a parking garage with shops on the ground floor. If we confuse the two linguistically we'll come to think of them as equal.
Reminds me of that old oxymoron "urban sprawl." Got the whole country thinking cities sprawl --when the real culprit was the suburb all along. It took decades to repair the damage caused by this linguistic faux pas. Let's not repeat it.
A lot is a lot and a garage is a garage.
Mr. Moderator?
Ron Newman
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 30, 2006
- Messages
- 8,395
- Reaction score
- 11
Re: New tower at Aquarium parking lot.
I agree. I'm asking because there is in fact a surface lot in this area, as well as the garage (which does have some retail use on the first floor, though much of the intended retail space is now used as an annex to the Aquarium)
I agree. I'm asking because there is in fact a surface lot in this area, as well as the garage (which does have some retail use on the first floor, though much of the intended retail space is now used as an annex to the Aquarium)
Padre Mike
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2007
- Messages
- 681
- Reaction score
- 1
Re: New tower at Aquarium parking lot.
I'm sure whatever is proposed will be looked at from the point of view of morning-afternoon shadows over the Greenway as well as downtown. I'd like to see a couple of towers of mixed use and different heights, narrow in scale, with an abundance of retail, etc. at the base. It's time for something unusual here, proportioned like the "needle" being built on the Chicago waterfront.
I'm sure whatever is proposed will be looked at from the point of view of morning-afternoon shadows over the Greenway as well as downtown. I'd like to see a couple of towers of mixed use and different heights, narrow in scale, with an abundance of retail, etc. at the base. It's time for something unusual here, proportioned like the "needle" being built on the Chicago waterfront.
pelhamhall
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2008
- Messages
- 855
- Reaction score
- 0
Re: New tower at Aquarium parking lot.
I agree - the Chicago Spire is certainly controversial, but being on the waterfront should be no reason to dumb down development. Check this photo out for context:
http://sustainabledesignupdate.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/chicago_spire600.jpg
I also like the Hong Kong example. A tall building on the water is a beacon. If done right, it can be stunning.
I agree - the Chicago Spire is certainly controversial, but being on the waterfront should be no reason to dumb down development. Check this photo out for context:
http://sustainabledesignupdate.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/chicago_spire600.jpg
I also like the Hong Kong example. A tall building on the water is a beacon. If done right, it can be stunning.
pelhamhall
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2008
- Messages
- 855
- Reaction score
- 0
Re: New tower at Aquarium parking lot.
Also, for those old enough to remember, the World Trade Center was originally built right on the harbor before the Financial Center was added on the fill in front. This is a great picture:
http://www.angelfire.com/art/papainc/images/World_Trade_Center.jpg
I personally think tall buildings rising from the edge of the water are breath-taking. More so than ones buried among other tall buildings.
Also, for those old enough to remember, the World Trade Center was originally built right on the harbor before the Financial Center was added on the fill in front. This is a great picture:
http://www.angelfire.com/art/papainc/images/World_Trade_Center.jpg
I personally think tall buildings rising from the edge of the water are breath-taking. More so than ones buried among other tall buildings.
Re: New tower at Aquarium parking lot.
yes that spot is calling for something along those lines...not a spire but something like what is in London or Barcelona....sleek, colorful, round and phallic....and not too tall
it would be perfect and it would leave some space to build around for the sake of retail
of course that is a pipe dream
yes that spot is calling for something along those lines...not a spire but something like what is in London or Barcelona....sleek, colorful, round and phallic....and not too tall
it would be perfect and it would leave some space to build around for the sake of retail
of course that is a pipe dream
Last edited:
KentXie
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 25, 2006
- Messages
- 4,192
- Reaction score
- 756
Re: New tower at Aquarium parking lot.
Guys, you treat a 40 story tower as something that is over 550 ft. Just for references, the Harbor Towers themselves are 40 stories. Considering that the Aquarium Towers are probably going to be residential, it' not going to be much if at all taller than the Harbor Towers. It's going to be barely taller than the Russia Wharf tower which stands at 395ft and it is also right over the waterfront. It's going to block some towers behind it but it will also create new views as well. And no, one tower will not, especially at 400ft, block out anything significant, no matter which angle you are looking at.
On a side note, there is a problem when residents of Boston considers a 400ft tower as a tall building.
Guys, you treat a 40 story tower as something that is over 550 ft. Just for references, the Harbor Towers themselves are 40 stories. Considering that the Aquarium Towers are probably going to be residential, it' not going to be much if at all taller than the Harbor Towers. It's going to be barely taller than the Russia Wharf tower which stands at 395ft and it is also right over the waterfront. It's going to block some towers behind it but it will also create new views as well. And no, one tower will not, especially at 400ft, block out anything significant, no matter which angle you are looking at.
On a side note, there is a problem when residents of Boston considers a 400ft tower as a tall building.
- Status