BU Development Thread

I like it.
And I say that as an ex-St. Paul Streeter.
 
Damn, just saw the renderings, took my breath away! Freakin love this! Iconic! Powerful! Amazing! Please, let it get built!
 
shmessy said:
1) Actually, many people who DO usually pay attention to architecture seem to not like it (more than half so far in this thread).

2) students and alum are people who would have emotions about the PLACE/LOCATION - - not in a NIMBY sense (because they do not live there long-term or even currently), but they are different from architecture buffs looking at it in isolation from place.

Once again, I'd have no problem if this thing were to be situated on the waterfront of the Seaport or Assembly Square. I DO have a problem with how this interacts with an increasingly tree-lined/bicycle friendly/Green Line boulevard. It's all about CONTEXT.
Click to expand...

I was more focused on the fact that even the non-architecture enthusiasts and people that usually don't pay attention to these things see something wrong with this. Usually when archboston is angry or in love with a building's design, the rest of the general public's response is "meh. Another glass building" or "I didn't know that was going up."

I myself don't like this very much. I side with your points about place and context. I'm familiar with the BU campus, and this doesn't fit. I will side with those who say they applaud BU for championing iconic architecture, but I don't like this specific design here. My wish is for this to go back to the drawing board, for a more refined, honest, and reserved high rise portion. Keep the red fins, but the offset floor plates don't work with this current massing. But how likely is that? The people in charge at BU are obviously fine with it since it has gone this far, so is the BCDC our last hope? Can/does the BU student/faculty/alum community hold enough power to convince them to go back for changes?
 
Last edited:
stefalarchitect said:
I was more focused on the fact that even the non-architecture enthusiasts and people that usually don't pay attention to these things see something wrong with this. Usually when archboston is angry or in love with a building's design, the rest of the general public's response is "meh. Another glass building" or "I didn't know that was going up."

I myself don't like this very much. I side with your points about place and context. I'm familiar with the BU campus, and this doesn't fit. I will side with those who say they applaud BU for championing iconic architecture, but I don't like this specific design here. My wish is for this to go back to the drawing board, for a more refined, honest, and reserved high rise portion. Keep the red fins, but the offset floor plates don't work with this current massing. But how likely is that? The people in charge at BU are obviously fine with it since it has gone this far, so is the BCDC our last hope? Can/does the BU student/faculty/alum community hold enough power to convince them to go back for changes?
Click to expand...

It’s commonplace that negative comments overshadow positive ones on social media. That said, the FB post had over 800 reactions, 700+ of which were not negative. Hardly scientific, but worth mentioning.
 
my biggest takeaway from the renders is that they're being willfully deceitful in presenting the above-ground green line through comm ave as some symmetrically tree-lined, lush boulevard, a la the arlington st. through mass. ave stretch of comm ave.

as for the building, itself, i agree with those who've speculated about the "why can't WE get designs that bold in boston?" reaction that some of the naysayers would have if this was proposed for nyc or san fran (or anywhere).

it took a while for folks to warm to the JHT and now it is the iconic post-19th century building in boston. this thing is ballsy. build it.
 
What's the FAA height limit here? Maybe stack more boxes and make it 1000 feet high! (Nah. Just kidding.)
 
I like the tower, but it's all wrong at the street level. The podium just looks like a parking garage.
 
JumboBuc said:
Same.

It's like this generation's take on the law tower (in a good way). And the colors say "BU" without being too in-your-face about it.
Click to expand...

I get the same sense about intention, but it just doesn't look like quality. It could use some tweaking regarding materials and the tower is also two bulky.
 
mattseee said:
I like the tower, but it's all wrong at the street level. The podium just looks like a parking garage.
Click to expand...


Agreed. I thought that it was a parking garage like in Warren Towers' base. Especially with that ramp.
 
odurandina said:
barf.
Click to expand...

Dude. Just because you don't like a building should not give you license to go crazy in every venue possible.

I love the energy / passion for our skyline but most of comments here and the Globe comments section on these projects are getting out of control.

For example, criticizing this project repeatedly on the Globe comments section of an article about the Seaport makes no sense, and it belittles your credibility. And constantly copy/pasting these massive diatribes into the Globe comments sections and here does not add value.
 
This thing, and the style in general for that matter, will age as well as brutalism did. Meaning, a limited architecture buff subsection will always adore it, while the masses with loathe it for generations to come.
 
Brutalism didn't fail us; we failed brutalism. (Hello, subsection leader checking in.)
 
HalcyonEra said:
...a limited architecture buff subsection will always adore it, while the masses with loathe it for generations to come.
Click to expand...

Just like heavily peated whisky, Anton Webern's music, Hart Crane's poetry, and Kandinsky's paintings.

Life is a rich tapestry. Our built environment should be a vivid reflection of this reality.
 
Last edited:
cjbski said:
Dude. Just because you don't like a building should not give you license to go crazy in every venue possible.

I love the energy / passion for our skyline but most of comments here and the Globe comments section on these projects are getting out of control.

For example, criticizing this project repeatedly on the Globe comments section of an article about the Seaport makes no sense, and it belittles your credibility. And constantly copy/pasting these massive diatribes into the Globe comments sections and here does not add value.
Click to expand...

You mean the triple or quadruple-word-for-word repeat posts from Tosh333 don't make his posts more credible???????? :rolleyes:
 
cjbski said:
Dude...
Click to expand...

Your critique is 100% deserved. Screwed that up as bad as someone can screw something up. We have 27 Globe pieces on the 150 Seaport saga. But, still nothing on the BU building. Next time i see Logan i'll get his email. A side topic is bad enough. Then, i cause confusion about what project i'm addressing.

2 reasons i absolutely hate this. 1. it's ugly. 2. i'm fairly sure they're trying to jam 350,000 sq ft, and get "x-script program" out of x-number of floors on an undersized lot–ostensibly a repeat of the Hub on Causeway office meets Back Bay Station. This oft repeated, agonizing facet of the "Boston building philosophy" has me fit to be tied.

BU has been making nice positive upgrades to it's campus in recent years. But, i don't believe this tower is going to wear or age particularly well on its ever-improving surrounds–and uptown in Kenmore. There's no shadow problem here. BU owns most of the area. If it needs to go 24 stories, then for Christ-sakes build it 24 stories, and keep the height expansion going. There's no sacred churches going to get mold growing on them--no minimal negative impact here for doing it right.

i think this is just more covering of Boston's overplayed fear of height with lazy, faux inspired garbage.
 
Last edited:
TomOfBoston said:
Agreed. I thought that it was a parking garage like in Warren Towers' base. Especially with that ramp.
Click to expand...

Agreed on the ramp. Could just square off the facade and not have the reddish part of the facade follow the ramp.
 
BarbaricManchurian said:
The base can be reworked a bit. I love the upper part though.
Click to expand...

agreed. I usually hate cantilevered BS, but this balances out up top and I like it.

Base should be more approachable, less monolithic and human scaled at the street level.

And the facade following that ramp makes the whole base look crooked
 
Late to the party but I do believe I like it. Daring, but not gratuitously so, which is exactly what the entire stretch of Comm (and the whole city, really), lacks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top