Bulfinch Crossing | Congress Street Garage | West End

[CSTH]

Only 'modern' road is commercial st, and there's no transit north of the greenway. Its hard to get even a pickup truck in there on anything other than Hanover. So the garage site is really the only plausible option, or maybe you could do Harbor Towers 2.0 on the hockey rink.

But why would you?

 

[Beton Brut]

Will it read well? It looks VERY wide, more than some of the large towers we already have.

Why oh why couldn't we have had this instead?

Pelli's early work with Tony Lumsden (when both worked for DMJM-Harris) was radical, futurist, and still compelling. Today, his work is Wonder Bread, toasted golden brown, with a thin coat of artisanal butter.

It probably could, but it shouldn't. It's got a lovely density and has a very European scale to it that would be a shame to lose. The Greenway is a nice divide.

Word.

But why would you?

Exactly...

...maybe you could do Harbor Towers 2.0...

There was **a proposal like that (I believe designed by Sert) in the late 60s. It went down like the Titanic.

** I have seen a photo of a BRA model, either on line, or in one of my books at home. Will add to this post if I'm able to find it.

 

[odurandina]

Well Brut,

i certainly like the height. i'm no fan of 1000' towers. but anything within a range of 872-942'--as long as the FAA would approve of it--is a go.....

except the FAA at the site is probably about 740'.

But that thing is also fat and massive.

Cut off (the shorter flank)--otherwise, thanks but no.

btw, i wouldn't be surprised if you see something creative like that proposed for the Harbor Garage.

 

[statler]

Anyone ever wonder why we (generally) find tall, slender things more appealing than shorter, wider things? I'm sure there is probably some literature on the subject, but it's odd that it seems almost universally true.

 

[odurandina]

^^ see that train wreck called the Pan Am building.

We got the JHT and the Pru. Both wide in their own rights.

But not near to the point of hideous absurdity.

 

[KentXie]

Anyone ever wonder why we (generally) find tall, slender things more appealing than shorter, wider things? I'm sure there is probably some literature on the subject, but it's odd that it seems almost universally true.

Probably the same reason why we as humans tend to find taller and slender people more attractive than shorter and wider people. Maybe it's an biological thing.

 

[Beton Brut]

Maybe it's an biological thing.

Probably more than just maybe. And when you consider psychology, it's closer to certainty. Across time, tastes change, but now we're in an age when tastes can change us, and we can change ourselves (through diet and exercise, surgery, and so on...)

We all know about the Golden Ratio and its strong connection to biomorphics. The ratio presents a more balanced than slender proportion, but combining or stacking golden rectangles has a similar effect.

My simple (or perhaps simplistic) hypothesis:

1. Height inspires a sense of action, with increases in height directly proportional to perceived activation;
2. Width inspires a sense of reposes, with increases in width directly proportional to perceived restfulness;
3. Curved surfaces modulate the perception of activation;

QED: the combination of width and curved surface dulls the perception of height

Pelli's design will look like a 600' stump.

 

[bigpicture7]

I don't think there will be too many angles where one is looking at the broad side of this from a vantage point where you can see the whole thing (with the exception of right in front of it). The skyline view coming from I93 from the north will be obscured by all of the north station-area towers going up.

From the Charles river this will look very nice (not only because it's narrower, but because the crown feature will look interesting).

 

[odurandina]

Trump World Tower is only 53 feet taller than the Pan Am building; 861' vs 808'....

Granted, the curtain wall on Trump World Tower looks dated.... 60's-ish.

That said,

QED

 

[Czervik.Construction]

As an outsider who has been desensitized by the glory of my Hudson Yards neighbors, I really like this tower, fatness and all.

 

[stick n move]

Anyone ever wonder why we (generally) find tall, slender things more appealing than shorter, wider things? I'm sure there is probably some literature on the subject, but it's odd that it seems almost universally true.

I think its proportions. Humans naturally like well proportioned things... faces, body type, hair...etc. Im sure theres a certain aspect ratio humans like and gravitate towards, but idk what it is. I know with obelisks and things like that I believe its 10/1? But Idk about other things.

Back to that proposal I wasnt that big of a fan tbh, I think it was gimmicky and would have looked bad when it got knocked down in height. I think this is the last building to say what if to as its one of our greatest proposals. Its not too crazy like London or Dubai with their gimmicky towers, but compared to other towers in Boston its a pretty huge departure. I think this is going to be amazing, at least from across the harbor. The overall shape is not anything wonky but its still very detailed. I love this and I realllllly hope it is not changed in any way from how it is now.... unless they thinned it out, which WILL NOT happen. The triple towers of that proposal from a front or rear view would have been a MASSIVE blob on the skyline, theres a reason you dont see that view. This would have been like putting rockefeller center in downtown boston.

 

[DZH22]

I love this and I realllllly hope it is not changed in any way from how it is now.... unless they thinned it out, which WILL NOT happen.

The easiest and most plausible way for them to make it appear thinner would be to add a few floors, which would at least improve the height-to-width ratio. Possible but highly unlikely, since this is Boston. I'd rather see the design built as-is than to redesign it or VE it in any way. We absolutely CANNOT go 0/3 on the Copley Tower / 1 Bromfield / Congress Street trifecta of curvy glass towers with non-flat roofs.

 

[stick n move]

Exactly, from everything so far its full steam ahead, its approved, nobodys bitchin, no reviews, its going forward as is.

 

[tysmith95]

Looking at that ^, a crazy thought entered my mind: Could the North End ever have tall buildings? It is right next to an area of existing and proposed tall buildings. Yeah, I know, NIMBYs, but still....

Call me a NIMBY but I hope it never does.

 

[odurandina]

Im sure theres a certain aspect ratio humans like and gravitate towards, but idk what it is. I know with obelisks and things like that I believe its 10/1? But Idk about other things.

MT is the beginning of a/r sexiness. Fed Reserve sort of has it.

Pru... well into it; near the top of the short list for lovely/iconic 60's era towers that continue to pass the test.

JHT from many angles has it in spades.... approaching its narrow end; nirvana.

1 Dalton; you had me at hello. 814'; i'd have sold my soul.

115 Winthrop by God; "Joe; split it into 2 towers with a sky bridge."

 

[BronsonShore]

Looking at that ^, a crazy thought entered my mind: Could the North End ever have tall buildings? It is right next to an area of existing and proposed tall buildings. Yeah, I know, NIMBYs, but still....

Why the hell would we want to touch the urban fabric of the North End in any way?

 

[Charlie_mta]

Why the hell would we want to touch the urban fabric of the North End in any way?

I hear you. It's probably best to keep it as a designated historic district and leave it as is. How about a few tall building along it's periphery next to the Greenway, though?

 

[shawn]

I am as YIMBY as most of the rest of us here, but the North End is a neighborhood too far, in my opinion. This is one of two areas in the city which absolutely should not have height, along with Beacon Hill.

 

[odurandina]

Never even occurred to me that the garage (perhaps) could be developed.

Sure, sink it and build 80'~120' on top (maybe).

The nimby's would fear a slippery slope to sure doom. And it's commercially untenable.

We love that garage!!

 

[Czervik.Construction]

I completely agree. Sadly, Beacon Street along the Common is a perfect place for some tall buildings as they would not cast shadows on the park at all.

I am as YIMBY as most of the rest of us here, but the North End is a neighborhood too far, in my opinion. This is one of two areas in the city which absolutely should not have height, along with Beacon Hill.