Encore Boston Harbor Casino | 1 Broadway | Everett

Re: WYNN Boston Harbor Casino | Everett

Dishing some inside news is one thing, but changing a thread title and spreading the gospel before something's been formally announced by a verified source is another. Personally, I think this is unacceptable--it diminishes the integrity of the content shared on ArchBoston.

First, I had no part in changing the thread title and don't have the ability to make such a change. I certainly never requested the thread title be changed.

Second, we really need to wait for an official press release to be issued from the developer to change a freaking title? Let's not take ourselves too seriously here folks. I don't think it diminishes anything. The name change was confirmed to me by sources I very much trust but cannot name in a public forum. I am involved in various legal aspects of this project as part of my day job. While I suppose it is conceivable they go with another name or keep the name, I highly highly doubt it.
 
1. Well, we all know that Wynn was involved in a scandal. Which had gotten his name removed from the tower.

2. Isn't there an identical tower in Las Vegas with the same name on it. If they are going to take his name off of things, then why not take it off of everything? After all. no one wants anyone who's been involved in a scandal to have his name put on things!
 
1. Well, we all know that Wynn was involved in a scandal. Which had gotten his name removed from the tower.

2. Isn't there an identical tower in Las Vegas with the same name on it. If they are going to take his name off of things, then why not take it off of everything? After all. no one wants anyone who's been involved in a scandal to have his name put on things!


Yea...its called Encore.

Like I said above this makes sense and they probably will. Encore is already the name of the second tower in Vegas and Id imagine now that Steve Wynn is gone they'll probably move away from his name and just use Encore to separate themselves as they already own the rights to that name as well. It removes the person and just leaves the entity. I bet they'll announce in Vegas as well that they're either going to replace the first towers logo, or remove it entirely and use tower 2’s Encore logo to represent the entire site because having both towers say Encore may be redundant. Not sure, but either way I see this happening at all of their casinos.


Encore-Flickr_54_990x660.jpg



Hopefully the logo and horizontal lines are lit up at night like in Vegas.

The-Encore-Las-Vegas.jpg



These towers are also capable of catching some interesting reflections as well:

BFC2EFY6AJHTVO75EP6IP5KHOE.jpg




Also theres going to be 24 white bands going across the tower and each one represents a floor plate. Right now they're at around the 21st floor so theres 3 more floors to go and then we get the mechanicals and crown. Its cool that they made the tower have basically the same proportions as the Vegas building but about half the amount of floors where in Vegas theres 45 floors and here theres 24. So the white bands in Vegas are spaced between double height windows with 2 floors per band, whereas here its a band per floor so they just basically took the same design and scaled it down. It scaled much better than Wynn Macau and it looks basically the same as the Vegas tower just shorter with 21 less floors. You really cant really tell that there is that much of a difference in height though between the two, which just goes to show how well the double windows work. Which is why on towers like 115 federal it was important they didn't do this because it actually works really well at disguising the height.

This is going to be 350' tall and the Wynn in Vegas is 614' which I never would have guessed without looking it up because in person it doesn't look like a 600 foot tower. The width helps a lot with disguising its height but so do the double pane floors as this is much shorter with the same width to height ratio and I would not have guessed the Vegas tower is almost twice as tall after seeing both in person. You do have to use some imagination here at the moment so maybe when its done it will be more noticeable that its much shorter, but I never would have thought the Wynn Vegas was a 600 footer. Yes the swoop on the roof helps, but remember we have the same swoop here. Just goes to show how massive the buildings in Vegas are. Imagine the corner of the Wynn in the picture above at 614' is a little taller than One Financial center here. Then drag the width wayyyy out sideways and it shows how huge these buildings are and how well the height is hidden. You only really notice the height in city center which has more proportionate buildings to most cities and they are around the same size as the rest of the towers on the strip, some are a little taller, but then the height/width starts to make sense.
 
Last edited:
Dishing some inside news is one thing, but changing a thread title and spreading the gospel before something's been formally announced by a verified source is another. Personally, I think this is unacceptable--it diminishes the integrity of the content shared on ArchBoston.

It's cool to see the City & metro fill in, a privilege to see the pieces forming a big jigsaw puzzle that will make the next chapter. We're able to get an advanced preview about many good ideas being set forth. We listen to everyone's ideas here and test a few of our own.

Some very smart people contribute. Like that great article you wrote in the Globe. Please write more. The City needs it.

People's contributions on this forum, The Globe and at public meetings vary widely. No one has all the answers. Sometimes smart folks can get offended by others they feel aren't making a good effort. i miss F-Line's contributions. In an odd sort of way, i miss Wiggy's as well. They had a bit of a tussle over a number of days. Then they left. Weird.

F-Line is a genius. And he could be downright hostile. No one has the right to treat any member of this board in that manner.

We have a few provocateurs who occasionally throw pies. Clearly, no one will ever think of you in that way. i like your idea about a round-table. i think it would help people understand where some people are coming from, and make a friendlier vibe on the board.

Pardon if i come off a bit curt. i recognize people have different priorities. Some have a predisposition for accuracy and form. That's good. But i don't know if you possess the temperament to be a moderator. You don't demonstrate the correct mix of detached levity and frivolity, imo; You don't always seem receptive to different ideas – including those from the unwashed masses.

The mods have been slow to invoke the ban hammer and play executioner. Bostonian's sometimes have a short fuse. There are people who sometimes express the desire to see a quick hook. The mods are wiser. They recognize there's no cause for that. Or enemy's lists. That's not what the forum needs.

What brings me here? i want to see the City go a bit vertical. But i'm also worried Boston isn't creating adequate opportunity (mostly in the form of living space) for young professionals and the next generation coming up. We don't have a huge public school population, but shouldn't we be doing more to ensure at least some will be able to make a home here someday?

i'm not just about the highrises. i see 1 Charlestown as one of the most important projects in the City, and i will fight to see it is built. i see a small minority of selfish old people who come to sit on these iag's and bully City planners. A few almost seem hellbent on ruining Boston's future. i feel bad for the dedicated people of the Walsh Admn who have to put up with their crap.

i take on the nimby's in the Globe. But, they're less likely to act out when they're sitting across from me. We want to believe that for every yimby, there's a better chance the developer will have the flexibility to put up the right brick.

i came on aB after spending many years blogging with car enthusiasts, psychopaths and mental defectives on the Porsche forums. i have hundreds of friends, despite my famous dumping upon the '944 model,' known the world over. Porsche's are an incredibly expensive hobby. Nevermind the 911's. We have $120,000 944's and 968's. My claim to fame is advising college kids to wait before jumping in. Emotion's run high when they blow up. This forum is definitely more formal.


Let's not take ourselves too seriously here folks.
 
Two towers would have been really nice for our copy. I cannot overstate how much I hate the cheesecake factory-on-acid base, anything to draw attention up away from it would be welcome.
 
Agreed. An arena/theater I think would have been big too, one that fit into the space where we need them I think someone had mentioned before that thats in the 5,000 seat area. Although I would imagine Wynn would have went bigger than that if there was one, for boxing etc... but I think that would have been cool to have a brand new really upscale place to go watch events like MMA, boxing, concerts...etc. The casino already a new level of night life that we did not have before, especially with the ferrys from Rowes Wharf, but an arena would have been that much better.
 
although those water facing garages make one question the sanity of the Assembly Row folks on the Somerville side who have otherwise put together a solid development. The view from the water and the waterfront park is supposed to be something you put on a postcard, not the butt end of the development. Such a missed opportunity there.

Those garages have a great view of the orange line train tracks, not waterfront property. Trust me, nothing of value was lost in the design.
 
Two towers would have been really nice for our copy. I cannot overstate how much I hate the cheesecake factory-on-acid base, anything to draw attention up away from it would be welcome.

Were any deep piles laid on that mall turd thing?
 
Those garages have a great view of the orange line train tracks, not waterfront property. Trust me, nothing of value was lost in the design.

He's talking about looking at Assembly row from across the water and yes the garages are horrendous. I said it before, but I hate when developers build garages with slanted floors. It just looks wonky and ridiculous. If you have to have an exposed garage at least have the floors level so it looks somewhat normal, especially seeing how that is what your looking at when you look at this from across the river, and they didn't even put any of those stupid colorful fins or anything to put lipstick on it. They just said na here you go. I like Assembly and you cant notice this when your there, but looking at the project from the outside in looks terrible because of this and the building on stilts over one of the garages too.


I was actually checking out the casino and took this picture from across the river of Assembly. This is the view you have of the project from across the Mystic. The garages look like the elevated highway in Oakland after the earthquake hit in the 90's. They don't even go in the same directions, it looks like something really heavy squished them in the middle.




Compared to what you get when your actually there:

 
Those lots are horrific. isn't this right next to the orange line with a brand new station? Does it really take lots that massive to have one medium density street?
 
They did it that way to wrap the buildings around the outsides of garages so it lead to pretty big lots. You just gotta take it or leave it here some people love it some don't. It was empty space before so I think they did a pretty good job of making it into like a downtown area. I do think theres a good lesson to be learned here though about how to hide garages that could be implemented really anywhere that theres a garage in a city, besides the sides facing the mystic. They hid them really well. Same kind of concept thats happening at the govt center garage.

Dubai should have done something like this as a way to hide their parking garages in plain sight vs what they did where they're all out in the open behind each tower on separate service roads. They could have done something like this -which they have been doing recently but for some roads its too little too late now, but it keeps the fabric of the city together while still providing ample parking when you need lots of parking. I think basically all garages in cities should be treated like this with condos/apartments/store fronts wrapping around the exposed sides, with just the entrances letting you know that they're even there.
 
I don't feel like this is all that great dont those garages face the T stop? The urban fabric is not well connected to public transportation or able to be easily expanded beyond a central strip. They could have faced the river far better than they did. I guess I just question the necessity of so damn much parking 100 feet from a subway stop. Seems like a bad way to build transit oriented density
 
I don't feel like this is all that great dont those garages face the T stop? The urban fabric is not well connected to public transportation or able to be easily expanded beyond a central strip. They could have faced the river far better than they did. I guess I just question the necessity of so damn much parking 100 feet from a subway stop. Seems like a bad way to build transit oriented density

Pretty much pick any page in the Assembly thread (this is not the Assembly thread) and you'll find discussion & disappointment about the urban planning/absurd amount of parking.
 
Yup thats been the on going theme. I agree that more consideration should have been taken to clean up the waterfront of this area vs just thinking its facing toward the tracks so they can put all the junk there.

We were sold this, but they conveniently left out how the side facing the tracks was going to be a catastrophe:

Assembly-Row-.jpg


AssemblyRow_Overview.0.jpg




The view they show above is from a spot where theres a couple condo buildings across the water and train tracks, nobody is going to see this view. Rt 99, the shopping plaza, and the casino are right across the river from the side with all of the garages so thats honestly where they should have paid more attention to how it looked from the outside. They didn't want the garages on the side with waterfront access I get it so you can get to the riverfront park, but I think they should have still put the same condos etc on river rd, because the tracks are only at ground level. That would be where the store fronts are and then the condos above would have seen over the tracks and had a view of the river and casino. Theres already a road there, might as have well hidden all sides and then thats more revenue as well with more condos to sell and retail space to rent out. I wouldn't mind a condo with a view of the river and casino, its much better than my view of the triple decker next door I have now. They should have hidden the garages on grand union blvd as well, just built condos and retail in front of the garage like they did on foley st. They did a lot well and dropped the ball on a lot as well. Its better than Ive seen in other cities where the garages aren't hidden at all, but I don't get why they didn't continue it everywhere here and only did this on some sides but not all. They were very close and its pretty nice when your there, but it could have been executed much better and I hope they learn from this.

 
Last edited:
Assembly row was one of the smartest, efficient successful developments in and around Boston with orange line access. Better than seaport
 
With the lots built the way they are is it even possible to develop them without tearing down the whole buildings? If that is the case an isolated lot honestly might have been better in the long run if uglier in the short term. I feel like the way this is built it orients this development to the car for decades.
 
With the lots built the way they are is it even possible to develop them without tearing down the whole buildings? If that is the case an isolated lot honestly might have been better in the long run if uglier in the short term. I feel like the way this is built it orients this development to the car for decades.

What do you mean? The lots being developed are empty. Are you saying redeveloping them in the future? In that case it depends but you can do anything you want. I dont really see that happening they’re just going to keep filling the large amout of empty plots into the forseeable future.

I hope they deside to add condos/retail onto the river facing garages on great river road and also the main strip on grand union blvd. It would add more revenue and also clean up a couple of flaws that were designed into this area. I think this would make a huge difference in making it look “authentic” and give it less of the disney land scale model of an American city feeling it has now.
 
It looks to me like the buildings are for the most part completely or at the least mostly structurally independent of the garages which would allow for the garages to be torn down and replaced more easily. For example the tallest residential building has part of the steel frame extending down past the garage completely independent of it. My guess would be that in the future they may replace some of these garages once they have used up the space on the rest of the site. Does anyone know if it was the developers choice to include this much parking or was it because of city parking regulations?
 

Back
Top