Fan Pier Developments | Seaport

I posted this information a ways back in this thread, but I don't remember exactly.

SeamusMcFly said:
The rendering I just looked at will probably bother a couple people in one regard. A large amount of louvers facing Seaport Blvd. Massive louvers at the mid level mech. space. and smaller at the upper level (penthouse) mech. space.

Building "A"

3 levels below grade (-32'-0".)
261'-0" to top of penthouse. (above grade)
4 distinct Retail spaces on the ground floor with minimal lobby. (Not too shabby.)The loading dock entrance is facing the courthouse, so probably best place for it.
The garage entrance is on the north facing the other vertex building, so suppose the other would be opposite (although I would think a shared garage with a single entrance could have worked maybe better) which is again probably in the best place.

As for the structure, it looks like there will be a 5' voide between the water protectiong piles and the foundation water (I assume for dewatering). The drawings refer to the lowest level as slab on grade. This is a mat slab that appears to vary from 54" - 60" thick, with piles (that look like footings to me). Whether that answer Whigh question I'm not sure.

It looks like what I assumed earlier, a shell and core set to get going, with Vertex fitout drawings to follow.
Click to expand...

SeamusMcFly said:
The CD's tell me otherwise unfortunately.
Building "B" shows a separate entrance it's garage, and for whatever reason it also faces north instead of sharing the same road.

Looks like 3 retail spaces on ground level (2 future restaurant and one future daycare.)
Also, unfortunately, a larger lobby on this one.

It does appear that the garage connects below grade between the 2 parcels. But, still with multiple entrances.

Looks like this one tops out at 268'-6", so fairly identical.
Click to expand...
 
czsz said:
Architect of this building, at some point: "Why use that full windowframe when we can just allow a slit of light in?"
Click to expand...

Well ... I am not sure what you are really saying about a "slit of light" ... but THIS is the actually active lite of vision glass within the perceived frame. The rest is spandrel glass. Because of its program (laboratory) they are lucky to get this much.

Why would they make it look like they have bigger windows then they do? Scale. It decreases the perceived scale of a building that has very tall floor to floor heights with tons of crap in the ceiling space and lab benches directly behind the facade. Think of it without the spandrel. That would be pretty unfriendly.

cca

markup-1.jpg
 
Good to know, cca, thanks. If only there were a way to reduce the contrast between those two glass types on the exterior.
 
Use glass like they have at the CLS building. That's all labs with the same issues of large above ceiling spaces, and looks just fine and dandy from the outside.
 
czsz said:
Good to know, cca, thanks. If only there were a way to reduce the contrast between those two glass types on the exterior.
Click to expand...

Yup, I hear you. This is hard unless you use very reflective glass, and even so, the illusion is broken at night. These are tough design issues that each architect has to make hard choices about. I guarantee that in the case of this building and this architect, thoughtful choices were made even though they may seem puzzling to us.

cca
 
Add in the Meco shades, and the whole thing gets screwed up anyways, especially when not on a timer or with user overides.
 
At least the sum of stubs can be a streetwall (see: Washington, DC)

What's going on in the fourth to last pic - is that a multistory gerbil tube?
 
At least the new streets are relatively narrow.

The gerbil tube is interesting. Normally I'd be against but it sort of works to make this block feel even more confined and intimate. In a century this area might even be valued as a sort of PoMo version of Fort Point.
 
Kind of surprising to see interconnecting bridges as this is all leased space and not tenant owned buildings.
 
^ Yup. Surely ones of the sweeteners to get the Vertex deal finalized was offering to connect the spaces however they could. Otherwise we would never see three levels worth of sky bridges on what was spec space.
 
Were they told they needed gerbil tubes?

Or did they try to make one giant landscaper occupying two entire blocks with one building and were told "No, make two buildings and have gerbil tubes."?
 
I'm sure it was more like: the site plan called for two buildings, Vertex preferred a connected complex, and the obvious solution was tubes.
 
armpitsOFmight said:
Cement is gone!!

2012-08-11%252016.23.17.jpg
Click to expand...

Has it been gone for a while? I've been over to the seaport countless times this summer, and the couple times I've taken a look at this lawn I recall saying to myself, "either I'm not looking at it from the right angle or the cement inconveniences have been removed from this lawn."

Good to see either way.
 
Wonder why, they made a cool light effect at night, but probably could have led to a lawsuit
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top