South Station Tower | South Station Air Rights | Downtown

[stick n move]

i lean toward the Tabasco Tower gaining favor if not becoming beloved.
it won't have an awkward appearance from 98% of vantage points.

Agreed, this is the thing with renders. Lots of the angles shown are from angles that no one is going to see, so it doesnt really matter how it looks from those angles.The views of this tower that people will see in normal day to day life look good.

The view from out front of South Station will be seen by millions of commuters every year walking up to the entrance of south station. It looks great from here.

The view of the tower in the skyline will be seen by millions of people every year at Logan airport, millions of people driving on rt 1A south, I90 west, and from people living, working, and passing through Eastie, enjoying the East Boston waterfront, and piers park.
*Bonus, theres not a render, but the inverse of this angle is the view youll have from the South End.

Another angle that will be seen by millions of people driving on rt 93 North, and by people living/working/and passing through Southie and Dorchester.

Who cares if it looks like a bottle of tobasco sauce from 200’ in the air over the greenway? I dont... Once its built youre going to never see it from this angle again.

 

[whighlander]

Looking forward a couple of years

There are going to be some most interesting juxtapositions of South Station tower with Winthrop Square tower since they are very close to each other but have totally non rectlinear alignments and both have complex cross sections changing with elevation, etc.

 

[Charlie_mta]

Still not feeling the love for this. It would have been better to have a tower in materials complementing South Station rather than all glass. Awhile ago Jess had posted one from another project that would have fit South Station well (minus the trees at the bottom):

 

[whighlander]

Still not feeling the love for this. It would have been better to have a tower in materials complementing South Station rather than all glass. Someone a few months ago had posted one from another project that would have fit South Station well.

Charlie_MTA -- No you don't want to muck with near perfection -- South Station like the McKim Wing of the main BPL, the main MFA, Isabella Stewart Gardner is nearly perfect as architecture

South Station just needs a bit of help as urban core due to the demolition which was allowed to happen a generation or so ago

But -- anything that is built and visible from the Greenway or Dewey Sq., Chinatown Gateway from which the original Headhouse structure, eagle, clock, etc. is visible has to be isolated from the existing architecture -- the only real way to do that is relatively unobtrusive glass with the right amount of set-back from the front facade

However --you love or hate the rest of the tower -- the base meets that requirement quite well

 

[393b40]

Still not feeling the love for this. It would have been better to have a tower in materials complementing South Station rather than all glass. Awhile ago Jess had posted one from another project that would have fit South Station well (minus the trees at the bottom):

It's hard for developers to justify architecture like this because the market really really demands lots of window area to let in natural light.

 

[stefal]

I'm okay with the tower we have going up, but it definitely could've been better.

Perhaps not entirely following the stone and glass to make it appear as if it were always a part of South Station, which is not the case, but a more classically defined tower, following the footsteps of CentraRuddy's Rose Hill Tower for Rockefeller Group (a group that has money for this kind of stuff), would've been interesting to see here. You'd still satisfy the demands for window area, while getting some materials other than glass, all in a refreshing and respectful design. It'd be clear it's from the 21st century, but still respectful of its context.

Img Sources

 

[Charlie_mta]

Stefal, that ^ is exactly what I would have liked.

I guess I just basically hate the proposed tower whether it's on top of South Station or not. The view from Dewey Square is ugly IMO, a tabasco sauce bottle or a giant middle finger upraised. Seriously. it's hideous as far as I'm concerned. Maybe it will look better in reality than in the render, I'm hoping.

 

[KriterionBOS]

Agreed, this is the thing with renders. Lots of the angles shown are from angles that no one is going to see, so it doesnt really matter how it looks from those angles.The views of this tower that people will see in normal day to day life look good.

The view from out front of South Station will be seen by millions of commuters every year walking up to the entrance of south station. It looks great from here.

The view of the tower in the skyline will be seen by millions of people every year at Logan airport, millions of people driving on rt 1A south, I90 west, and from people living, working, and passing through Eastie, enjoying the East Boston waterfront, and piers park.
*Bonus, theres not a render, but the inverse of this angle is the view youll have from the South End.

Another angle that will be seen by millions of people driving on rt 93 North, and by people living/working/and passing through Southie and Dorchester.

Who cares if it looks like a bottle of tobasco sauce from 200’ in the air over the greenway? I dont... Once its built youre going to never see it from this angle again.

I agree. This tower looks great. Might even look better than Winthrop Center. Most important, its a 200+ meter addition to a city that has a good number of 150+ buildings but is more vertically challenged by most of her peers.

 

[393b40]

I like the side profile of this tower, but I think the front looks dated... 80's Dallas / Super Corporate feeling.

The head on angle is gonna be a pretty rare view so I'm not too phased by it.

 

[shmessy]

Stefal, that ^ is exactly what I would have liked.

I guess I just basically hate the proposed tower whether it's on top of South Station or not. The view from Dewey Square is ugly IMO, a tabasco sauce bottle or a giant middle finger upraised. Seriously. it's hideous as far as I'm concerned. Maybe it will look better in reality than in the render, I'm hoping.

It's a bland, long, bald bullet.

It doesn't live up to its location. South Station deserved something better.

.

 

[DZH22]

Still not feeling the love for this. It would have been better to have a tower in materials complementing South Station rather than all glass. Awhile ago Jess had posted one from another project that would have fit South Station well (minus the trees at the bottom):

I think the biggest issue I have with this specific render is that the Cathedral of Learning in Pittsburgh (what the tower actually is) was built in 1926. South Station itself was built in 1899. Architectural design really shifted dramatically in 1950 and beyond, so they just don't build buildings like this anymore. If we tried to emulate a tower from 1926 today, it would never come out as well or be as architecturally significant as the older versions. I guess what I'm trying to say is that while these buildings look like they fit pretty well, it would be difficult for a building built today in a similar vein to be as contextual as what we are seeing here. I'm not saying it's a bad sentiment, I just think this is romanticizing it because we won't have an old pre-war tower there no matter what gets built.

 

[stick n move]

Im not saying its the greatest tower ever either. I was just pointing out that the good thing is that its more unflattering angles are angles that wont be seen in day to day life and the ones that will are its better angles.

I liked the tower 1 version before this one better as well, buuut some of that was because it looks better in the render... which is a 200ft over the greenway view. Soo in practice this will be a pretty solid addition, definitely not my favorite tower ever either, but its pretty good.

-The funny thing about some people saying that an art deco tower would have been better (which I agree with btw) is that every time I advocate for new art deco towers to be built in Boston some people on here say its stupid to build “knock off” art deco towers and that the time has passed... even though we had no problem building Quincy market long after the fall of ancient Greece. I think that as long as the result is a quality building it doesnt matter when its built. People who enjoy built spaces dont enjoy them less if theyre not “old enough” or whatever... Anyways since this is the tower were getting, Im fine with it, and once its built and people are seeing it from real life angles and sight lines itll be fine.

 

[DZH22]

I liked the tower 1 version before this one better as well, buuut some of that was because it looks better in the render... which is a 200ft over the greenway view.

I think the one thing most of can agree on is that it looked better with the extra setback in the prior version. More graceful, less jarring of a transition.

Capture by David Z, on Flickr

 

[stefal]

-The funny thing about some people saying that an art deco tower would have been better (which I agree with btw) is that every time I advocate for new art deco towers to be built in Boston some people on here say its stupid to build “knock off” art deco towers and that the time has passed... even though we had no problem building Quincy market after the fall of the Roman empire. I think that as long as

If it's going to be art deco built in 2020, I think it has to reflect that. Mimicking a style from another period without showing much advancement in technology and design (respectfully and thoughtfully of course) is where I draw the line between good and bad design.

 

[Jahvon09]

I think the one thing most of can agree on is that it looked better with the extra setback in the prior version. More graceful, less jarring of a transition.

Capture by David Z, on Flickr

This one looks like a shortened version of the Trump Tower in Chcago.

 

[odurandina]

searching FAA archives....
Seems we were somewhat close to getting the 2nd version (the one shown above,
that people like much more)--back in 2008.

Work Schedule:

09/01/2008 to 02/01/2010

https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/searchAction.jsp?action=displayOECase&oeCaseID=528833&row=8

 

[Charlie_mta]

This one looks like a shortened version of the Trump Tower in Chicago.

This then could be called the Trump Stump.

 

[whighlander]

Here's another angle of the arches.View attachment 2955

Jahvon This is the most important view from ground level

How do the people taking the trains interact with the tower -- from this view I think it will be good -- nice massive arches

The next most important view of the tower from the ground is for someone approaching South Station while walking along the Greenway -- at present walking along the Greenway we only have One Financial Center as a model -- I think this tower will be more pleasant to look at as one approaches South Station and it takes up an increasing amount of the vertical plane

All the other views from ground level are just icing on the cake -- so far from the angles which we've had the opportunity to image /imagine [courtesy of the renders] -- it looks OK

Driving up from the South on I-93 will be important as will the view from the harbor and Logan

I don't expect to see much of it from the Charles or from the Back Bay -- but that will be interesting to see as construction gets really going in 2022

 

[jass]

If it's going to be art deco built in 2020, I think it has to reflect that. Mimicking a style from another period without showing much advancement in technology and design (respectfully and thoughtfully of course) is where I draw the line between good and bad design.

The new Comcast tower in Philly is a good modern art deco inspired tower. Of course, South Station isnt Art Deco, so thats not even the template we should be looking at.

But I don't understand how anyone can claim that the South Station Tower is modern design when it looks like a 1980s econobox.

 

[DZH22]

The new Comcast tower in Philly is a good modern art deco inspired tower. Of course, South Station isnt Art Deco, so thats not even the template we should be looking at.

I have a hard time calling that one "good." Once I saw it in person, it was the first time I finally appreciated the original Comcast tower across the street. The thin side with the spire on it is very neat, in case that's what you were referring to. It reminds me of a stretched out version of the prior Hub on Causeway office proposal. However, the 3 other sides of it are decidedly chunky/tacky looking. It doesn't help that it has the same issue as LA's new tallest, with a shorter roof than the Comcast building across the street but a large finger-like spire that adds 200 more feet. It unbalances everything, which is technically not an indictment of the building itself in a vacuum (and probably contributes to my negative feelings about it).

Still, if this exact building was proposed in Boston, or even the same thing but only like 900', I would be the first one protesting it.