The Hub on Causeway (née TD Garden Towers) | 80 Causeway Street | West End

Brut is precisely right. It's the most challenging parcel in town. You have go with very stout trusses spanning the Pike with only 3 or 4 points on terra firma to get to ~700' Beantown Supertall height.

The idea is spectacular. But we can get something very tall on the extreme east end of the Sheraton site with a smart re-design. It's about all that's left down there. Boston Properties could make a deal with Simon to build Copley Tower. Admittedly, a bunch of folks should do a lot of cool things. But the thing you really need is permission to go at least 700' to get the financing. This is precisely what's causing so much pain for Copley Tower, 40 Trinity $ & Harbor Garage.

JumboBuc said:
Avalon North Station used a steel "core" because it was built on top of an existing underground garage. Cast-in-place concrete cores are the usual choice to provide sheer strength and fire protection because they're typically cheaper and easier to put up than an angled steel structure that provides comparable qualities. But cast-in-place cores are also really heavy, so they don't work well built on top of a pre-existing foundation/structure. That's why Avalon North Station got all steel, and the multiple-phase nature of the Hub office tower makes it a logical candidate for a "steel core" as well.

Cast-in-place cores (and cast-in-place tower construction in general) is also a relatively new development; it wasn't really a thing when the Hancock Tower was going up.
Click to expand...

Sweet how you cover John Hancock Chicago supertalls, anti-seasickness construction for >180m residential towers, and improved fireproofing of core structures in so few words. :D
 
kmp1284 said:
Could it be Lord & Taylor?
Click to expand...

According to the parcel map, the only pieces that BXP doesn't own are the various apartment towers controlled by Avalon, the rounded condo building on the corner of Belvidere (which is far too close to the Pru, 111 Huntington and One Dalton to be considered for a tall building), and the Hotel Lenox, which I doubt they can touch. Generally, all of those plots have fairly substantial buildings on them already.

Maybe the final piece is a logistical need to building something like L&T that BXP owns...
 
kmp1284 said:
Could it be Lord & Taylor?
Click to expand...

^^Hear, hear: it's very logical to expect a redo for the Lord & Taylor site!
And lucky for us, our resident BPDA authority on height (Lauren S.) has made it
extremely clear what exactly can be done here. Unfortunately it can not go but
slightly taller than the 348' Avalon Exeter tower--as the site falls under the
jurisdiction of Boston's uber-strict Shadow Bank authority.
To get very exact, if height is pushed, it would be ideal to have the mechanicals
located in the southwest corner of a triangular roof pushing 400' at the peak.
 
dshoost88 said:
I agree about letting the High Spine, and think the Lord & Taylor site would be a great place for an 850+ footer. Large floor A late, Boylston St. address, and it's connected to the Prudential Center. I'm trying to imagine something like the (Devon Tower) there.

Also, I'm bummed the new Hancock Tower proposal for Stuart isn't more ambitious square footage wise. Stuart and St. James Streets are screaming for taller development.
Click to expand...

The idea this site (or the JHT3 site) will/would/can/could ever top 380~400' is wild speculation (it can't; JHT3 was going 388'). Copley Tower was to be allowed to cast shadow on Copley/Trinity Church, etc, and that was going to be that. The L&T site is further complicated by casting shadow on Copley Square, The Comm Ave Mall, PG & Common. That ship sailed with Winthrop Square. We love your love of height (expressed so brazenly). But the Okla City Devon's width is far out of proportion to Back Bay's modest scale. It doesn't work well in Okla City either, imo (it's more suited for Hudson Yards, or set back a few blocks on Chicago's new, booming South Side Waterfront). But the L&T site with a tall slender ~875' w/ a 100' spire would be fine--shadow or not. Many of us love shade. Good on you, too.
 
North Shore said:
FWIW, they started the interior renovations on level 9 inside the Garden.

They wanted to start these already, but were forced to delay them for obvious reasons. Most of the existing columns surrounding the promenade have been covered up.

https://twitter.com/nicolecyang/status/1133176507516555264
Click to expand...

That looks absolutely terrifying. The Garden's balcony already makes me think I'm going to tumble off into the loge, I can't imagine how much more unsettling that view is going to be.
 
^ fascinating. What an incredible quick-turn construction project. Does anyone know if the garden is closed for events (concerts, etc.) this summer?

If not (or either way, I suppose), kudos and best wishes to the project managers making this work, and to the many night shift workers I'd surmise are required...
 
Arenacale said:
That looks absolutely terrifying. The Garden's balcony already makes me think I'm going to tumble off into the loge, I can't imagine how much more unsettling that view is going to be.
Click to expand...

That's no worse than the gondola seats that used to hang off the balcony at the old garden.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top