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

I just checked the project documents and they show the height to the first setback as 420 feet so the shorter height I did my original calculations for is the correct height.

The taller height you mentioned odurandino was the height for the residential tower and that is too the very top of the tower. Here is an image from the filing with the BCDC.

EMRZKkS.png


Here is the image for the office tower:

OcRMbjM.png
 
i had the resident tower roof height at 487' and 495' for the office tower.
 
Not according to the most recent BCDC presentation which was the final approved plan. That is what I pulled the images above from. I think a previous version might have had those heights but I am not sure.
 
ngb_anim8 said:
Not sure if this was mentioned anywhere already - I couldn't fin reference to it. But...
Gee... look familiar? The architects COMPLETELY ripped off Phillys' new Comcast tower. Of course... theirs is over 1,100ft tall and ours will barely break 500ft. :/
Click to expand...

I mean we already have a squat version of the empire state building in the old john hancock tower, so why not a squat version of the comcast tower too?

And maybe in a couple years we'll build a squat version of the sears tower or the transamerica pyramid or something!
 
Blackbird said:
I mean we already have a squat version of the empire state building in the old john hancock tower, so why not a squat version of the comcast tower too?

And maybe in a couple years we'll build a squat version of the sears tower or the transamerica pyramid or something!
Click to expand...

Well played, sir. Well played.
 
Blackbird said:
I mean we already have a squat version of the empire state building in the old john hancock tower, so why not a squat version of the comcast tower too?

And maybe in a couple years we'll build a squat version of the sears tower or the transamerica pyramid or something!
Click to expand...

So basically like Vegas but like minus the attention to details.
 
Maybe wishful thinking but any chance the base is built in such a way that when it comes time to build the towers, they could change the height of the res tower to the originally approved 600 feet and be ok from an engineering standpoint?
 
No... source close to the process informed me (in Dec) the height was reduced in a closed door meeting in Nov (or Oct?) with the West End Gang - and that was that. The compromise was then used as leverage for approving the Garden Garage. (i posted on Skyscraper City on the 21st of December that GG was 'getting done' just awaiting the procedural process, public hearing/s ect). In the end, 4 development groups (BP, DN, AC, ER) got their 4 highrises. BRA sacrificed the ~180m low skyscraper... Bold nevertheles on the GG site (just outside tall zoning). Grownups made the right call. West Enders got a more awesome 24 hour neighborhood. Zoning will hopefully get more flexible elsewhere.
 
Last edited:
Interesting -- if anyone remembers the old configuration with da Gahhdn -- we had the old Madison Hotel and an old office building as next door neighbors -- history starting to sort of repeat

127-05.jpg
 
Looks like we won't be seeing cranes onsite until the start of next year, per this FAA doc.

Lots of excavation and below-grade construction remains.
 
The residential tower and hotel are a go this round along with the podium right? The office building is still up in the air for the next phase?
 
That is correct. I heard Brian Koop of Boston Properties confirm that publicly.
 
The residential tower and hotel are a go; however, they are technically "Phase II" of this development, and the office tower is "Phase III". The FAA permit downburst shared before is consistent with plans for "Phase I", which is the podium only. You'll notice the FAA doc only calls for a ~300 foot crane... the residential tower for Phase II will be much higher than 300 feet.
 
A small part of me is hoping that we get the podium this development cycle and then they hold off until the next cycle for whatever reason and come back with something iconic ala Millennium tower type of situation, but a podium instead of a hole.
 
stick n move said:
A small part of me is hoping that we get the podium this development cycle and then they hold off until the next cycle for whatever reason and come back with something iconic ala Millennium tower type of situation, but a podium instead of a hole.
Click to expand...

^I know what you're talking about, and I think a lot of us feel the same.
.........The Good:It's going to be great to see the base/podium incorporate a lot of new and exciting things which aren't there now, and what better spot than at a major transit hub. The Bad: Caving to the nimby's. Why they are allowed to force developers to slice and dice projects to death is ridiculous......The Ugly: The most disappointing aspect to me is the office tower. Despite the spire being added, it still looks underwhelming-especially sitting at the northern "gateway" area to the city. So, I agree with stick n move. Build the podium, but do not squander the chance to build towers to be proud of on top of it.
 
For some reason I can handle the office tower- though its no gem, but the residential makes me cringe every time I look at it.
 
stick n move said:
A small part of me is hoping that we get the podium this development cycle and then they hold off until the next cycle for whatever reason and come back with something iconic ala Millennium tower type of situation, but a podium instead of a hole.
Click to expand...

Millennium is nice, but I wouldn't call it iconic ever
 
I didnt call it iconic. I was saying hopefully they can build something iconic here the next cycle in a millennium tower situation where they start the project and then stop and restart it later with something much better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top