Tip O'Neil Federal Building (Causeway Street)

Charlie_mta

Charlie_mta

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2006
Messages
4,054
Reaction score
5,252
JS38 said:
New LesVants May 2020 Boston aerials added...
www.lesvants.com/boston/Boston_index.html
Click to expand...
Pretty cool shot, in a Sim City kinda way:
4-29-20_boston-stock_7694-142%20copy.jpg
 
What are the realistic odds of the O'Neil building relocating and selling off their property by 2030?
 
Boy, that low-rise portion of the O'Neill is just begging to be replaced with a tower and ground-level retail on Causeway Street. Of course I'd like to see all of it gone.
Also, the parking lot next to the Spaulding, and the Spaulding itself, is begging to be replaced with air-rights development including a tower or two, over expanded commuter rail lines to North Station.
 
I'm using these 3 posts (above) to anchor/collect our occasional musings 'why can't we give the O'Neil building the Volpe treatment?' It is certainly tempting to imagine knocking down the lowrise section--or maybe just building a slightly set-back tower about where the mechanical pent house is on the low rise (brick-faced) section facing Causeway St.
 
Replacing the O'Neill offers some opportunities to reconfigure the streets at the site. You can keep the existing layout, or go with a revised straight-through shot for Nashua Street, which was the layout when the Madison Hotel was there (see below). This would expand the buildable footprint. As an option, the upper stories could span the relocated Nashua Street for additional development space.

50149352738_528db75b3c_z.jpg
 
I like the current footprint (big workfloors around a big atrium with elevators on the corner diagonals), and would be happy to see it simply go taller.

I'd be in favor of a pedestrianized cut-through, but not vehicular.
 
Massachoicetts said:
Is it possible this will go?
Click to expand...
Not specifically. More like observing that buildings like the Volpe eventually become obsolete, and that the GSA can be commercially motivated for non-marquee buildings
 
The moment there's a proposal to get rid of it, we'll bump this thread over to "Developments"... not holding my breath tho.
 
^ That too. I put it here because it doesn't have a concrete (re)development proposal, but is, for now, an "architecture and urbanism question" Kinda the real estate equivalent of a Reasonable Transit Pitch
 
The O'Neil is nowhere near as offensive now that the surrounding lots have been developed. What used to stand out as the most significant building is now just a background building. As a background building, it's fine. To be honest, I hardly even notice it when I'm over there now.
 
HenryAlan said:
The O'Neil is nowhere near as offensive now that the surrounding lots have been developed. What used to stand out as the most significant building is now just a background building. As a background building, it's fine. To be honest, I hardly even notice it when I'm over there now.
Click to expand...
Not as horrifying now, especially considering that at least one of the new buildings in Cambridge Crossing is similar in style to the O'Neil.
 
Charlie_mta said:
Not as horrifying now, especially considering that at least one of the new buildings in Cambridge Crossing is similar in style to the O'Neil.
Click to expand...


Actually, the fact that they are spawning makes it MORE horrifying.

Were it merely a "one and done", it would just be an ugly outlier.
 
Charlie_mta said:
Here's the one in Cambridge Crossing that looks damn similar to the O'Neil in my estimation:
Click to expand...

And that's it BEST side (facing train tracks). It does it least damage from that one angle.

Given that location and proximity to Boston and public transpo, it is an abomination. Not AS MUCH of an abomination as sitting at North Station, but still, an abominaion in any urban environment.

Stick it on Route 128 and it works fine. Hey, at least they didn't try the "Glass Waterfall" lipstick that was pasted onto the EF Building.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top