Winthrop Center | 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

cjbski said:
UGH. Will this curtail 1 Bromfield?!
Click to expand...

i made sure to include 1 Bromfield in my Globe post. But, i forgot to stipulate that 1 Bromfield is in the clear (to calm a tough crowd of skeptics). Of course, it is not in the clear. It's shadow will rapidly sweep over the corner of the Common closest to the State House for a considerable number of weeks on either side of the Summer Solstice. How many minutes beyond its future determined allowance is unclear.
 
Last edited:
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Lightman: "We got something." (WOPR mainframe at NORAD stirring).....

JeffDowntown said:
Maybe. Maybe not.
Click to expand...

i sometimes wonder if Marty Walsh should have gone for broke and done 115 Winthrop Square and 1 Bromfield together. It's been many months since there was a meeting on 1 Bromfield. With the precious time lost, it's likely, we'll see the MT residents joining the list of antagonists that includes;

1. 45 Province Street residents.
2. Friends of the Public Garden
3. Boston Preservation Alliance
4. did i leave out anyone?

But i got some news earlier that could be the equivalent of the Lufthansa Heist.... It could eventually be the crack where they drive the spike.
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

don't tease. if you have news, share! :p
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

My point was if Walsh and BPDA go "all in" to get 115 Winthrop Square approved at height, they will likely give up the rest of the shadow bank, which could compromise 1 Bromfield and others.

But if they negotiate harder, they might save room for the other projects as well.
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

http://www.bostonherald.com/busines...h_aims_to_get_garage_project_out_from_shadows

"antiquated zoning rules" would appear to be a none-too-subtle reference to the preposterous number of highly-archaic allowed uses in the Midtown Cultural District zoning overlay (millinery shops, anyone...), as well as the as-of-right development height of 155'.

FYI, they're posted here:

http://www.bostonplans.org/getattachment/ffff1219-ee7f-4e9b-9404-959cc3baf8ac
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

The Herald site barely loads and the stories get archived so....

Marty Walsh aims to get garage project out from shadows

Donna Goodison Tuesday, January 24, 2017

The Walsh administration is committing to a planning study to guide future downtown development as part of efforts to win support for a state shadow law exemption for Millennium Partners’ proposed $1 billion redevelopment of the old Winthrop Square garage.

The study would look at “big-picture” planning and updates to antiquated zoning rules, according to Jonathan Greeley, director of development review for the Boston Planning & Development Agency.

Mayor Martin J. Walsh plans to file a home-rule petition which, if approved, would exempt Millennium’s up to 775-foot mixed-use tower from state laws governing new buildings’ shadow impacts on Boston Common and the Public Garden.

It would also eliminate the remaining quarter-acre in a “shadow bank” that developers can tap for new Midtown Cultural District buildings that would cast shadows after 10 a.m.

The shadow law has been effective in guiding development, but Millennium’s project — which falls outside Midtown and has more stringent shadow limitations — “offers a unique opportunity for public benefits and capturing the value of the development site,” Greeley said.

The city could take in $153 million for its sale of the one-acre site to Millennium — money Walsh has pledged to parks/open space and affordable housing improvements, including on the Common.

Millennium hopes construction will be underway this time next year. “There’s nothing in our way from doing that other than getting the rights to do it,” partner Joe Larkin said. “We’re building this office space speculative, without a tenant. You want to get started, because you don’t really know what’s going to happen in the future. We’re willing to take on those risks across the board, but we have to know what we have, and we need to go.”
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

I think I'm all for this plan as long as it gets the tower built and the city its money. I am concerned about what this means for 1 Bromfield, does this effectively cheapen midwoods investment? I believe all other proposals in the area are short enough not to impact the current shadows on the park.
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

617 said:
I think I'm all for this plan as long as it gets the tower built and the city its money. I am concerned about what this means for 1 Bromfield, does this effectively cheapen midwoods investment? I believe all other proposals in the area are short enough not to impact the current shadows on the park.
Click to expand...

Yeah 1 Brom is really the question mark here. Other proposals in the mid-200' range (e.g., the LaGrange tower...but obviously exact shadow depends on location) barely cast any shadow on the common (the LaGrange PNF shows a microscopic sliver of new shadow in a tiny space directly between two other buildings's shadows - something even the most ardent of shadow police probably don't care about; and even if so, would be like 0.1% of the shadow bank).

Basically what this might be implying is a couple blocks of step-up from the common back toward the high spine. I am totally ok with step-up. But I just hope we can get all of this sorted out so that we don't have to go through all of this every time someone proposes a perfectly reasonable tower in a location far away from the common. 1 Brom may be the sacrifice to set the stage for a more reasonable future...dunno...
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

I do not understand the rationale of why the shadow law is a state law, when it is specific to Boston. Are the areas under the law managed by the state?
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

boston85 said:
I do not understand the rationale of why the shadow law is a state law, when it is specific to Boston. Are the areas under the law managed by the state?
Click to expand...

Public access to the shoreline...
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

boston85 said:
I do not understand the rationale of why the shadow law is a state law, when it is specific to Boston. Are the areas under the law managed by the state?
Click to expand...

The shadow law is the Great and General Court protecting their State House "front yard", Boston Common.

They made is slight broader than Boston by including Lynn Common in the law, so that it could not be labeled just a Boston law (air cover). (Because we all know that Lynn Common is under imminent threat of huge buildings casting shadows!)

The Great and General Court also used to regulate the height of buildings in downtown Boston to protect the sanctity of the height of the State House Dome. The Custom House Tower, though kind of snuck past the goalkeeper, since it was Federal property.
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

617 said:
I think I'm all for this plan as long as it gets the tower built and the city its money. I am concerned about what this means for 1 Bromfield, does this effectively cheapen midwoods investment? I believe all other proposals in the area are short enough not to impact the current shadows on the park.
Click to expand...

Hopefully this project get built to it's full height and 1 Bromfield dies a painful death and it's developers stub their toes on the way out of the door.
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

statler said:
Hopefully this project get built to it's full height and 1 Bromfield dies a painful death and it's developers stub their toes on the way out of the door.
Click to expand...

Not to derail too much more....
But, IMHO 1 Bromfield has many more pros than cons, and the cons are mostly easily fixable with some podium redesign or possible retention of existing into said podium. Fix the street level warts, and I love the project.

And, yes. Build this to its full height.
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

In reference to the 710' proposal; if 1 Bromfield somehow, doesn't violate the shadow law (it's just a sliver at the northeast corner of the Common)....

If the ugly cantilevers are done away with (already done).

If the podium, garage/delivery/trash/shipping/receiving issues are resolved to an acceptable level,

If it comes down to should we have a 710' tower or not....

what then?

Geebus.
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

statler said:
Hopefully this project get built to it's full height and 1 Bromfield dies a painful death and it's developers stub their toes on the way out of the door.
Click to expand...

From off-the-record convos I've had with folks in the industry (including involved with the MT and 1D projects), One Bromfield is essentially vaporware anyway. I would be extremely surprised to see it actually go anywhere, even if shadows were completely removed from the equation.
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

SeamusMcFly said:
Not to derail too much more....
But, IMHO 1 Bromfield has many more pros than cons, and the cons are mostly easily fixable with some podium redesign or possible retention of existing into said podium. Fix the street level warts, and I love the project.

And, yes. Build this to its full height.
Click to expand...

odurandina said:
In reference to the 710' proposal; if 1 Bromfield somehow, doesn't violate the shadow law (it's just a sliver at the northeast corner of the Common)....

If the ugly cantilevers are done away with (already done).

If the podium, garage/traffic/delivery/trash/issues are resolved to an acceptable level...
Click to expand...

Galactic said:
From off-the-record convos I've had with folks in the industry (including involved with the MT and 1D projects), One Bromfield is essentially vaporware anyway. I would be extremely surprised to see it actually go anywhere, even if shadows were completely removed from the equation.
Click to expand...

^^Just theoretical, but if the conditions i mentioned above were to be met to a workable resolution....

if the shadow turns out not to be the limiting factor (it's at the extreme northeast corner of the Common)

and if somehow, the Friends of the Public Garden and Boston Preservation Alliance were to drop their resistance.....

At that point, you'd have the MT and 45 Province Residents but little else standing in the way of the project.

Would it not be a lot closer to a resolution than people might imagine....

and how do you know that hasn't already happened?
 
Last edited:
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Galactic said:
From off-the-record convos I've had with folks in the industry (including involved with the MT and 1D projects), One Bromfield is essentially vaporware anyway. I would be extremely surprised to see it actually go anywhere, even if shadows were completely removed from the equation.
Click to expand...

They spent an awful lot of time and money to create vaporware. I can understand that perhaps they wanted to do a buy, design, approve and flip type scenario but that still means they're just middlemen to someone else building the tower who would be paying for that 700+ ft approval.
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

meddlepal said:
They spent an awful lot of time and money to create vaporware. I can understand that perhaps they wanted to do a buy, design, approve and flip type scenario but that still means they're just middlemen to someone else building the tower who would be paying for that 700+ ft approval.
Click to expand...

I personally would like to see the tower built, but I'm just passing on the general sentiment. It's more about finding a partner with the type of cash to get this thing off the drawing/rendering board.

That being said, the folks I talk with have an incentive to downplay since they are trying to keep MT and 1 Dalton in high demand, haha
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

If the Mayor would just accept reality (height, FAA concerns) this thing could get past the design phase and begin construction w/in the year!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top