Winthrop Center | 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

[KentXie]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

The proposed SST would be a better example. It's at the edge of the 300 ft limit and near a flight path.

This was already answered in the SST thread. SST is not an exception. It sits where the allowable height is 725'. The train tracks behind it sits at 300'.

And while we are at it, in case someone brings it up again for a different project, there has been NO, as in ZERO, exceptions to the FAA height limit.

If you really feel that it is important to have a higher FAA height limit in downtown, go create a petition to close runway 9/27. Good luck.

 

[stick n move]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

or just get new radar and keep 9/27.

 

[Hubman]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

I don't think Atlantic Wharf needed an FAA exception to go to 436 feet. FAA cap there is about 650 feet (hard to tell exactly on their map, but it's about that). The Fed Reserve and a number of other buildings in pretty close proximity are taller.

https://www.massport.com/media/11778/BOS_COMPOSITE_Ver2pt0_dec201_small.pdf

I think Atlantic Wharf got an exception to Chapter 91 height restrictions. Others hopefully remember this more clearly.

That would not add up to a "no" answer to your question, just that you need a different example.

I might be wrong, but I think it says in the 3rd paragraph that it was permitted to exceed height restrictions.

Also, buried somewhere in one of the Archboston threads someone said that exceptions could be made.

 

[SeamusMcFly]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Drink!!

 

[type001]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Can't they just move the Radar? How about Runway? Airport? Goddam FAA.

 

[stick n move]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

They can just slightly tilt Boston a lil bit.

 

[odurandina]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

I might be wrong, but I think it says in the 3rd paragraph that it was permitted to exceed height restrictions.

Nah. FAA has always been around 600~625' here. it went higher than Ch 91 200' or whatever because [the Menino].

Also, buried somewhere in one of the Archboston threads someone said that exceptions could be made.

when hell freezes....

Next One: Hook Lobster exotic truss podium waterfront + Waterfront History/Culture Atheneum and go 450~500'. Why? 300' just isn't good enough. Because we can. Isn't it beautiful. We're not building turds. You gotta believe. And nimby wars bring us closer to God.

don't bump the thread.

 

[ShawnA]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Devolper speaking on benefits of tower,

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VJO5rg_uyjk

 

[Hubman]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

don't bump the thread.

You talking to me?

 

[DBM]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Well, if the object of the game was, "construct a set of sociopolitical circumstances such that a major downtown tower proposal will incur the maximum possible politicization within a given community," 115 Winthrop Square is lapping everybody, everywhere, for all time... or so it appears to this perhaps naive and inexperienced observer.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2017/03/09/lawmaker-wants-skyscraper-cash-for-greenway/MM7Sk85aRsC17TINdwRmeJ/story.html

 

[Riverworks]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Everyone fighting over a piece of the pie. Though the current earmark process is somewhat shortsighted given the local and public nature of this project.

The comments on that article are ridiculous (one person in particular anyway). The shadows! Please, not the shadows! The sun will be gone forever! I love one person's response - "If you want sun, move to Phoenix."

Think of Bryant Park, Gramercy Park and parts of Central Park in New York. They seem to get by just fine. Cities evolve. It is the people living in them that seem to have difficulty grasping that concept.

 

[bigpicture7]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Think of Bryant Park, Gramercy Park and parts of Central Park in New York. They seem to get by just fine. Cities evolve. It is the people living in them that seem to have difficulty grasping that concept.

^this. I swear I am not trying to be a pro-development ass when I profess that there's something utterly beautiful and tranquil about a park being an oasis amongst tall buildings in a city. I love Bryant Park, and I love the park at Post Office Sq in Bos. True - they would be depressing if fully shaded all the time. Some sunlight is needed, but the proportion of sunlight our ill-conceved law demands borders on ludicrous. I get how preservationists/activists operate - there's a fear of encroachment, so laws and activism center on asking for more than is needed with the expectation that exceptions are going to be made -- it is a political distrust thing, and probably logically founded.

But the point is that a park amidst high-rises in a city can be a truly beautiful, peaceful, wonderful thing. I love the idea of a series of step-ups from the common to the high spine. I would not advocate building skyscrapers on the edge of the park. A few blocks back, however, actually creates quite a wonderful effect (e.g., there isn't one formula that dictates "the only solution to quality of life in the park" as some of these crazies are pontificating).

 

[Equilibria]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Well, if the object of the game was, "construct a set of sociopolitical circumstances such that a major downtown tower proposal will incur the maximum possible politicization within a given community," 115 Winthrop Square is lapping everybody, everywhere, for all time... or so it appears to this perhaps naive and inexperienced observer.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2017/03/09/lawmaker-wants-skyscraper-cash-for-greenway/MM7Sk85aRsC17TINdwRmeJ/story.html

He's covering his a$$. The North Enders love their part of the Greenway, and he's trying to pin his failure to advocate for continued Greenway Conservancy funding on the Mayor.

As blackmail, it's pretty callous - It's not like the City is spending the $150M on corporate tax breaks or a new desk for the Mayor, it's going to other parks that the City owns, including the ones "threatened" by shadows from the project. Does the Rep. oppose parks or public housing if they aren't in his district?

What a clown. The Legislature and Governor have completely F-ed up this Greenway thing, and they're flailing.

 

[Rover]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Look just pay the toll and call it a day. Its a worthwhile extortion to get the project built. Throw a couple of million bucks the Conservatory's way so they can hire a few more unemployable relatives of politicians and then let the state deal with that.

 

[Hubman]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

I wonder if the NIMBYs would be happy if a large portion of the money from the garage sale went to the common and Public garden.

 

[odurandina]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

^^$28M is proposed for the Common/PC, w/ many tens of additional millions going to Franklin Park and the Emerald Necklace. That's why the State Rep's crap about GIVE $MILLIONS FOR THE GREENWAY–OR ELSE is just more bullshit from another of Boston's commie extortion specialists looking for more free shit for his district.

 

[Hubman]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

"just more bullshit from another of Boston's commie extortion specialists looking for more free shit for his district"

I had no idea anyone used "Commie" anymore, except as a joke.

 

[HalcyonEra]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

He's covering his a$$. The North Enders love their part of the Greenway, and he's trying to pin his failure to advocate for continued Greenway Conservancy funding on the Mayor.

As blackmail, it's pretty callous - It's not like the City is spending the $150M on corporate tax breaks or a new desk for the Mayor, it's going to other parks that the City owns, including the ones "threatened" by shadows from the project. Does the Rep. oppose parks or public housing if they aren't in his district?

What a clown. The Legislature and Governor have completely F-ed up this Greenway thing, and they're flailing.

Fuck that, the Greenway is Boston's jewel, and they should pay for it, not the state. If the city takes state local aide or grant dollars and allocates it there, so be it. But no special funding should be given to it.

 

[odurandina]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Mow the lawn, fertilize, trim the trees.....

Bowling for city dollars to steal.....

 

[bakgwailo]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Fuck that, the Greenway is Boston's jewel, and they should pay for it, not the state. If the city takes state local aide or grant dollars and allocates it there, so be it. But no special funding should be given to it.

Isn't the Greenway on state land, though? I suppose I could agree with you if the city owned the land itself. The Greenway was also built with state/federal dollars, and on State land, so it is kind of a failing at the State level that they can't fund its maintenance correctly.