Winthrop Center | 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

This is great news. NIMBYs are reaching for their oxygen tanks right now.

For all your collective fussing, it is great that Boston is also your capitol, with the state house 5 minutes away from city hall to get stuff done.

Down here in NYC, we have legendary battles between NYC and Albany. The current spat between the city and the state over who is going to foot the bill for a major subway overhaul is getting ridiculous.
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

chrisbrat said:
i wish any of these many recent posts had anything to do with news relating to 115 winthrop...
Click to expand...

dshoost88 said:
Baker signs bill to allow proposed 775-foot tower to cast shadows on parks
Click to expand...

The thread was thoughtfully bumped in the collective unconscious of AB, and given a huge jolt by the Governor, when he thumped the project up to Article 80 just ~11 years and 5 months since the decree from Thomas Menino announcing the redevelopment of the Garage.

Congratulations everyone! What a milestone!
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Just imagine if this was what was approved.


BidSubmission(4)-1A%5B1%5D.jpg



Boston would have been ruined for the rest of our lives.
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

stick n move said:
Boston would have been ruined for the rest of our lives.
Click to expand...

I can think of a million other (more probable) ways that would happen...

(1. not spending enough to maintain transit infrastructure)
(2. not doing enough to add connectivity to underserved neighborhoods)
(.....)


But sure.
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

No, just no.

The Trinity proposal was an affordable housing tower! If anything, this was truly the best proposal for Boston, aesthetics notwithstanding.
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

datadyne007 said:
No, just no.

The Trinity proposal was an affordable housing tower! If anything, this was truly the best proposal for Boston, aesthetics notwithstanding.
Click to expand...

Epic line, Data.

......aesthetics notwithstanding?

I thought aesthetics of architecture combined, with good urban planning was why most of us were here and not just on BBJ.

"He'll make a great husband......homicidal tendencies notwithstanding...." :D
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

And my point was, stick, no disrespect, that aesthetics/or not, and tower/or not....none of those things are quite worthy of "Boston would be ruined for the rest of our lives," when compared to all the other potential problems Boston needs to deal with on its horizon.
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Trinity would be the best proposal to build 30 of at half the height, all around Somerville, Cambridge, Dorchester, Roxbury, Longwood, and out as far as Quincy, Everett, Malden, etc.

For the most prominent building downtown, it's total crap. The tallest buildings should also be among the best looking or it's a visual blight on the whole city; they are the ones that stand out the most from everywhere.

Trinity is appropriate for most of the city (and in generous quantities) but not as the winner of a competition for the peak of the financial district.
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Wow, I forgot about that one already. That building in height, proportions and design is classic Manhattan infill. It would just blend in here, but not for Boston. I really like the Millennium Partners design.
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

IDK everyones entitled to their own opinion but if that was our crown piece of downtown we would have had a turd skyline for the rest of time. Theres places EVERYWHERE for affordable, market rate, .....bla bla insert whatever term u wanna insert here. But for this 1 single downtown tower you dont want a 775' waterside place. This is 1 lot in the entire city that is going to define our skyline from here on out. 1 parcel. Yea the ESB also could have been a 1300' turd salad too and it could have had all the catch phrases you want, but would manhattan be revered the same if it was? Absolutely not. Again 1 single parcel in the ENTIRE city.

Thats also not exactly an appropriate place for affordable housing anyways, build it out in the neighborhoods. For this parcel you go all out. I dont think its too much to ask for our tallest downtown to not look like a bag of ass with a bag of ass on top. We have the bland towers everywhere + MP, I think that for the tallest building downtown that were probably ever going to get you need to do it right or dont do it at all, and that tower above falls into the latter. I live in a cheap triple decker in Dorchester on the red line...thats completely appropriate for affordable housing to go there. I dont expect for 1 second to be able to afford to live in the tallest tower in downtown crossing and im completely fine with that. Im not fine with being priced out of a neighborhood where I hear gunshots 4/7 nights a week, build affordable there.
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Never going to understand this mentality of needing a pretty skyline. It's a fucking city where people live and work not a model on competition for "Prettiest Skyline 2017". We're not competing for billions of dollars on how good our skyline looks from Mt. Fucking Auburn or the God Damned Motherfucking Harbor.

The Trinity Proposal was good and I rather like that sleek modern style.
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

meddlepal said:
Never going to understand this mentality of needing a pretty skyline. It's a fucking city where people live and work not a model on competition for "Prettiest Skyline 2017". We're not competing for billions of dollars on how good our skyline looks from Mt. Fucking Auburn or the God Damned Motherfucking Harbor.

The Trinity Proposal was good and I rather like that sleek modern style.
Click to expand...

Yes and the hyperbole in this thread/on this board is absurd.

I'll take an ok-looking tower filled with affordable housing over a beautiful glass tower that houses millionaires.

Imagine what it would say about Boston's commitment to affordability if our newest & tallest residential tower was affordable housing.
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

wtf? Stick characterized the situation about improving our downtown skyline in a way that is irreproachable. A beautiful skyline vs an ugly skyline is something many of us hold desirable. We shouldn't be shamed for having this opinion.

But we just built Bulfinch Triangle, and the Leather District is up next. Not bad when you consider there are many affordable units being built so close in the core.

What gives one person's arguments that anti-building deserves a higher value than the belief that we can add a tall tower (or two)–when what we've been up to mostly is connecting neighborhoods? Why can't a city have planning that uses a podium approach to highrise construction, but also combines the whole to render a beautiful City?

We're getting something vastly better with these Pike air-rights projects. ... A few years ago, Tom Menino clearly saw that Downtown needed something more. We needed not only to activate Downtown Crossing, but to welcome better architecture at Filenes, Winthrop Garage and possibly 1 Bromfield. They were/are the last chance to make Downtown denser, taller, more beautiful and better.

I'm disappointed Millennium Partners went with so much volume in their design (when they probably would have been named the winner anyway), and 1 Bromfield getting pushed back into obscurity over what should have amounted to unremarkable improvements. Anyway, 1 Bromfield pushing 710' is the coup de grace for activating DTX.
 
Last edited:
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

datadyne007 said:
Yes and the hyperbole in this thread/on this board is absurd.

I'll take an ok-looking tower filled with affordable housing over a beautiful glass tower that houses millionaires.

Imagine what it would say about Boston's commitment to affordability if our newest & tallest residential tower was affordable housing.
Click to expand...

Is THAT an "ok looking tower" to you?

I never saw this forum as a trade journal, but a place where people who give a damn about the aesthetics of the City of Boston (along with the economic viability of it).

Just because it is affordable housing doesn't mean it has to shit all over the city. They could do several things to make it look more humane. Look at the picture - - would it actually kill someone, anyone, to put a different hat on a building? Or make it a slightly different shape?

Honestly, if you said "I think it looks good", then I could understand it (even if I didn't agree). But this is Boston - - not Baltimore. "Settling" doesn't have to happen.

"Imagine what it would say about Boston's commitment to affordability if our newest & tallest residential tower was affordable housing"

Detroit has some very affordable housing towers.
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Did they have any specific criteria or reasoning for why Millenium's proposal was chosen over others? Do we know what that process looked like?
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

DAVE said:
Did they have any specific criteria or reasoning for why Millenium's proposal was chosen over others? Do we know what that process looked like?
Click to expand...

Millennium offered the most money by far. $150 mil.
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

I watched the meeting again and he stressed many times that the renders that we see now are not the finished product.
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

DAVE said:
Did they have any specific criteria or reasoning for why Millenium's proposal was chosen over others? Do we know what that process looked like?
Click to expand...

It was mostly about money (they offered like $40M more than the next highest bid) and Millennium's track record.

There was a whole lot of process and public meetings and whatnot last summer, and there were other objective criteria the BPDA studied. But once the $$ offers came out it was pretty much a done deal. Millennium offered so much more, plus were the only team that had really built a downtown tower here. BPDA was comfortable with them.
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

My take was that the BPDA asked for bids and the other developers bid based on expectations they'd have to stay within a certain height whereas Millennium offered the most knowing they wouldn't be held responsible for having to shrink it (and could reduce payment if they did). I think BPDA also preferred Millennium as payback for their investments in DTX.
 
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

JohnAKeith said:
My take was that the BPDA asked for bids and the other developers bid based on expectations they'd have to stay within a certain height whereas Millennium offered the most knowing they wouldn't be held responsible for having to shrink it (and could reduce payment if they did). I think BPDA also preferred Millennium as payback for their investments in DTX.
Click to expand...

Millennium's proposal was only 25-50 feet higher than the others (I believe they proposed 750, then filed a PNF at 775, when the stated height in the RFP was 725). That extra height probably helped them offer a bit more $$, but wouldn't have been enough to account for $40 million.
And yes, they cleverly scaled their financial offer to give the city a little extra incentive to help them get higher. They also didn't propose an observation deck, despite the city specifically requesting one.
They pushed the envelope and decided to ask forgiveness, not permission. So far it has paid off for them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top