SlothofDespond
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2014
- Messages
- 222
- Reaction score
- 94
Winthrop Center | 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District
- Thread starter vanshnookenraggen
- Start date
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District
It reminds me of the Always Sunny episode where Frank joined the cast. He tells Dennis and Dee that their mother is dead (switching from pleated glass to 80's robot) then says nah, she's not dead, but we're getting a divorce. (refinements on the 80's robot) He said he used it to soften the blow. It's a great scene and I wish I could find it to post, because it's wholly appropriate here!
It reminds me of the Always Sunny episode where Frank joined the cast. He tells Dennis and Dee that their mother is dead (switching from pleated glass to 80's robot) then says nah, she's not dead, but we're getting a divorce. (refinements on the 80's robot) He said he used it to soften the blow. It's a great scene and I wish I could find it to post, because it's wholly appropriate here!
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District
I think a lot of people really desire a spire or non-flat top roof. Problem is the economics of building in Boston + FAA height limits make that nearly impossible because no developer will give up the usable space unless they get a big ass lucrative deal from the city to do so. And if that happened imagine the outcry.
This building is fine. I wasn't expecting much more and most of it is surrounded by tall buildings anyway.
I think a lot of people really desire a spire or non-flat top roof. Problem is the economics of building in Boston + FAA height limits make that nearly impossible because no developer will give up the usable space unless they get a big ass lucrative deal from the city to do so. And if that happened imagine the outcry.
This building is fine. I wasn't expecting much more and most of it is surrounded by tall buildings anyway.
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District
I desperately wanted that, but I agree with your take here. It would be nice, however, if they could get some type of lighting at the top, even if it's something subtle like 1 International. I'd take anything over nothing.
Another dark rectangle, hiding in the night.
Is there literally another city in the world with a substantial skyline that's darker or more dimly lit at night than Boston?
I desperately wanted that, but I agree with your take here. It would be nice, however, if they could get some type of lighting at the top, even if it's something subtle like 1 International. I'd take anything over nothing.
Another dark rectangle, hiding in the night.
Is there literally another city in the world with a substantial skyline that's darker or more dimly lit at night than Boston?
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District
As somebody else mentioned, this would stick out a lot more negatively if it was somewhere more open, like the Back Bay. It even would a lot more where MT is, being the closest tall tower to the park. As it is, it's essentially surrounded by at least 1 row of big buildings on every side of it.
It will still stand out a lot from, say, 2+ miles out. It looks like the flat roof will be 25-30' taller than the highest tip of MT, and that's clearly the dominant downtown tower in most skyline views.
As somebody else mentioned, this would stick out a lot more negatively if it was somewhere more open, like the Back Bay. It even would a lot more where MT is, being the closest tall tower to the park. As it is, it's essentially surrounded by at least 1 row of big buildings on every side of it.
It will still stand out a lot from, say, 2+ miles out. It looks like the flat roof will be 25-30' taller than the highest tip of MT, and that's clearly the dominant downtown tower in most skyline views.
a_tortoise
New member
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2014
- Messages
- 33
- Reaction score
- 127
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District
The massing would work much better if the Federal Street volume was shorter.
The massing would work much better if the Federal Street volume was shorter.
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District
A good point. That doesn't seem like too much of a stretch to make happen.
A good point. That doesn't seem like too much of a stretch to make happen.
type001
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2006
- Messages
- 1,731
- Reaction score
- 233
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District
After seeing the details, I like it more. I was also thinking that a modest spire (over the part that jets out towards Federal St) could go a long way if it did not violate anything FAA-related.
After seeing the details, I like it more. I was also thinking that a modest spire (over the part that jets out towards Federal St) could go a long way if it did not violate anything FAA-related.
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District
You either misread or misunderstood Jouhou's post.
Just for fun though, what project are you "involved" in?
You either misread or misunderstood Jouhou's post.
Just for fun though, what project are you "involved" in?
kz1000ps
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 28, 2006
- Messages
- 8,818
- Reaction score
- 10,255
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District
It looks like BCB and NAVD 1988 are related to measurements from sea level. I guess this thing ends up being 691' overall. So 1 Federal likely still holds at 591', although I am convinced they are failing to count the mech box at the top in the height. Still, it's pretty lame to post a diagram like the one on page 4 and get my hopes up!
It looks like BCB and NAVD 1988 are related to measurements from sea level. I guess this thing ends up being 691' overall. So 1 Federal likely still holds at 591', although I am convinced they are failing to count the mech box at the top in the height. Still, it's pretty lame to post a diagram like the one on page 4 and get my hopes up!
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District
An observation abouy *gulp* height - I don't understand the insistence on the horizontal "breaks" on the facade every 5 floors or so. It really creates the illusion that the building is shorter than it is. Look at the vertical lines on the smaller section, they create the illusion of stretching it taller. These visible horizontal and vertical lines have the same effect that vertical and horizontal stripes do on a shirt. If you want to look shorter and wider, go horizontal. Taller/thinner, go vertical. That's my biggest gripe between the old and new renderings.
An observation abouy *gulp* height - I don't understand the insistence on the horizontal "breaks" on the facade every 5 floors or so. It really creates the illusion that the building is shorter than it is. Look at the vertical lines on the smaller section, they create the illusion of stretching it taller. These visible horizontal and vertical lines have the same effect that vertical and horizontal stripes do on a shirt. If you want to look shorter and wider, go horizontal. Taller/thinner, go vertical. That's my biggest gripe between the old and new renderings.
KentXie
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 25, 2006
- Messages
- 4,192
- Reaction score
- 756
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District
If so, I give this "updated" rendering two big thumbs down. The pleated windows also looks like a glorified version of the left side of the Northeastern dorm.
Is that really what the facade for the sides are going to look like, because we already have something like that:Exchange Place is apparently 542'. i'll try to get that confirmed. i'm sanguine 1 Financial Ctr is 600'.
It's quite similar to Steve Belkin's tower plan from 4 years ago. It's an awkward thing; reflecting the challenge to squeeze all the affordable housing, park beautification, etc.
Not crazy about adding such a prominent earthy trim on top of an already incredibly brown, red, Tuscany & coffee colored Downtown skyline, but it'll probably last 180 years.
How soon before we see drilling rigs? The foundation prep should proceed.
If so, I give this "updated" rendering two big thumbs down. The pleated windows also looks like a glorified version of the left side of the Northeastern dorm.
bayvillagebrahmin
New member
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2015
- Messages
- 97
- Reaction score
- 0
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District
Why does every rendering look different? This could have been infinitely better.
This screams cost consolidation. I wish we took a lower bid.
Why does every rendering look different? This could have been infinitely better.
This screams cost consolidation. I wish we took a lower bid.
Beton Brut
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 25, 2006
- Messages
- 4,382
- Reaction score
- 335
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District
I love how the presentation materials refer to the appendage that fronts Federal Street as the "bustle." This is one tacky wedding dress...
I love how the presentation materials refer to the appendage that fronts Federal Street as the "bustle." This is one tacky wedding dress...
Poolio
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2014
- Messages
- 358
- Reaction score
- 1,383
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District
Another improvement that I like is the thin strip where the main glass facade extends all the way to the ground (next to 101 Federal on Winthrop Square). It looks like a continuation of the same pattern now, where in the earlier renderings they just punted on it and put ugly little offset windows there.
Another improvement that I like is the thin strip where the main glass facade extends all the way to the ground (next to 101 Federal on Winthrop Square). It looks like a continuation of the same pattern now, where in the earlier renderings they just punted on it and put ugly little offset windows there.
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District
I am not in love with the design. It could have been far more iconic. I remember when this tower was initially proposed. That was 2006 a long time ago. That was 12 years ago. So my point is I can live with the design. Its OK. I think it will look decent. Just build the damn thing already.
Any process that takes 12 years to play out is ultimately a total failure for the city. It took 12 years of time to come up with a 700 foot mediocre design? We could have had mediocrity years ago and at least gotten the tax revenue and benefit of redeveloping a blighted area.
That said its time to move forward. More time is not likely to result in a better outcome at this point
I am not in love with the design. It could have been far more iconic. I remember when this tower was initially proposed. That was 2006 a long time ago. That was 12 years ago. So my point is I can live with the design. Its OK. I think it will look decent. Just build the damn thing already.
Any process that takes 12 years to play out is ultimately a total failure for the city. It took 12 years of time to come up with a 700 foot mediocre design? We could have had mediocrity years ago and at least gotten the tax revenue and benefit of redeveloping a blighted area.
That said its time to move forward. More time is not likely to result in a better outcome at this point
Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District
this is the single worst highrise/skyscraper design i've ever seen in my life. one beacon street is more elegant and engaging. one federal street had more thought put into it. "the boston city hall version of a tower"??!?!? hardly -- at least city hall is interesting (albeit ugly) and, certainly for/at the time, adventurous. the whole "well it's been 12+ years, so let's just put something up" mentality is entirely backasswards as far as i'm concerned. wait a decade-plus to put up some POS nonsense that albany would be ashamed of and that's a good plan? if this goes up as currently proposed it will be a huge negative for the city's skyline and for the city, period. "blend into the background"? nope, not at this height (albeit a relatively anemic height, compared to initial hopes). this will be the worst thing to happen to boston since razing the west end.
this is the single worst highrise/skyscraper design i've ever seen in my life. one beacon street is more elegant and engaging. one federal street had more thought put into it. "the boston city hall version of a tower"??!?!? hardly -- at least city hall is interesting (albeit ugly) and, certainly for/at the time, adventurous. the whole "well it's been 12+ years, so let's just put something up" mentality is entirely backasswards as far as i'm concerned. wait a decade-plus to put up some POS nonsense that albany would be ashamed of and that's a good plan? if this goes up as currently proposed it will be a huge negative for the city's skyline and for the city, period. "blend into the background"? nope, not at this height (albeit a relatively anemic height, compared to initial hopes). this will be the worst thing to happen to boston since razing the west end.