Winthrop Center | 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

[tysmith95]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

there are shorter towers that don't have flat roofs and zero interesting going on

You have to remember that Millennium wants to maximize square footage. With a limited height a crown would cut into available square footage. Therefore this building has a flat roof. Blame the FAA for that.

 

[dirtywater]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

The design will be undergoing further revisions. The BCDC is still not satisfied. From Banker & Tradesman:

Despite the changes, some members of the BCDC remained unsatisfied with the latest version. . . . Millennium and Handel said they’ll refine the designs and come back to the board for further review.

 

[Beton Brut]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

I've looked at these renderings a bit more. Random thoughts:

• It's all a bit retro-futurist;
• There's a dystopian vibe (RoboCop, not Brazil or Children of Men);
• Might look sexier with black glass;
• Make it "brood" like Seattle's Columbia Center

 

[stick n move]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

That brown part will be 3' from the next building

If they are going to cheap out on a portion of the exterior I'll take the part no one will ever see.

exactly my sentiments.

 

[stick n move]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

The design will be undergoing further revisions. The BCDC is still not satisfied. From Banker & Tradesman:

Jesus, are you serious. What are they not satisfied with? Well looks like were still along for the friggin ride. Now we go back to having no idea wtf were going to get here and they could pull a hub on causeway office tower on us EASY as thats pretty much ALWAYS par for the course. Theres no way to know which part they are unhappy about, so it could be anything or it could be everything. That was friggin quick, 1 day of excitement. Maybe it really was too good to be true. In Boston the buildings never get better as the final result, and we may be about to finally get slapped, like we did before with that brown thing, after 1 final tease. I knew something was fishy about this. When have you EVER seen after multiple revisions over the course of years where the final result is the best design...... not one time. This is insane. I hope the revision is to just get rid of the brown thing and add 20' and call it a day. Mannnnn now we just have to sit here and wait again for the inevitable it feels like. Why do we have to wait anymore they literally just got it right? WTF.

If they drop a hub on causeway bait n MF switch, trinity, or that other design before these last 2 on us we need to do everything in our power to just say STOP ALREADY PLEASE. Just stop, you finally got it right, build it. Stop dickin around with shit. You fixed it, it has basically what everyone wants. It compromised for height...check, the T got you the extra square footage you need, you jazzed up the T and gave it a Boston slanty roof...check, you got to leave out the observation deck by adding the great hall and then made it an okay hall, thats fine, the other design that (some) people liked, it has elements of that still, and the original one that pretty much everyone liked it has a lot of elements of that still too, they all blend together perfectly to make this final revision and pretty much everyones happy now and you want to change it again?

You got it right. STOP. Step away from CAD or whatever you use and just learn when to call it good. Its good. Leave it as is and everyone wins and on the plus side you don't have to do any more work because its finished. Its done, finito. Learn when to call it done and build it. The garage is torn down lets get this thing going. I was so happy for Boston today that this parcel that has been in the works for decades finally was slated to get what it deserves after all these years of bickering, different mayors, different developers, design changes, more design changes, good changes, bad changes, finally the garage comes down, and then all of a sudden out of friggin nowhere THEY GET IT RIGHT. After all that they got it right. Now what? I swear this better be a MINOR revision that improves it even more than it is or this city has lost its friggin marbles. If you drop a finished polished up gem like that and then still cant call it good, you need to learn when to stop while your ahead. They probably noticed how it literally worked out perfect and that means nobody can complain about it anymore so they're gonna have to Boston it up a bit and revise it back down to some double height precast windows because it worked out too well and that means no more meetings and community involvement and people getting to pretend they're important anymore. I don't even know what to say. 1 Dalton looks great. See how fun nice architecture is? Lets not dick this one up huh?

 

[odurandina]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

*i didn't see Dirtywater's post until after posting.

i glanced at this page and only caught Beton Brut's offering before writing.

i read some late Globe posts. The late offerings seem fishy; maybe a few development haters sent a group text. i looked at the renders again for a few moments and thought;

Will planners and BCDC overseers decide the design tower is acceptable; As if we're all suffering from some form of induced architectural Stockholm Syndrome? Are they (as are we) enamored by the tower that simultaneously massacres the parcel, then pulls off its neatly polished heist.... or will they finally have their (ctjm) moment and admit how much their souls crave the tower named Accordia, and finally ask: did it have to come to this?'

Would the site look good if it were in fact two towers?

The sky bridge concept suggests (to me), yes and no.


Then i looked at the aerial render

God, that is one damn strange huge thing.

i immediately thought of da Brut.

BB, i also love black. The Seagram Bldg and Luxor are awesome; better still, in person.

Planners would jump over the edge of a volcano before allowing an Onyx tower.


Now seeing Dirtywater's post; Wow. It's encouraging to see the BCDC devoting so much time to this. Imagine if they walk back the $$$ and just say, "This isn't working. It's time for a much slimmer tower."

 

[stick n move]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Stockholm syndrome.... uhh na I just think this is finally a nice tower, just like I thought their 775' tower was nice too. Just because you like the -doesn't fit into the pallet of Boston whatsoever green colored Accordia proposal, doesn't mean everybody else that doesn't agree with you has a condition. To me the original Accordia proposal with the rounded edges and tapered height was the best design of them all, not the green rounded setback thing...but to each their own. Accordia lost though, so I don't even know what that has to do with anything. Theres also no way they're revising it that much to make it 2 separate towers. They've kept the general massing of the site pretty consistent due to the awkward shape of the parcel. The sky bridge is to get the extra sq ft from chopping off 85 feet from the top of the tower. That T already existed on the original tower, they just extended it up the tower to get back the lost sq ft.

see: already existed - its right there on the left

This is clearly the general plan they're going with, just what new revisions they have in mind is the question. Accordia is dead and gone though and so is Trinity luckily.

 

[odurandina]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

No, i wasn't suggesting 2 towers. it was a poor attempt to ask, "does 2 towers even look correct," as thus to justify the reasoning for a visual allusion of an asymmetrical pair of distinct peaks in the first place.

As to 'Accordia 2' ; i never believed it would stay pale-lime green. Did anyone?

Maybe in Miami or LA.

As to referencing Accordia. Sorry for overusing it to reference my idea of the closest to ideal massing that has been rendered.

Compared to the others, it wasn't even close. i believe the consensus would be aB contributors beside themselves if either of the slim Accordia proposals were rising to the FAA limit.

Yes, i would have been ok with the original MP 775' design.

 

[stick n move]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Either way Im just hoping they only slightly change this because they got it right this time. They really did. I dont know what else they need to do. Hopefully they bring back a version of the old great hall, add 20’, an observation deck just because its the tallest downtown, and get rid of the random terra cotta-ish part. Then it will be perfect. Seriously giving up one or two of the upper floors with a paying observation deck and restaurant would be a worthwhile investment. Wasnt windows on the world the most successful restaurant in America? There arent any balconies on this tower or an outdoor patio like the top floor of MT so the 3rd floor down from the top would be essentially the same as the top floor and they could have a paying observation deck and restaurant with an ocean view unike the Pru. Why not have both of these along with the great hall to really cement this tower as THE center of downtwn. I would if I was them. This would be the centerpiece of downtown Boston that the public interacts with vs walks by.

 

[vanshnookenraggen]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Hudson Yards from this past weekend, there is no comparison, New York is a city unto itself! Boston, however, might not have the skyline, the population, but it surely is one powerhouse of education, finance, tech, pharma, culture and an urban energy that most cities would kill to have!

Come to NYC and see this thing. There are no words. This is a whole 'nother scale to anything that Boston could dream of. Don't say that anything in Boston is like this because this is a game changer that is changing how NYC itself works. This isn't open yet but I've seen when Williamsburg allofasudden had towers open and how everything changed. These things have consequences.

Look, we all like cool tall buildings, but these things don't operate in a vacuum. The thing I like about Boston is that the tall buildings that are built are built for a reason. The tall buildings that are built in NYC are built for ego and this leaves much to be desired, especially in terms of an urban experience. NYC isn't better because of 432 Park Ave, it's worse off because there are more international investors who need to park their money and fewer humans who need to live in the city. The city is more expensive because of these buildings and the people who make living here worth while are forced to move out.

Don't be seduced by the dark side; this is something that older members of this board have been railing against for some time which is not to fetishize tall buildings. They don't make good cities. Good people make good cities. 115 Winthop Sq will be a very nice building but, as they said in The Departed, it won't add inches to your cock.

 

[reverend_paco]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

I still want the original great hall -- at least the feeling it gave me of an actual great hall.

The newer version is better than the 2nd version they gave us, but I have no idea why this very first version was pulled.

 

[Poolio]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Late to the party, but have to add my voice to the chorus.

I like this. A lot. I think their solution to making a T-shaped building look like something other than a monstrous hulk on the skyline is brilliant. The dividing of the mass, the sky bridge, the slanted roof, the verticality of the lines, all of it. The two volumes actually work together and complement each other instead of clashing like before. I also love how the design of the crown emerges logically from the structure below it, and isn't just some random thing tacked on.

The thought of this going back for further revision actually makes me nervous now because they got so much of it right this time.

 

[Equilibria]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Late to the party, but have to add my voice to the chorus.

I like this. A lot. I think their solution to making a T-shaped building look like something other than a monstrous hulk on the skyline is brilliant. The dividing of the mass, the sky bridge, the slanted roof, the verticality of the lines, all of it. The two volumes actually work together and complement each other instead of clashing like before. I also love how the design of the crown emerges logically from the structure below it, and isn't just some random thing tacked on.

The thought of this going back for further revision actually makes me nervous now because they got so much of it right this time.

Is further revision coming? If they get the BCDC vote, I think that's the starting gun. They have the site clear and are talking about construction in 2018.

 

[Poolio]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Is further revision coming? If they get the BCDC vote, I think that's the starting gun. They have the site clear and are talking about construction in 2018.

dirtywater's post at the top of this page (#4022) suggests yes. I don't have access to the referenced article though.

 

[tysmith95]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

I still want the original LOBBY-- at least the feeling it gave me of an actual great hall.

[/img]

Fixed it for you

 

[statler]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

I see what you did there but his point still stands. The original hall/lobby felt open to the public. The current version feels more like an entrance to a private space and less welcoming.

 

[cca]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

The original lobby was a boring ol' lobby with a very fun piece of "urban furniture" inserted. It was a glaring target for value engineering. Never had a chance of survival.

In the end that component was badly designed. It had not purpose other than image maker. When exciting spaces are build in an integrated way with other design criteria ... THAT is when the real magic happens and it is terribly difficult to value engineer away.

cca

 

[stick n move]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

The design will be undergoing further revisions. The BCDC is still not satisfied. From Banker & Tradesman:

Is there any useful info in this link?

Poolio- I agree about the crown too it actually makes sense how the crown grows from the lines of the tower vs something that is just slapped on after.

I really hope whatever revisions they make are veryyy small because they finally got it right.

 

[statler]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

You are probably right about the original being VE'd away but still there is something about about an arch that's more than just "fun". People have an emotion reaction to them that an oversized doorway can't match. I'm sure it will be fine, but just going by the renders (I know) I would be far more likely to walk into the former and past the latter.

 

[Beton Brut]

Re: 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

...it actually makes sense how the crown grows from the lines of the tower vs something that is just slapped on after.

If you squint your eyes a bit, the crown looks like the head of a toothbrush.

...there is something about about an arch that's more than just "fun". People have an emotion reaction to them that an oversized doorway can't match.

The original tried and failed to emulate this (on a much smaller scale):

More images from SOM's sadly unbuilt Transbay scheme
EDIT: more cool stuff.