Winthrop Center | 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Beton Brut said:
[/COLOR]

No idea, and as a taxpayer in Boston, that's not really my main concern. I think you'll agree, this is more a conversation about public policy than architecture and urbanism (though there are certainly a web of connections). Personally, I take no comfort in Millennium's progressively tighter hold in Boston. I don't expect anyone else to share my discomfort...
Click to expand...

I do agree; I just think you're being alarmist here (which you do seem to thoughtfully concede to a certain degree with your "my discomfort" qualifier).

Also, the post above's thought-experiment re: what if Millennium owned 1 Bromfield? is kind of fascinating. Assuming the presumption is that 1 Franklin is built to its current scale/massing--and that all those condo owners at 1 Franklin have certain expectations (however preposterous) that their views be preserved indefinitely.

Either way, the life-cycle of the 1 Bromfield proposal has been damn puzzling to me, no doubt. I totally appreciate that the original 2008 proposal collapsed in the face of the global recession. But why wait until 2016--6 years into the recovery!!--to revive it? And then why dither for another 2 years--as the favorable market cycle obviously wanes--and not do anything to expedite reissuing a new proposal that strives to pacify the severe opposition the BPDA/abutters raised in 2016? damn strange.
 
DBM said:
I do agree; I just think you're being alarmist here (which you do seem to thoughtfully concede to a certain degree with your "my discomfort" qualifier).

Also, the post above's thought-experiment re: what if Millennium owned 1 Bromfield? is kind of fascinating. Assuming the presumption is that 1 Franklin is built to its current scale/massing--and that all those condo owners at 1 Franklin have certain expectations (however preposterous) that their views be preserved indefinitely.

Either way, the life-cycle of the 1 Bromfield proposal has been damn puzzling to me, no doubt. I totally appreciate that the original 2008 proposal collapsed in the face of the global recession. But why wait until 2016--6 years into the recovery!!--to revive it? And then why dither for another 2 years--as the favorable market cycle obviously wanes--and not do anything to expedite reissuing a new proposal that strives to pacify the severe opposition the BPDA/abutters raised in 2016? damn strange.
Click to expand...

Wasn't it determined that the design was just used to pump up the value of the lot so that the developers could sell it? That argument is gaining strength every day they don't come back with a redesign.
 
stellarfun said:
The first Boeing 707 entered commercial service in October 1958. The old close to the city center airports (LGA, BOS, DCA. MDW) were built during the age of piston and turboprop airplanes. Planes such as the 707 and DC-8 were relegated to airports more distant from the city center. Dulles was purpose built for jet aircraft. From Wiki
Click to expand...

DCA is OK because the tallest buildings in the DC area are in Roslyn and those are only around 450 feet.

MDW is still a lot further away from the Chicago Loop than BOS is from downtown. I think MDW is 7-8 miles from the loop, but definitely at least 5.

PHL and PHX are really close to downtown, but in the case of Phoenix, they have no tall buildings, similar to DC.
 
KriterionBOS said:
DCA is OK because the tallest buildings in the DC area are in Roslyn and those are only around 450 feet.

MDW is still a lot further away from the Chicago Loop than BOS is from downtown. I think MDW is 7-8 miles from the loop, but definitely at least 5.

PHL and PHX are really close to downtown, but in the case of Phoenix, they have no tall buildings, similar to DC.
Click to expand...

Just googled it...MDW is a whopping 10 miles away from the loop. Thats about as far as JFK from midtown/downtown Manhattan.
 
stefalarchitect said:
Wasn't it determined that the design was just used to pump up the value of the lot so that the developers could sell it? That argument is gaining strength every day they don't come back with a redesign.
Click to expand...

That strikes me as a very odd and counterintuitive argument. The way to maximize a property's value is to spruce it up as best as possible and work feverishly to retenant it with a quality blend of high rent-paying tenants. These guys have done the exact opposite--emptied the tenants (the vast majority at least), let things crumble & sit vacant for years. Also, the 2016 design proposal they put out was a very serious proposal which surely cost them millions of dollars in consultant/architect/engineering fees. To think they'd waste all that money in an act of such ridiculous, self-defeating cynicism is... just not a credible argument.
 
DBM said:
...the 2016 design proposal they put out was a very serious proposal which surely cost them millions of dollars in consultant/architect/engineering fees. To think they'd waste all that money in an act of such ridiculous, self-defeating cynicism is... just not a credible argument.
Click to expand...

I'd tend to agree. Why hire Adrian Smith + Gordon Gill if your goal is a pump 'n dump for the site?
 
Sprngh2o said:
Show us the steel.
Click to expand...
I'm fairly certain this is a CIP concrete structure.

cadetcarl said:
Gotta go down before it goes up, right?
Click to expand...

This is using top-down construction, iirc.

topdown3.jpg


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2gCBVq7R6Q
 
Anyone got any renders of what downtown will look like once this is up?

And for the record, is this gonna appear taller than MT? Official height its only a mere 4 feet taller I think (691 vs 687).
 
^^Keep your eye on the ball;

Better than anything–they did the right thing (twin towers).

We're just a few months from this thing carrying the day....

Shirley Kressel sent to the dustbin of history–

i must be dreaming!
 
KriterionBOS said:
Anyone got any renders of what downtown will look like once this is up?

And for the record, is this gonna appear taller than MT? Official height its only a mere 4 feet taller I think (691 vs 687).
Click to expand...

Depending on where its seen from it wil. Especially from the South it will and most of from within the city. From the north and Cambridge MT will appear taller.



























 
odurandina said:
^^Keep your eye on the ball;

Better than anything–they did the right thing (twin towers).

We're just a few months from this thing carrying the day....

Shirley Kressel sent to the dustbin of history–

i must be dreaming!
Click to expand...

The BRA was going to give the land away for a measly $25 million before Shirley Kressel and others shined a light on their corruption and incompetence. Now the city is getting $100+ million more. So I guess you are a fan of corporate greed and taxpayers getting screwed over?
 
Shit, this baby looks sweeter than I remember before!

Can't wait till this one is completed.
 
Kinopio said:
The BRA was going to give the land away for a measly $25 million before Shirley Kressel and others shined a light on their corruption and incompetence. Now the city is getting $100+ million more. So I guess you are a fan of corporate greed and taxpayers getting screwed over?
Click to expand...

I KNEW there was some poster out here who still had the hots for Squirrely Shirley! Just couldn't remember who..;)
 
It was never about the money....

I'll credit Shirlz; that i don't believe she was doing 'this' out of feelings of inadequacy, urban paranoia, etc,
that is clearly present when you attend community meetings...

She came with an argument, and was prepared to defend it;

Still, i believe her core goal was obstructing and running out the clock to ensure nothing got built.

It's clearly the most clever tweak of core nimby fanaticism. Shirlz really sold it!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top