Winthrop Center | 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District
- Thread starter vanshnookenraggen
- Start date
A Chicagoan
Active Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2020
- Messages
- 193
- Reaction score
- 1,262
Today
IMG_0301
IMG_0371
IMG_0558
IMG_0565
IMG_0569
IMG_0609
Architecturally Boston is not boring... but there's a lot of "boring" aspects to Boston beyond architecture.
Well, sure. Also: water, wet; fire, hot.
citydweller
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2019
- Messages
- 407
- Reaction score
- 630
Such as???
HenryAlan
Senior Member
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2009
- Messages
- 3,885
- Reaction score
- 3,714
I'm going to guess it has something to do with the T not running all night, and bars closing at the same time as they do everywhere else in this country outside of NYC and Vegas.
I don't find Boston boring at all. What is lacking here that's in other big cities? Tons of world-class restaurants, bars, museums, beaches, outdoor activities, sports and concert venues, theaters, even a big casino... I'd say there is far more than most big cities- even NYC and LA don't have a casino. So what exactly are you missing in Boston compared to virtually every other city? I mean, I guess if you're an adult still pining for their college years and want to stay out at bars til 4am instead of 2am, then sure, but for most actual adults, drinking til 2am if plenty.
I'd like to see a large rollercoaster somewhere in the vicinity. There used to be gigantic (for their time) rollercoasters at both Revere Beach and Nantasket Beach in Hull. Now it's Canobie for "anything" or closer to 2+ hours to Six Flags New England or Lake Compounce. I guess you can ride Excalibur at Funtown/Splashtown and that's only 90-100 minutes away, but still, it's too far to the nearest thrill ride!
Bos77
Active Member
- Joined
- May 26, 2006
- Messages
- 482
- Reaction score
- 295
Lacking...
There is a LOT going on which is great, and yet somehow the nightlife scene is still sub-par compared to similar sized cities. Not saying there's nothing to do at all, Boston has come a long way with great food scene, outdoor drinks and dining. That said, certain segments of the population have seen too many closures of their spaces, only to be replaced with high priced, overly sanitized options - or worse an ATM bank or CVS. Other cities have managed to keep a lot more diversity in their nightlife, all nights a week. Also, even at this stage of my life, the 2am close with 115am last call, whilst being shoved out the door by 145am, is a joke.
End rant. Carry on Winthrop Tower, being our 21st century snooze-fest.
There is a LOT going on which is great, and yet somehow the nightlife scene is still sub-par compared to similar sized cities. Not saying there's nothing to do at all, Boston has come a long way with great food scene, outdoor drinks and dining. That said, certain segments of the population have seen too many closures of their spaces, only to be replaced with high priced, overly sanitized options - or worse an ATM bank or CVS. Other cities have managed to keep a lot more diversity in their nightlife, all nights a week. Also, even at this stage of my life, the 2am close with 115am last call, whilst being shoved out the door by 145am, is a joke.
End rant. Carry on Winthrop Tower, being our 21st century snooze-fest.
You're hanging at the wrong places if last call is 1:15 and out the door at 1:45. Not that I'm out that late often, but I was at a bar in Somerville a few weekends ago and ordered a drink at like 1:58 and they didn't push people out til 2:30. Many gay places are the same, if that's your thing, as it is mine. There's also a certain bar at the Boston Park Plaza that is notoriously known for drinks served right til 2 and hanging out til well after. And there are many, many others like it. Stay out of the cheese-fest touristy areas where there are drunk morons bar fighting where they rightfully shut it down earlier. Just gotta know where to go.
**Back to your regularly scheduled architecture conversation**
Czervik.Construction
Senior Member
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2013
- Messages
- 1,878
- Reaction score
- 979
Could someone explain to me in English why this building is snoozy or boring? This isn't Miami or Sunny Isles with their shouty Bugatti or Bentley Residence towers. I think it is subtle from a distance and has some nice detail up close. It also looks very well made. I also think the crown lighting is very tasteful. As a former Hudson Yards resident, this fella looks good to me.
In 10 years I think the general consensus will be to rate this building ahead of Millennium Tower. At the present moment, MT has 2 distinct advantages over WT:
1. It was here first, the tallest building in 40 years, and got the chance to stand alone for a few years.
2. It was revised UPWARDS beyond our wildest dreams, whereas WT was originally proposed as an impossible supertall, and still well over 700' in the competition phase, so disappoints compared to the original expectations.
However, at the end of the day I'm picking WT over MT for 2 simple reasons. First, while a slanty roof is typically more interesting than a flat roof, MT's open-roofed eye-sore from the South and West is absolutely egregious. Renders showed a covered roof, similar to their shorter Millennium Place towers by the common. WT doesn't have any awkward angles or stand-out blunders like that open roof. Second, the subtle lighting at the top of WT is an absolute breath of fresh air, considering MT often totally disappears into the night.
If MT had covered the roof but not lit it up, I'd probably have MT winning in a photo finish. If MT had both completed the roof and added some lighting, it would be the runaway winner. However, judging the buildings based on their current statuses and not on what "should have" happened leaves me barely choosing WT as the visually superior addition to our city.
1. It was here first, the tallest building in 40 years, and got the chance to stand alone for a few years.
2. It was revised UPWARDS beyond our wildest dreams, whereas WT was originally proposed as an impossible supertall, and still well over 700' in the competition phase, so disappoints compared to the original expectations.
However, at the end of the day I'm picking WT over MT for 2 simple reasons. First, while a slanty roof is typically more interesting than a flat roof, MT's open-roofed eye-sore from the South and West is absolutely egregious. Renders showed a covered roof, similar to their shorter Millennium Place towers by the common. WT doesn't have any awkward angles or stand-out blunders like that open roof. Second, the subtle lighting at the top of WT is an absolute breath of fresh air, considering MT often totally disappears into the night.
If MT had covered the roof but not lit it up, I'd probably have MT winning in a photo finish. If MT had both completed the roof and added some lighting, it would be the runaway winner. However, judging the buildings based on their current statuses and not on what "should have" happened leaves me barely choosing WT as the visually superior addition to our city.
I have nothing against Winthrop Center -- there's just not much about it that excites me.
It's another box and Boston has a disporportionate number of rectilinear towers and highrises. I appreciate the lit crown and the hall/walkway/whatever looks more interesting than I was expecting after they downgraded it and the whole project does seem to be well made with quality materials.
One Congress is exciting. Aspects of 1 Dalton are/were kind of exciting. Winthrop just isn't (to me).
I agree with the above point that MT benefits from exceeding initial expectations, whereas Winthrop just got continually diminished (now it's shorter, now it's not going to have an observation deck like they initially promised, now it's a "connector" and not a grand hall like they initally promised, now it's even SHORTER, now the "iconic lit crown" is just a subtly lit crown, etc. etc.).
One Congress, in contrast, came out of the gates with a really daring design -- and they delivered on it. They didn't flatten any of the curves, they didn't make it shorter than originally proposed, and by not really specifying what the night-time lighting scheme would be, when we started to see what they were doing and how bold it's going to be, it was a really welcome surprise.
It's another box and Boston has a disporportionate number of rectilinear towers and highrises. I appreciate the lit crown and the hall/walkway/whatever looks more interesting than I was expecting after they downgraded it and the whole project does seem to be well made with quality materials.
One Congress is exciting. Aspects of 1 Dalton are/were kind of exciting. Winthrop just isn't (to me).
I agree with the above point that MT benefits from exceeding initial expectations, whereas Winthrop just got continually diminished (now it's shorter, now it's not going to have an observation deck like they initially promised, now it's a "connector" and not a grand hall like they initally promised, now it's even SHORTER, now the "iconic lit crown" is just a subtly lit crown, etc. etc.).
One Congress, in contrast, came out of the gates with a really daring design -- and they delivered on it. They didn't flatten any of the curves, they didn't make it shorter than originally proposed, and by not really specifying what the night-time lighting scheme would be, when we started to see what they were doing and how bold it's going to be, it was a really welcome surprise.
Last edited:
Blackbird
Senior Member
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2014
- Messages
- 1,168
- Reaction score
- 1,660
Restaurants and bars that don’t expect me to spend my life savings. That and good houses which cost what they’re worth. Better DJs at clubs would be nice too. Of course better buses and trains, but that’s something the whole country struggles with so maybe it shouldn’t count.