Winthrop Center | 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

This may be the greatest news in the history of ArchBoston. If this actually pans out.

A quote from the article that hopefully is true:

"Still, selecting a developer is no guarantee that the tower will actually get built any time soon.

O’Donnell last month noted that “we’re closer to the end of this [real estate] cycle than the beginning.” Recently several other large office proposals in the city have struggled to find a main tenant big enough to launch construction. Financing, too, could become a challenge if the global economy cools or interest rates rise.

But even if the office market stalls, all the plans filed last year included residential components, which have generally performed well in downtown Boston. Some also had hotels.

And regardless of when ground might break, BRA officials say they want a proposal that can withstand economic cycles, and a building that will evolve with the city.

“We want a building that can be built today and can thrive for a long time,” said chief BRA planner Sara Myerson. “A truly great building for decades to come.”"








ps: BRA if you are reading this....PICK THE FUCKING ACCORDIA TOWER! Don't even hold a competition it is already over, Accordia wins, build it.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

While Accordia's was nice, we still haven't even seen the HYM proposal.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

it's nice that the BRA is resolute for this site. Next, we need to hear what Midwood Investment wishes to do at 1 Bromfield St – or if they've gone back into a hold pattern.

Accordia!
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

meddlepal said:
While Accordia's was nice, we still haven't even seen the HYM proposal.
Click to expand...

THANK YOU! Finally someone is in agreement with me. While the actual design of the accordia tower is quite nice, and most developed (and by one of the most qualified arch firms), HYM's site plan I think has a major upside that can't be ignored. I also feel that moving the tower over one street would fit better in the overall skyline.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

Also, just pulled down the list of planholders, and Shirley Kressel grabbed a copy of the RFP and just listed 'Citizen & Taxpayer' as her company. It gave me a chuckle.
 
Last edited:
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

Accordia was the best of what we saw last time...
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

Sorry to burst everyone's Accordia bubble, but the building in the render's will never be built. It's a beautiful dream, but it's too tall. The Globe article clearly reminds us all that the FAA height limit for that spot is 725'. That would make the absolute top of any new tower just 40' taller than Millennium Tower. If the FAA says 725' is the max. safe height limit, nobody would ever insure anything higher because of that presumed hazard. (at least that's what I've read somewhere) Nevertheless, a 725' tower-done right-will still be good.

What really get's me is WHY the city isn't shooting for a TALL, iconic tower for Back Bay Station--a place where a tall building WOULD meet FAA height requirements all the way to 1000'+ !!! They need to encourage Boston Properties to go higher out there.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

I think most of the proposals were over 725' ... the only one I remember that isn't is Joe Fallon's proposal.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

Technically the FAA could allow a taller building those heights are guidelines not hard limits. Looking at the history of the site I don't expect them to but I will hold a tiny bit of hope and see what happens.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

I dont think all of these developers would have spent the time and money designing 750' - 780' towers and then submitting them to the BRA if there was a 0% chance they could be built at that height. I guarantee they know more about what can and cant happen on the site than we do.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

^^^The 2 with close BRA ties proposed the range. That should tell you a lot.
740' buy it now.
780' board room.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

Mods - Would it be possible to post a link to project renderings at the top of every thread so you don't have to scroll back through page after page of comments to find them? Thanks!
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

lapradetom said:
What really get's me is WHY the city isn't shooting for a TALL, iconic tower for Back Bay Station--a place where a tall building WOULD meet FAA height requirements all the way to 1000'+ !!! They need to encourage Boston Properties to go higher out there.
Click to expand...

It would face alot of opposition from neighbors; just look at the fight that Simon had to go through to get the Copley Tower approved (which I dont recall the exact height of the structure but i think it had a total of 52 floors).
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

scorpio02150 said:
It would face alot of opposition from neighbors; just look at the fight that Simon had to go through to get the Copley Tower approved (which I dont recall the exact height of the structure but i think it had a total of 52 floors).
Click to expand...

What neighbors?
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

I'd be happy with 750'.
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

Best news ever. I have no doubt that the city can negotiate with the FAA. This needs to go to 850'. There's no way 725 or 850 makes a difference. The building site is blocked by the Federal Reserve and 100 Federal. No aircraft is taking that route out of Boston.

BRA is killing it right now. Iconic and impactful
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

The 53-page document outlines the BRA’s priorities for the site, including a “substantial” contribution to the skyline, a “decidedly civic character” at the street level, observation deck, and even a Hubway station.
Click to expand...

Oh damn, I was on the fence before, but a HUBWAY station will be part of the plan?? Sign me up!
 
Re: 111 Federal St. | Formerly Trans National Place (Winthrop Square) Part 2

stick n move said:
I dont think all of these developers would have spent the time and money designing 750' - 780' towers and then submitting them to the BRA if there was a 0% chance they could be built at that height. I guarantee they know more about what can and cant happen on the site than we do.
Click to expand...

^I hope this is true. Maybe the FAA always issues a "notice of presumed hazard" for any proposal near an airport. I know Miami developers have received FAA approval for towers up near 1000' after initially receiving the notice of presumed hazard. (but Miami Int'l is a few miles further away from downtown than Logan is to downtown Boston) Maybe the key word here is "presumed". After the FAA investigates a proposal further, it gives it's ok when the "presumed hazard" is found not to be a hazard after all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top