Winthrop Center | 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

[George_Apley]

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

The Accordia proposal by a mile, but I must say this picture strikes me kinda queer: instead of highlighting how awesome it'll be on the skyline it just reinforces how dull of a box shape it really is. I hope the ghost of Menino haunts these developers and architects in their dreams until they come up with a silhouette even halfway interesting.

Accordia is my favorite as well, but I find it humorous that they added the sunburst to the tower for emphasis... why not just have a nice crown/spire/slant? Give the building an exclamation point and it's pure gold.

 

[Equilibria]

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

Accordia is my favorite as well, but I find it humorous that they added the sunburst to the tower for emphasis... why not just have a nice crown/spire/slant? Give the building an exclamation point and it's pure gold.

I'd love it if it happened, but the fact is that when you have a height limit, you're throwing money out the window if you add ornamentation to the top. With a non-slam-dunk operation like Accordia, I'm okay with them not turning down cash.

 

[George_Apley]

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

I'd love it if it happened, but the fact is that when you have a height limit, you're throwing money out the window if you add ornamentation to the top. With a non-slam-dunk operation like Accordia, I'm okay with them not turning down cash.

Honestly, I'd be perfectly happy with this as presented. Just saying that a crown would be ideal.

 

[kmp1284]

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

Accordia and Ares are doing the D Street hotels, so their hotel component has some weight behind it. They'd partner with Starwood again, and the hotel would be have the "Le Meridien" brand on it.

Not that I have any issue with Le Meridien but Boston already has one. Could there be a better location for a St. Regis?

 

[lapradetom]

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

WOW, What a difference a little competition makes! Thank goodness Marty Walsh decided to jump-start the process,which really gives us hope that something iconic WILL be built there. What I find puzzling is just how UN-inspiring the TransNational proposal is, and it was them whom previously had the renonwned Renzo Piano on board for the first (FAA doomed) tower proposal.
You would think that they would have at least presented something inspiring with the follow up. ......I agree that the top of the building really should have some sort of "expressive" top to set it apart, and hope Walsh encourages this in the final design for the building. Who would've thought that he would turn out to be so pro-development?
What I want to know is why did it take so long to allow for greater density/height in Boston? Have the NIMBY's gone away somewhere? Or does the new BRA just not put up with them like they used to?

 

[citylover94]

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

They seem to be paying just enough attention they can't get in trouble but there is less pressure on developments to now to neighborhood groups. Also the whole process has gotten shorter for example it took Avalon North Station from 2005 till 2014 to start construction and it took the Four Seasons Tower from 2014 to 2015 to do the same. This means there is less time for NIMBYs to stop a project.

 

[DZH22]

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

.....for example it took Avalon North Station from 2005 till 2014 to start construction and it took the Four Seasons Tower from 2014 to 2015 to do the same.

There was originally a shorter proposal at 512' that went through part of the approval process before they asked for more height. Not sure how long ago it was originally, but a few years for sure. In the scheme of things, I'd say Boston still has a longer process than most American cities.

 

[coleslaw]

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

Seeing as all of us seem to be united behind the Accordia proposal, do we have any way of collectively pushing for it?

 

[FK4]

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

Ha. "Collectively" as in the 25-odd people on here who have supported it?

 

[DZH22]

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

Hey we haven't seen all the proposals yet. Maybe there's a "3 Liberty Place" in there. Oooh la la, talk about the perfect spot for it.

 

[datadyne007]

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

Seeing as all of us seem to be united behind the Accordia proposal, do we have any way of collectively pushing for it?

No, because the BRA is not going to care what a group of skyscraper fetishists who haven't evaluated the proposals beyond "ooh that's pretty!" actually thinks.

The people reviewing these proposals will be looking at feasibility, experience/design team, schedules, budgets/finances, public amenities, urban design (which does not simply mean asking "is it really tall?!"), ground level, and integration with Boston's development goals/programmatic uses in addition to the sheer architectural design.

Being designed by SHoP does not instantly qualify a building to developed. End of story.

--
Edit: I realize this is a bitchy post, but it's one that's been a long time coming. The bottom line is that if we all were to collectively review every proposal, research all the finances/funding, evaluate the feasibility, etc AND THEN come to the conclusion that Accordia is the best, then we could try some advocacy, but the key is being prepared to defend our views. "It's pretty" doesn't cut it with urban planning professionals, bankers, executives, etc.

 

[393b40]

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

There was originally a shorter proposal at 512' that went through part of the approval process before they asked for more height. Not sure how long ago it was originally, but a few years for sure. In the scheme of things, I'd say Boston still has a longer process than most American cities.

I think we're changing quickly. Menino was conservative (very?) in his development approach. Walsh needs to survive his first re-election attempt, but if he does I think that's a validation that Bostonians approve of a different methodology.

 

[bobthebuilder]

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

While I truly like SHoP's design, I think we need to take a step back and evaluate the whole proposal before we say it's Accordia or nothing. As others have mentioned, not much is known about Accordia. As I'm sure most of you know, the ability to get this thing BRA approved, permitted, financed, & built is just as important as the design.

Now personally, I like HYM's overall proposal the best. I feel like it's killing two birds with one stone. It replaces the lifeless wall that is St. Anthony's with a new tower & retail space, and replaces that decrepit garage with a church/rectory, school, & open space. I know others here have trashed HYM's proposal for their lack of rendering, but I think the diagram shown in slide 13 of their proposal has potential. It could be sleek from the south/north. Obviously nothing is set in stone, and I would like to think that given such a prominent stage, HYM would push for a truly iconic design.

Accordia is my #2, strictly on design. They brought in a good architecture firm for this project. From what I gather, Kirk Sykes (the majority partner) is a local guy, but I haven't come across anything that says he has completed something like this before. Rich Galvin & CV properties have a little more verifiable experience, but they are the minority partner. I've only done some quick googling, so maybe there is more out there that I'm missing.

Ideally, I think HYM's site plan with SHoP's tower (or a version thereof) would be ideal. Give it some architectural lighting towards the crown, and a spire that makes it really stand above the rest of the financial district and call it a day.

Millennium, Fallon, & Lend Lease are all okay in my book. They have mediocre designs and could get the job done. Lend Lease is behind some high profile stuff (I believe One57 & 432 Park) so I think they would do alright, it'd just be good to see an actual render.

 

[dshoost88]

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

Question regarding the HYM proposal, because it's an interesting one. I took another look at the FAA Boston Logan Airspace map:

I zoomed into it to get a better idea of where the rings are for increased height allowance. The BLUE polygon is the site of Winthrop Garage. The little GREEN polygon is the site of the current Saint Anthony Shrine & Friary.

If HYM succeeds in the land swap deal with the church, the new public school, and a tower on the site of the current Saint Anthony building, would they technically be allowed to make a marginally taller tower there?

 

[fattony]

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

FWIW, it is interesting to note that most (all?) of the proposals on the garage site exceed the 700 feet allowed by that map.

 

[stellarfun]

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

FWIW, it is interesting to note that most (all?) of the proposals on the garage site exceed the 700 feet allowed by that map.

The map is in 25 foot gradients. The St. Anthony's site is near 750'.

 

[Mongo]

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

As I understand it, part of the reason the map steps like that it to ensure "sight lines" for the radar at Logan to approaching traffic.

If one of these developers negotiated with the FAA to put a flight radar on the roof could they go significantly taller? (and raise the ceiling on downtown too.)

 

[stellarfun]

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

FWIW, I looked at the partnering, where such was provided.

Accordia
Ares Financial Capital Partner
Starwood for the hotel
Clark Construction, contractor
Thornton Tomasetti, structural engineers

Fallon
Holliday Fenoglio Fowler, L.P. for securing financing
Turner Construction

HYM
Moriarty contractor

Lend Lease
Hudson Group (Ori Ron of Dainty Dot) financing partner
own contractor
DeSimone, structural engineer
Hotel partner, none

Millennium
Suffolk contractor
DeSimone, structural engineer

Transnational
Toll Brothers, capital?
Holliday Fenoglio Fowler, L.P. for securing financing
Turner or Moriarty or Suffolk, contractor
Hptel partner none

Trinity
Moriarty, contractor
LeMessurier, structural engineer
GB Lodging (hotel, small boutique hotel chain)

Nada for Lincoln. I don't consider Lincoln's submission to be responsive.

Accordia's choice of Clark is interesting. Competent contractor, but well-versed in K St style and materials, which is essentially ho-hum. The only tall that I'm aware of is a joint venture with Hathaway Dinwiddie on the Transbay (now Salesforce) tower in San Francisco. But Hathaway Dinwiddie knows about building tall, they built the Transmaerica and Bank of America towers in San Francisco.

 

[Equilibria]

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

No, because the BRA is not going to care what a group of skyscraper fetishists who haven't evaluated the proposals beyond "ooh that's pretty!" actually thinks.

The people reviewing these proposals will be looking at feasibility, experience/design team, schedules, budgets/finances, public amenities, urban design (which does not simply mean asking "is it really tall?!"), ground level, and integration with Boston's development goals/programmatic uses in addition to the sheer architectural design.

Being designed by SHoP does not instantly qualify a building to developed. End of story.

No, it doesn't. However, Walsh initiated some rumblings that the BRA was going to encourage innovative architecture moving forward. Only one of these designs has so far showed any respect for that innovation, and only one developer has hired an architect who has a record of innovation (I realize that Handel does, but not in Boston, and not for Millennium).

If I was going to push for anything here, it wouldn't be for the Accordia proposal so much as for the BRA to throw the Millennium proposal back to them and ask for a more interesting tower, and for the BRA to make the statement to HYM and Lend-Lease (the two without renders) that doing something interesting is a prerequisite for selection. Everything you mentioned is important, Data, but on this particular site a statement building should be equally as important. This is particularly true because many of these proposals are similar in terms of ground level activation, urban form, and programming (with the notable exception of Trinity).

I want the BRA to treat these as first drafts - which the ones without designs clearly are - and demand some revisions.

 

[Suffolk 83]

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

I bet Millennium gets it because they have suffolk as the contractor.