Winthrop Center | 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

[odurandina]

So you are proud that MP won the contest with a showier grand hall that looks nothing like the present one?

Not really, but i'm trying to look at the big picture. Millennium overbid, and they were forced to go much shorter; forcing a true, shytte design, and things really bottomed.... Since then, the developer made themselves available, and listened to critics, fixed the design, routed the nimby's, came to an accord with the City and shareholders and opened their checkbooks.....

I see the dig site, all the rigs and trucks working furiously, look up at Millennium Tower, and compare all this construction to where we were just a few years ago with that deep hole to nowhere, and no plan/s in sight to sink these garages.

 

[bigpicture7]

^ got it.

As always, I should have bit my tongue and just stuck with my initial post of the day: "we do an awful lot of arguing on this forum without having all the pertinent facts"

IOW, and in fairness, if the city ever insinuated that 725' was possible when it wasn't, that's not an effective part of the process either.

Truth is, laypersons/non-insiders have very little way to know exactly what has gone on over the past 12+ years about this whole thing. I say this being a layperson with a day job who honestly tried to follow this / be part of the public process within reason of my personal constraints.

I bow out and just hope something somewhat non-shitty rises up / the checks clear for that park money.

 

[shmessy]

From this:



To this:



That's a BIG change, all in a matter of a couple of days!

Yawn. Post #4656 (sandwiched between my two posts you referenced) already addressed that. Nice cherry picking.

We all get it. You are arguing for sport. The point has been agreed that if the developer goes to the city for vetting the change and the city signs off on it, then the developer has done nothing wrong. However the developer should never be allowed to unilaterally change what was agreed to. That is simply a breach. Renegotiate is fine. Bait and switch isn't.

I'm just as opposed to the City unilaterally chopping the height allowance after a proposal has been agreed upon. Business ethics runs both ways.

It's really not that complicated.

.

 

[fattony]

^This is not a change?

It now looks like an office building lobby.
It was briefed as an inviting, public space; one clearly disambiguated from a private lobby space. Were you at any of the events to hear how grandly it was briefed? I was.

Are you not concerned it is strategic that privately-owned public spaces gently slide toward being unwelcoming? Clearly there are others concerned about this being a trend.

I'm still trying to understand. It was always somewhere between an office lobby and a small mall. It is still somewhere between an office lobby and a small mall. I'm not "for" the new design, the old one was obviously more exciting (looking).

I'm trying to figure out objectively, factually, measurably what has changed? In square footage. If the answer is "nothing" then I'm going to quit reading this thread for about a month until the collective panties-in-a-bunch subsides.

 

[Suffolk 83]

If you look in the original renderings there was a concert going on in the Great hall, that was one idea that could have been many to transform the space for the public. If you look closely at the new one, the stairs in the middle, VEing out the "grandness" of the previous hall, it has become a useless office lobby with a cafe.

 

[shmessy]

I'm still trying to understand. It was always somewhere between an office lobby and a small mall. It is still somewhere between an office lobby and a small mall. I'm not "for" the new design, the old one was obviously more exciting (looking).

I'm trying to figure out objectively, factually, measurably what has changed? In square footage. If the answer is "nothing" then I'm going to quit reading this thread for about a month until the collective panties-in-a-bunch subsides.

http://www.bldup.com/projects/115-winthrop-square

".......the tower’s first three floors would contain a 12,000-square-foot Great Hall public space. The Great Hall would create a new connection between Winthrop Square and Federal Street and would be lined with 31,000 square feet of restaurant and retail space as well as 21,000 square feet of shared meeting space...."

If the "Connector" retains the 31k sq ft retail and 21k sq ft of shared meeting space, then nothing much (other than subjective aesthetics) is lost.

From the new renders and the Globe article, it looks like all that has been axed, but the info has been sketchy.

If that 52k sq ft of retail/shared meeting space is eliminated, the extended hour human activity/vibrancy (i.e. Manhattan vs Houston) is the difference.

 

[stick n move]

If you look in the original renderings there was a concert going on in the Great hall, that was one idea that could have been many to transform the space for the public. If you look closely at the new one, the stairs in the middle, VEing out the "grandness" of the previous hall, it has become a useless office lobby with a cafe.

Yea there was a fashion show shown too, with a runway setup in the middle of the hall with chairs all around for attendees. There were a few different examples of the ways in which it was going to be used as a public space. Im trying to find those old renders of how it was going to host a variety of different events. Im not sure if this is still in the plans with the new hall or not, it could be.

 

[stick n move]

So yea I didnt find the old great hall renders, I found the new ones though. Apparently they do still plan on using this for all kinds of public events, just like they had planned for the “great hall”. Ted talks, yoga, superbowl parties etc. So nothing has really changed except for that it just doesnt have the Santiago Caltrava inspired arches anymore. The only real difference is the look, but its still going to have the same public function as before, and it doesnt look bad at all in this new iteration.

http://www.bostonplans.org/getattachment/9489d79c-053d-4910-97de-3dd2ee0c872c

Those what looked like “paintings” on the walls near the lobby are actually interactive lcd screens that can be changed any number of ways. Then theres a drop down projector screen, LED lights, loudspeakers...etc.

Below they have an example of another fashion runway show, a candidate for office speaking, a concert, TED talks, yoga...etc.


Examples of how the lobby lcd screens can be changed


Different features that will be built in that are available for use at public events




You can see the walls no longer have those same blue pictures on the walls anymore as instead of that being art, it is actually the “interactive lcd screens”.


Yoga classes


Superbowl viewing party


Public art exibit



Remember these are just renderings to give examples. The important part is that it is designed well and available. Then it will be up to the city to utilize it to its potential. It looks well designed and interactive in the renders, now well just have to see how it works in practice before we can deem it a success or not. As of now it looks to have plenty of potential. Well see how it turns out, no way to know until its finished.

 

[stick n move]

Devonshite st. is the side of the building where the tower lobby is located and its street entrance


Federal st entrance on the backside of the tower


Federal st is where the connector hall is located and its street entrance


Devonshire st main lobby entrance


The “interactice lcd screens” on the lobby walls, walking towards the connector hall


The connector facing Federal st. looks pretty good...

 

[odurandina]

I'm still trying to understand. It was always somewhere between an office lobby and a small mall. It is still somewhere between an office lobby and a small mall. I'm not "for" the new design, the old one was obviously more exciting (looking).

I'm trying to figure out objectively, factually, measurably what has changed? In square footage. If the answer is "nothing" then I'm going to quit reading this thread for about a month until the collective panties-in-a-bunch subsides.

You are a LORD!! NYC/Chicago/Toronto; it's a nothing infill highrise. Rounding out the next 10~15 cities, it still flies under the radar,
w/ nary a soul giving two shyttes. No Kressel, Galer, Frazee, no Rover, Tosh, Linehan. 20 months later, steel rising and peeps like, 'oh, cool..."
here? nary a soul + 2~300, (500 tops),
20 deranged nimby's throwing spaghetti strings at a wall–hoping 1 will stick.
Less than ~0.1% of the population give a rats ass.

In the final analysis, is half of this picture really necessary?
i never bought in.
Do people feel invited and relaxed loitering in buildings
in Downtown Boston (of all places)–less care (enough to try)?
Who has the crystal ball people will even make an effort to hang out here?
How much retail is needed in DTX?
Copley Place promised basically the same–in the Center of it all.
How did that work out?

 

[bdurden]

Copley Place isn’t without it’s issues, but I wouldn’t consider it a failure by any stretch. I find it particularly useful getting from Back Bay Station to Mass Ave quickly on cold days.

 

[bakgwailo]

Not really, but i'm trying to look at the big picture. Millennium overbid, and they were forced to go much shorter; forcing a true, shytte design, and things really bottomed.... Since then, the developer made themselves available, and listened to critics, fixed the design, routed the nimby's, came to an accord with the City and shareholders and opened their checkbooks.....

I see the dig site, all the rigs and trucks working furiously, look up at Millennium Tower, and compare all this construction to where we were just a few years ago with that deep hole to nowhere, and no plan/s in sight to sink these garages.

No one forced Millennium to bid at a height that was above even what the City was asking... in fact, the City/BPDA (and Millennium if they did their due diligence) knew for a fact going into this what the FAA limit was on the parcel given that the FAA ruled on it years ago under Menino.

 

[jdrinboston]

To rehash my point from a couple of days ago, but here is the video that was shown at the groundbreaking ceremony in October. At 3:30, you can clearly see the “scaled down” iteration of the great hall. I stand by my earlier comment that this change in the great hall was already vetted and approved by the city months ago.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TI3wDACbogg

 

[chrisbrat]

the bigger issue isn't the dumb hall -- it's that this is one fugly-ass building. it's better than some of the brown blocks of shit that went up in the '70s, but boston should have demanded more than a blocky glass nothing tower for the 4th tallest. very lame.

 

[KriterionBOS]

the bigger issue isn't the dumb hall -- it's that this is one fugly-ass building. it's better than some of the brown blocks of shit that went up in the '70s, but boston should have demanded more than a blocky glass nothing tower for the 4th tallest. very lame.

Its not great, but its not that bad. Could have been a lot uglier.

 

[34f34f]

the bigger issue isn't the dumb hall -- it's that this is one fugly-ass building. it's better than some of the brown blocks of shit that went up in the '70s, but boston should have demanded more than a blocky glass nothing tower for the 4th tallest. very lame.

In my view, the biggest problem with the design is that it's so similar to Millennium Tower (particularly when viewed from the Common/Back Bay). With two of the biggest buildings having the same style (ooo shiny glass! vertical lines! but otherwise just rectangles), we've essentially given our skyline (the 2010-2020s version of it at least) to a single company.

I know this is par for the course in Boston (see TheFortPointer's critiques of the Seaport design hegemony), but it's still disappointing that we could easily push for more, we just choose to sit back and let a few companies design our city.

 

[shmessy]

In the final analysis, is half of this picture really necessary?
i never bought in.
Do people feel invited and relaxed loitering in buildings
in Downtown Boston (of all places)–less care (enough to try)?
Who has the crystal ball people will even make an effort to hang out here?
How much retail is needed in DTX?
Copley Place promised basically the same–in the Center of it all.
How did that work out?

Why is a lively and vibrant human city so offensive to you in favor of just having tall buildings?

The salient point you keep forgetting (or ignore): Copley Place was built as a physical island (just look at the streets/pike around it) in the early 80's when people didn't live in Boston downtown or midtown. Downtown and midtown Boston back then was a place to commute to for work. The streets were barren after 6:00pm.

The city's character has changed - - you may not think so, but many of us are cheering the much more busy sidewalks and liveliness of Boston compared to when Copley Place was built in the early 80's. People (particularly empty nesters and young professionals who flock to restaurants and clubs, etc.) are fighting to get into the city (and shoot dollar bills into the economy).

I get what you're saying - - tall buildings are wicked cool. You know what's wicked cooler? Tall buildings with pulsating activity in and around it - - a real city, not a depressing 8 hour a day SimCity Potemkin Village like Houston.

24 hour T service with no curfews would make Boston far more world class than just tall buildings. With the advent of driverless subscription pods (no more on street parking or parking garages - - leading to more real estate residential and business building opportunities) the population that can grow from 600K to several million.

THAT is the true potential of the city. Far brighter than only a bunch of tall rods.

.

 

[Rover]

In my view, the biggest problem with the design is that it's so similar to Millennium Tower (particularly when viewed from the Common/Back Bay). With two of the biggest buildings having the same style (ooo shiny glass! vertical lines! but otherwise just rectangles), we've essentially given our skyline (the 2010-2020s version of it at least) to a single company.

A fair point but I think those two compliment each other and seem to be the only two of that design in the vicinity.

I'll also say again that if you're collecting 150M in upfront payments for the right to build the tower, its tough to then also insist on something that does not maximize square footage (aka a box) as opposed to spires and pointy roof tops. While Joe NIMBY with a 1st grade understanding of economics might insist that you can collect that much dough and then force them to build what he wants to see, in reality its a trade-off the city has to make.

 

[HenryAlan]

If you look in the original renderings there was a concert going on in the Great hall, that was one idea that could have been many to transform the space for the public. If you look closely at the new one, the stairs in the middle, VEing out the "grandness" of the previous hall, it has become a useless office lobby with a cafe.

That render was always an obvious con job, though. There is no way that space, no matter how grand in appearance, could ever have been a satisfactory concert space. It would be open to far too many disruptions. I want to see music in music halls, not in shopping malls or building lobbies. If it's appropriate for the latter forms, it isn't really something that adds to the cultural status of the city.

Essentially, the proposition was for something more than a lobby, something that would allow for public passage, some sort of programming or engagement. That is still an element of the current version. It was never going to be Symphony Hall.

 

[odurandina]

Not to mention, Millennium is announcing it's most likely embrace: a connector! To me that means some type of passageway or shortcut. Isn't this what it was always going to be? Then, we've already got some decent lobbies nearby, and DTX. Retail looks fairly saturated all over Boston (to me). I see the residents of this tower spending weekends in Newburyport (or the Azores?) before stopping downstairs to mix with common folk. ....and does Millennium have a crystal ball about how retail vs/ food and drunken parties looks a few years out?