Winthrop Center | 115 Winthrop Square | Financial District

George_Apley said:
These just looks like more detailed renders... What am I missing here?
Click to expand...

“these changes are primarily due to a refinement in the building facade”



They literally say in the pdf they changed the facade... so no its not just the renders.
 
stick n move said:
“these changes are primarily due to a refinement in the building facade”



They literally say in the pdf they changed the facade... so no its not just the renders.
Click to expand...

They refined it, meaning they likely turned to building performance engineers and building envelope designers to provide real specs on the window panels and other elements; there's no serious/drastic change in the facade. The BCDC-approved facade was not detailed for construction. It was never going to be a silky-smooth facade with no mullions. The building permit approved version just has more realistic detailing on the glass panels. That, along with some more realistic rendering accounting for daylighting is what's leading to some to believe there are drastic changes:

stefal said:
Looks to me as if there's still "ribboning" going on. It's still apparent in the floor plans. I think it's just more realistically rendered in noon-ish daylight. They also made the ceilings more visible, which, depending on the glass, may or may not be more realistic too. Have to wait for the sampler to make absolute sense of these renders, or wait for some flashy high-res marketing renders to come out soon.
Click to expand...

For the relocated balconies and mechanical systems moving, those are also likely the result of building engineers telling the architects and developer it will cost significantly less if the balconies are altered slightly, the mechanical penthouses are built in a certain way, so on and so forth.
 
George_Apley said:
What's the massive downgrade? These just looks like more detailed renders and they offset one floor of residential to office. What am I missing here?
Click to expand...

I don't think it's massive and I do think it was inevitable, and there's more to come. If MT is any indication, one thing these renders say to me is that the windows (now squared off and defined) will open, which mars the skyline presence of MT from many angles. This revision adds balconies to the penthouses. Opening windows... balconies... all things the BPDA should require architects to be honest about and should hold them to, because they make a big difference to the skyline. Instead, I'm sure it's a wink-and-nod among the architects on the BCDC that "if you don't bother us, we won't bother you".

That said, I actually don't remember many other developer/architects that have done the sneaky NPC VE with high-rises in this cycle. BXP and Gensler may not be everyone's favorite design for Hub on Causeway, but the height drop and redesigns of the office tower happened during the BCDC process. They're building what was approved. One Dalton went through no revisions at all as far as I can remember. Neither has One Congress and the rest of Bulfinch Crossing.

This is really just a MP/Handel thing. They did it with MT and this is their second take on doing it with Winthrop Square. It's slimy.

stefal said:
They refined it, meaning they likely turned to building performance engineers and building envelope designers to provide real specs on the window panels and other elements; there's no serious/drastic change in the facade. The BCDC-approved facade was not detailed for construction. It was never going to be a silky-smooth facade with no mullions. The building permit approved version just has more realistic detailing on the glass panels. That, along with some more realistic rendering accounting for daylighting is what's leading to some to believe there are drastic changes:
Click to expand...

You're right. To be clear, my complaint is not that the new render is realistic, it's that the old one was unrealistic (and that One Dalton and One Congress and other tall glass towers don't seem to have this issue). At this stage, if I were the BPDA or BCDC, I wouldn't believe any render Handel puts in front of me.
 
Just to think that a year and a half ago, people were singing MP's praises and wanting to turn over every large development to the firm. I'm possibly exaggerating my memory, but that's ringing bells in my brain.
 
^^If all mentioned weren't enough:
It looks less public and more private.

Are the facade/s still all glass?
 
Last edited:
I mean Im not going to share it a 3rd time but they say they CHANGED the facade. My definition of just sharpening up a render wouldnt require making changes to a facade, and submitting the required documents to allow those CHANGES, but whatever floats your boat.

When the final hub on causeway render came out it required no notice of facade changes submitted to the bpda.... because there werent any, but the render did still sharpen up.
Hub50House.jpg
 
IIRC:
- people were "meh" that MP won. Ab seemed split on who should have won.
- Then it shifted to MP are the right people for the job, look at all the other great stuff they have done in Boston.
- Then an updated render that was WTF and HOLY SH*T came out and Ab went berzerk and I think the city did too
- New renders come out and Ab was happy again with MP, lamenting lack of height maximization with the mini "side tower" and great hall turning into a fancy lobby
- Work starts and Ab is dancing
- The latest updates ome out and Ab is mad again

George_Apley said:
Just to think that a year and a half ago, people were singing MP's praises and wanting to turn over every large development to the firm. I'm possibly exaggerating my memory, but that's ringing bells in my brain.
Click to expand...
 
FWIW...the updated renders on Handel's Web site appear to track more to the "building permit" render in Millennium's Notice of Change letter than to the original rendering in the BPDA application.

Winthrop Center

handelarchitects.com handelarchitects.com
 
Czervik.Construction said:
IIRC:
- people were "meh" that MP won. Ab seemed split on who should have won.
- Then it shifted to MP are the right people for the job, look at all the other great stuff they have done in Boston.
- Then an updated render that was WTF and HOLY SH*T came out and Ab went berzerk and I think the city did too
- New renders come out and Ab was happy again with MP, lamenting lack of height maximization with the mini "side tower" and great hall turning into a fancy lobby
- Work starts and Ab is dancing
- The latest updates ome out and Ab is mad again
Click to expand...

I'd reframe a little, since we didn't design this building:

- People were "meh" that MP won. No one on AB (IIRC) thought MP had the most attractive proposal, but they offered the most money to the City, so they clearly had to win.
- Acceptance set in as Shirley Kressel and the shadow mafia tried to scuttle the deal entirely and leave the site an empty hole.
- Then MP tried to see what it could get away with, distracting everyone with a POS redesign to cover up their shanking of the "Great Hall" (which was never constructable to begin with).
- MP "responded to BCDC pressure" and went back to a compromised version of the original design (probably drawn at the same time as the "redesign"), having achieved their goal of sneaking VE past everyone.
- Work starts. Really. Really.............................Slowly.
- MP admits that even their VE'd compromise design wasn't buildable (which they surely knew the whole time). We end up with an attractive building but we're still angry about the fantasy renders and subterfuge.
 
You can have architecturally stunning buildings or you can demand that developers pay the vig as a cost of doing business and therefore get a more bland design.

You can't have both. The #'s just don't work. The sooner people realize that, the less disappointed they might be when buildings actually get constructed.
 
I wish the glass reflected like the Hancock but at least as much as the Res in the Hub. Not sure really know until it's up.

Is this the same height as the Millennium towers? Some of those skyline render shots make them look like this should have all been one complex.
 
guitarguynboston said:
I wish the glass reflected like the Hancock but at least as much as the Res in the Hub. Not sure really know until it's up.

Is this the same height as the Millennium towers? Some of those skyline render shots make them look like this should have all been one complex.
Click to expand...

Just about. I think this one might be 6 feet higher.
 
The Crappening is underway. No real surprise but it may, hopefully, only be a mild Crappening. Some of the sleekness is gone but it seems enough will still be left, at least going by the renders above. Unless they, too, are deceptive...
 
Brad Plaid said:
The Crappening is underway. No real surprise but it may, hopefully, only be a mild Crappening. Some of the sleekness is gone but it seems enough will still be left, at least going by the renders above. Unless they, too, are deceptive...
Click to expand...
Millennium has a good track record in Boston. The first millennial tower looks better than the renders.
 
Bu bu but its just a clearer render...

Good news though

“In a sign of the close scrutiny this project has received for years now, even these relatively minor changes will undergo review by the Boston Planning & Development Agency. A public meeting has been scheduled to discuss them Wednesday, and public comment will be taken through Nov. 12.”
 
Curbed wrote that one parking level is being dropped, which cuts 50 parking spaces.
 
They want to beef up office space at the expense of condo, and this is the Financial District, so without discussing facade changes I don't see the real problem here.

As for the facade, it has lost some of its muchness, but those early renders were so heavily stylized that the reality had to be different.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top