HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum.

Since 1999, SkyscraperPage.com's forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web.  The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics.  SkyscraperPage.com also features unique skyscraper diagrams, a database of construction activity, and publishes popular skyscraper posters.

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Highrise & Supertall Proposals

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted: Jul 5, 2012, 4:01 AM
DZH22 DZH22 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Boston / North Carolina
Posts: 328
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zapatan View Post
Why all the negativity over an article from over 4 years ago?

The article I posted makes it seem like there's a chance for some sort of new tallest to rise soon.
Clearly you don't know how things work in Boston. "Soon" is very relative. In this case, a tower hasn't even been proposed yet, has no tenant, and the use is unknown. The original structure also called for the demolition of a building next door, which is still standing.

The negativity is more about "being realistic". Something certainly might get built, but much more likely a 700'-800' tower at best, and Boston moves at a glacial pace with this stuff. I couldn't see this starting construction before 2014. This is all conjecture until the developer actually comes back with a serious proposal.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted: Jul 5, 2012, 9:05 AM
FrancoRey's Avatar
FrancoRey FrancoRey is offline
Stay Thirsty.
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Shanghai, China 中国上海
Posts: 2,765
Well, the old rendering is very nice looking. Too bad about the FAA though. That kills this proposal being more than 800 feet, guaranteed. Especially with a small spire that may be hard to see in bad weather even with beacons, that wouldn't fly in the FAA's book (pun intended).

For other lame excuses from the FAA limiting heights of buildings in city CBDs, see Denver circa the 1980's building boom. Height was capped at 715 feet because Stapleton was about 3.5 miles away. Denver has three towers between 700 and 715 feet tall, all because back then, they couldn't go higher.

Still waiting for the day when the Mile High City can live up to its name in more ways than one (more tall buildings!)
__________________
Denver's getting infill like it's 1999...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted: Sep 5, 2012, 9:18 PM
-Filipe-'s Avatar
-Filipe- -Filipe- is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 254
any news?
__________________
I LOVE NY!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted: Sep 5, 2012, 11:35 PM
Downburst Downburst is offline
Loves Weather
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Boston
Posts: 49
No, there hasn't been any news on this. If there is, I would guarantee that it would be posted on here by myself or someone else within a day or two.

The ArchBoston forum also has expanded discussion on this proposal if you're interested in learning more.
Reply With Quote
     
     
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Highrise & Supertall Proposals
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:26 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.