Tall Building in Historic Centers

TALL BUILDINGSIN

HISTORIC CENTERS

TALL B

UILD

ING

S IN

HIS

TOR

IC C

EN

TER

S

TALL BUILDINGS IN HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS FOR HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS WITH HISTORIC CENTERS

TALL BUILDINGS AROUND HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS AND HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS AT HISTORIC CENTERS

TALL BUILDINGS BEFORE HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS AFTER HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS ABOVE HISTORIC CENTERS

TALL BUILDINGS BEYOND HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS OVER HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS INTO HISTORIC CENTERS

TALL BUILDINGS UNDER HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS BELOW HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS AMONG HISTORIC CENTERS

TALL BUILDINGS AS HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS BEHIND HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS BESIDES HISTORIC CENTERS

TALL BUILDINGS BETWEEN HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS BUT HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS AMID HISTORIC CENTERS

TALL BUILDINGS DESPITE HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS FOLLOWING HISTORIC CENTERS

TALL BUILDINGS FROM HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS INSIDE HISTORIC CENTERS

TALL BUILDINGS OUTSIDE HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS LIKE HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS OFF HISTORIC CENTERS

TALL BUILDINGS ONTO HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS OPPOSITE HISTORIC CENTERS

TALL BUILDINGS PAST HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS NEAR HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS SINCE HISTORIC CENTERS

TALL BUILDINGS REGARDING HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS PLUS HISTORIC CENTERS

TALL BUILDINGS BY HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS EXCLUDING HISTORIC CENTERS

TALL BUILDINGS CONSIDERING HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS TOWARDS HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS DURING HISTORIC CENTERS

TALL BUILDINGS PER HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS VERSUS HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS ACROSS HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS UNLIKE HISTORIC CENTERS

TALL BUILDINGS REGARDING HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS SINCE HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS UNTIL HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS UPON HISTORIC CENTERS

TALL BUILDINGS THROUGH HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS VIA HISTORIC CENTERS

TALL BUILDINGS WITHIN HISTORIC CENTERSTALL BUILDINGS WITHOUT HISTORIC CENTERS

TALL BUILDINGSIN

HISTORIC CENTERS

This publication has been prepared as part of the thirteen week graduate thesis research program in the Northeastern University School of Architecture in the Fall 2012 as part of the ARCH7130 course. All research and content in this publication was produced by the Tall Buildings in Historic Centers studio research team.

Published by Northeastern University School of Architecture360 Huntington AvenueBoston, Massachusetts 02115

Copyright 2012 by Northeastern University School of ArchitectureAll rights reserved

Thank You to Our Critics and Contributors:

Garrett BrignoliAbraham AluicioIgor EktajnGeorge ThrushGreg RussellKevin BerryBruner/Cott & AssociatesBryan NorwoodDeborah BuelowJohn Martin

Tall Buildings in Historic Centers Research Team

Paul DiMiceli Christine Greene Dan Joyce Reem Kanoo Hao Li Jeanette Lin Tim Loranger Melissa Murphy Evan Parkinson

Led by

David Turturo

Tall Building nounany realized building of at least 240 feet in height, determined as the necessary minimum for the accurate comparison of global urban centers

Historic Center nounan historic urban moment that builds upon itself over time

We define the following to be used throughout this book.

This book is the visual impulse of our shared search into the subject. Though slim in volume, the content is rich with information specific to the disparate stratospheres of landmarks-organizations and tall buildings - because often the two collide. What interests us about this study is not just the finite practice of the collision with its metrics, legislations, and countless built examples but also the broader disciplinary problem (or promise) that the collision poses for architecture. The possibility that the surging capital motives of private real-estate development and the weight of social value can exist side-by-side or bound reassures the role of the architect in the future shaping of cities. More profoundly, this alludes to the responsibility an architect can hold in shaping history and capitalism. For example, the extent to which our history remains in the public domain is not set in stone. Neither are the limitations that civic groups determine for our signature skylines. But we strive to determine what regulatory forces, if any, exist between historic centers and tall buildings.

There are two traits that distinguish this volume amongst analyses in architecture today. The book pursues urbanity as opposed to context and axonometry rather than experience. This research strives to illustrate the conditions of collectivity: the intersections of memory, space, regulation, and ambition on the one hand; and articulates these in three measurable dimensions. It is in this vain that we study constraints and precedents. For example, civic groups like the Boston Redevelopment Authority play an important role in shaping Bostons skyline.

Welcome to Tall Buildings in Historic Centers.

PREFACE

Tall Buildings in Historic Centers8

Par

isN

ew Y

ork

Mila

nLo

ndon

Dub

aiC

hica

goH

ong

Kon

gB

ejin

gB

osto

n

His

toric

Org

aniz

atio

nsZo

ning

Cod

eEc

onom

ic

CITY

CEN

TERS

01 CON

STRA

INTS

25

Precedents

Scra

ping

Nei

ghbo

rhoo

dtJo

hn H

anco

ck T

ower

One

Bos

ton

Pla

ceSe

agra

m B

uild

ing

Seve

n W

orld

Tra

de C

ente

r

TALL

BU

ILDI

NGS

133

PROJ

ECTI

ONS

173

Scra

ping

Nei

ghbo

r50

0 P

ark

Ave

Atla

ntic

Wha

rfB

ank

of A

mer

ica

Tow

erC

itico

rp C

ente

rC

usto

ms

Hou

se T

ower

Exch

ange

Plac

eH

ears

t Tow

erM

assa

chus

etts

Eye

and

Ear I

nfirm

ary

Pen

n M

utua

l Tow

er

Scra

ping

Infr

astr

uctu

re33

Arc

h St

reet

Old

Sta

te H

ouse

One

Pen

n P

laza

Pan

Am

Bui

ldin

gP

rude

ntia

l Tow

erTh

e St

anda

rd H

otel

CITY CENTERS

A variety of relationships exist between tall buildings and history in urban centers across the globe. In this section we studied the broad spatial

relationships between tall buildings and historic districts in nine prominent cities. An analysis of the urban fabric within these cities reveals dimensional

patterns that shape the footprint and form of tall buildings.


Paris

0 mi

1

5

0 mi

1

5

City CentersNew York City

0 mi

1

5

0 mi

1

5


Milan

0 mi

1

5

0 mi

1

5

City CentersLondon

0 mi

1

5

0 mi

1

5


Dubai

0 mi

1

5

0 mi

1

5

City Centers

Dubai(continued)

0 mi

1

5

0 mi

1

5


Chicago

0 mi

1

5

0 mi

1

5

City CentersHong Kong

0 mi

1

5

0 mi

1

5


Beijing

0 mi

1

5

0 mi

1

5

City CentersBoston

0 mi

1

5

0 mi

1

5


One of the more significant factors that inform the design of tall buildings between different cities is the scale and patterning of the urban fabric they reside in. Many cities exhibit multiple scales and patterns of urban fabric as a result of the ways in which the programming of different areas of the city evolved overtime. Shown here are neighborhoods of urban fabric surrounding tall buildings, as well as examples of urban fabric in more historic districts for each city below.

(from top, left to right): China World Trade Center, Beijing; Hancock Tower, Boston; Willis Tower,Chicago; Burj Khalifa, Dubai; Central Plaza, Hong Kong

City Centers


(from top, left to right): One Canada Square, London; Pirelli Tower, Milan; Empire State Building, New York; One Place des Saisons, Paris

City Centers


725 ft

375 ft

250 ft

1125 ft

875 ft

250 ft

315 ft

625 ft230 ft 375 ft

190 ft

875 ft

750 ft625 ft

875 ft

250 ft

500 ft

1625 ft

1125 ft

1000 ft

150 ft

150 ft440 ft

180 ft

180 ft125 ft

270 ft 180 ft 250 ft

300 ft 650 ft510 ft 430 ft

140 f

t

560 ft

250 ft

375 ft125 ft

15

0 f

t

150 ft

The dimensions of city blocks and parcels in large part determine both the footprint and the height of the tall buildings located there. Here, a prototypical tower plan is compared to the dimensioned blocks in which prominent towers are located in these cities.

City Centers

725 ft

375 ft

250 ft

1125 ft

875 ft

250 ft

315 ft

625 ft230 ft 375 ft

190 ft

875 ft

750 ft625 ft

875 ft

250 ft

500 ft

1625 ft

1125 ft

1000 ft

150 ft

150 ft440 ft

180 ft

180 ft125 ft

270 ft 180 ft 250 ft

300 ft 650 ft510 ft 430 ft

140 f

t

560 ft

250 ft375 ft

125 ft

15

0 f

t

150 ft


!

!

!

!

!

45

25

140

560

52

20

30

100

30

20

60

140

avg153

50

90

There are several measurements pertaining to historic and tall buildings that are dictated by the urban fabrics they reside in. Here, prototypical dimensions relating to a Boston rowhouse and a residential tower are compared.

City Centers

!

!

!

!

!

45

25

140

560

52

20

30

100

30

20

60

140

avg153

50

90


The urban fabric of city districts typically determines the form of its buildings at the street scale. Because of their significant height, tall buildings have the ability to both conform to the street grid at the ground level as well as make a more expressionistic statement above. An analysis of Noli maps taken at various heights for these prominent tall buildings exposes the freedoms possible with tall building form above street level.

(from left to right): China World Trade Center, Beijing; Hancock Tower, Boston; Willis Tower, Chicago;Burj Khalifa, Dubai; Central Plaza, Hong Kong

City Centers


(from left to right): One Canada Square, London; Pirelli Tower, Milan; Empire State Building, New York; One Place des Saisons, Paris

City Centers

90 (street wall)115

235350 (max H)

35

15

15

35

35

Maximum height

and setbacks as

determined in

design review

Maximum height

and setbacks as

determined in

design review

400 (max H)300

125 (street wall)

40

35

50

400 (max H)

40

125 (street wall)

465 (max H)

125 (street wall)155

295

10

20

20

400 (max H)

70 (street wall)

295155

5

15

15

1,000

100 100 = lease value

$100 / SF yr = $1,000 ft

$ / SF yr

>2.5W

44

250 MAX.44 MIN.50 MAX.


modern texture/facade

historic facade

historical elements preserved

historical street presence remains

sensitivity to landmark

facade reacts to landmark

modern column grid

PUBLIC PRIVATE

TESTIMONIAL HEARING VOTE MOTION PASSED

REGISTRATION

PUBLIC PRIVATE

REPORT VOTE MOTION PASSED

PROCESS TO BECOME A BOSTON LANDMARK

PROCESS TO BECOME A NATIONAL LANDMARK

CITY HALL HEARING

Initial meeting opento the public

Report led after hearing

STRUCTURE NOW A LANDMARK

Signed into lawby the mayor of Boston

VOTE BY THE COMMISSION

Proposal must be approvedby 2/3 of the Commission

WRITTEN PETITION SUBMITTED

Testimonial submitted toBoston Landmarks

Commission

Building must be 50 years oldStructure is then placed on the Federal Register

BUILDING IS EVALUATED

Advisory board makes commentson report in preparation for

the testimony

REPORT PREPARED BY CONGRESS ADVISORY BOARD VOTES

Board has 30 days to approveor deny landmark request

LANDMARK IS ESTABLISHED

Property is placed on the National Register 6-8 weeks after

Advisory Board Vote

Historic Commissions

In history-laden Boston there are many sites protected by the Boston Landmarks Commission (BLC) and the National Trust of Historic Places (NTHP). The BLC controls the process in which a Boston building can become a landmark. Buildings are nominated for landmark designation by individuals or groups that feel they merit such recognition. Elements including fenestration, building texture, and street presence are primarily responsible for determining those buildings considered for landmark designation. Despite the existence of several organizations to protect and preserve Bostons historic buildings, there are no regulations set in place that prevent the realization of tall buildings in close proximity to landmarks.

Constraints

modern texture/facade

historic facade

historical elements preserved

historical street presence remains

sensitivity to landmark

facade reacts to landmark

modern column grid

PUBLIC PRIVATE

TESTIMONIAL HEARING VOTE MOTION PASSED

REGISTRATION

PUBLIC PRIVATE

REPORT VOTE MOTION PASSED

PROCESS TO BECOME A BOSTON LANDMARK

PROCESS TO BECOME A NATIONAL LANDMARK

CITY HALL HEARING

Initial meeting opento the public

Report led after hearing

STRUCTURE NOW A LANDMARK

Signed into lawby the mayor of Boston



WRITTEN PETITION SUBMITTED

Testimonial submitted toBoston Landmarks

Commission

Building must be 50 years oldStructure is then placed on the Federal Register

BUILDING IS EVALUATED

Advisory board makes commentson report in preparation for

the testimony

REPORT PREPARED BY CONGRESS ADVISORY BOARD VOTES

Board has 30 days to approveor deny landmark request

LANDMARK IS ESTABLISHED

Property is placed on the National Register 6-8 weeks after

Advisory Board Vote


APPLICATION REVIEW VOTE MOTION PASSED

PUBLIC PRIVATE

PROCESS TO CHANGE A BOSTON LANDMARK

LANDMARKS HEARING

Building characteristics suchas texture, facade work,

and architectural elements are

WORK MAY BEGIN

Building permit granted

and work may begin



APPLY BUILDING PERMIT

Application for buildingpermit submitted to

Landmarks Commissionconsidered

Landmarks in Boston are mainly dictated by the regulations of the BRA and the Landmarks Commission.

(from left): Individual buildings can be designated as landmarks also districts can be declared landmarks. Zones of preservation are also another common way to control development around a protected site. Building heights adjacent to, or on top of landmarks are controlled by groups such as the BRA and the BCDC.

APPLICATION REVIEW VOTE MOTION PASSED

PUBLIC PRIVATE

PROCESS TO CHANGE A BOSTON LANDMARK

LANDMARKS HEARING

Building characteristics suchas texture, facade work,

and architectural elements are

WORK MAY BEGIN

Building permit granted

and work may begin



APPLY BUILDING PERMIT

Application for buildingpermit submitted to

Landmarks Commissionconsidered

Tall Buildings in Historic Centers30 Tall Buildings in Historic Centers30

context in scale

align to street wall

humanely-scaledstreet wall

height restriction(refer to zoning)

setback(refer to zoning)

through-blockpedestrian way

easily maintainedpublic space

small-scale block

context in scaleorganization of mass

ground level treatmenttype of materials

...contemporary architectural expression would make a more progressive statement regarding Bostons entry into the twenty-

rst century, while still reinforcing the citys more traditional

attributes.

...how a project allows important open spaces to be connected...

...transitions to or extentions from an existing open space.

...how the physical design of open spaces - particularly the edge condition and location -

affect the usability of a proposed space.

...continues to encourage buildings that dene the

streetwall and offer through-block pedestrian passageways.

...the negative impacts that removing inter-building pedetrian

trafc has on the street life.

...how a project recognizes traits distinctive to the city, such as an accomodation for the view of a distant landmark or the use the the citys historic street pattern

and scale.

physical denitionvisability

accessibilitysunlight

special features

well-dened streets shaped by continuous, humanely scaled

street wallssmall-scaled blocks

active ground oor uses

unique shorelinetopgraphic features

USE MASSING HEIGHT SITE DESIGN

BUILDINGS PUBLIC SPACE STREETS AND WALKWAYS CITY CHARACTER

BR

AR

EVI

EW

BC

DC

RE

VIE

W (

60

-90

DAY

PE

RIO

D)

BC

DC

CO

NC

LUS

ION

:AP

PROV

AL, R

EJEC

TION

, OR

MOD

IFIC

A-TI

ON

RE

QU

IRE

D

Boston Civic Design Commission

Article 28 of the Boston Zoning Code defi nes the Boston Civic Design Commission as a forum for the public and professional design communities to participate in shaping the citys physical form. BCDC approval is required for tall building proposals over 100,000 square feet. The BCDC reviews tall building proposals to ensure that new projects have a positive effect on the city. Because every project is subject to its unique context, however, there are no prescribed tall building design requirements that will grant BCDC approval.

Constraints

context in scale

align to street wall

humanely-scaledstreet wall

height restriction(refer to zoning)

setback(refer to zoning)

through-blockpedestrian way

easily maintainedpublic space

small-scale block

context in scaleorganization of mass

ground level treatmenttype of materials

...contemporary architectural expression would make a more progressive statement regarding Bostons entry into the twenty-

rst century, while still reinforcing the citys more traditional

attributes.

...how a project allows important open spaces to be connected...

...transitions to or extentions from an existing open space.

...how the physical design of open spaces - particularly the edge condition and location -

affect the usability of a proposed space.

...continues to encourage buildings that dene the

streetwall and offer through-block pedestrian passageways.

...the negative impacts that removing inter-building pedetrian

trafc has on the street life.

...how a project recognizes traits distinctive to the city, such as an accomodation for the view of a distant landmark or the use the the citys historic street pattern

and scale.

physical denitionvisability

accessibilitysunlight

special features

well-dened streets shaped by continuous, humanely scaled

street wallssmall-scaled blocks

active ground oor uses

unique shorelinetopgraphic features

USE MASSING HEIGHT SITE DESIGN

BUILDINGS PUBLIC SPACE STREETS AND WALKWAYS CITY CHARACTER

BR

AR

EVI

EW

BC

DC

RE

VIE

W (

60

-90

DAY

PE

RIO

D)

BC

DC

CO

NC

LUS

ION

:AP

PROV

AL, R

EJEC

TION

, OR

MOD

IFIC

A-TI

ON

RE

QU

IRE

D


(from top left): The BCDC seeks to maintain a lively street presence, maintain the urban wall of the city, as well as keeping the streetscapes character. The Commission also seeks to keep the historic street presence of the neighborhood, while providing views through the buildings to pedestrians. By doing so, the BCDC perpetuates active storefronts, the visibility of the project, and ensures that history is mirrored within said projects.

Constraints


(clockwise from top left): Tall buildings employ several gestures to create public space at the ground level, including setbacks, canopies, winter gardens, deviations from the urban fabric, stilts and atriums.

Constraints


2012

1826

1775

1,000 ft

Constraints

2012

1826

1775

1,000 ft

Constraints


Old

Stat

e Ho

use

Old

Sout

h M

eetin

g Ho

use

Fane

uil H

all

Old

North

Chu

rch

Park

Stre

et C

hurc

h

Bunk

er H

ill M

onum

ent

Chur

ch o

f the

Cov

enan

t

Trin

ity C

hurc

h

Ames

Bui

ldin

g

Stoc

k Ex

chan

ge B

uild

ing

Custo

m H

ouse

Tow

er

Unite

d Sh

oe M

achi

nery

Com

pany

Bui

ldin

g

New

Engla

nd M

utua

l Life

Insu

ranc

e Bu

ildin

g

John

Han

cock

Ber

keley

Bui

ldin

g

John

Han

cock

Tow

er

Chris

tian

Scien

ce C

ente

r Tow

er

Prud

entia

l Tow

er

One

Bosto

n Pl

ace

Exch

ange

Plac

e

One

Hund

red

Elev

en H

untin

gton

1700

1800

1900

1900

2000

500

100

200

400

700

1000

Old

Sout

h Ch

urch

Flou

r and

Gra

in E

xcha

nge

Build

ing

Citc

o Si

gn

New

Engla

nd T

eleph

one

Build

ing

Fede

ral R

eser

ve B

ank

Build

ing

Inte

rnat

ional

Plac

e

Constraints

Old

Stat

e Ho

use

Old

Sout

h M

eetin

g Ho

use

Fane

uil H

all

Old

North

Chu

rch

Park

Stre

et C

hurc

h

Bunk

er H

ill M

onum

ent

Chur

ch o

f the

Cov

enan

t

Trin

ity C

hurc

h

Ames

Bui

ldin

g

Stoc

k Ex

chan

ge B

uild

ing

Custo

m H

ouse

Tow

er

Unite

d Sh

oe M

achi

nery

Com

pany

Bui

ldin

g

New

Engla

nd M

utua

l Life

Insu

ranc

e Bu

ildin

g

John

Han

cock

Ber

keley

Bui

ldin

g

John

Han

cock

Tow

er

Chris

tian

Scien

ce C

ente

r Tow

er

Prud

entia

l Tow

er

One

Bosto

n Pl

ace

Exch

ange

Plac

e

One

Hund

red

Elev

en H

untin

gton

1700

1800

1900

1900

2000

500

100

200

400

700

1000

Old

Sout

h Ch

urch

Flou

r and

Gra

in E

xcha

nge

Build

ing

Citc

o Si

gn

New

Engla

nd T

eleph

one

Build

ing

Fede

ral R

eser

ve B

ank

Build

ing

Inte

rnat

ional

Plac

e


Growing MediumFilter Membrane

Drainage

WaterproongSupport Panel

ThermalInsulationVapor ControlStructure

Different Environmental Aspects can be taken advantage of to create a more environmentally conscious building. Some of these aspects are: Rain, sun and Wind. Rain can be collected through green roofs, (right) sun and wind energy can be collected through solar panels and wind turbines.

Constraints


Drainage




Different Shading strategies can be used to avoid solar gain. Horizontal strategies are best for the southern exposure, and vertical strategies can be used for east and west.

Constraints



Drainage



spandrel panel(can insert PV panels)

green roof

wind turbine

grey water collection tank

SUN

Solar PV panels and Passive shading techiniques

RAIN

Grey water collection and Green Roofs

WIND

Horizontal vs vertical wind turbines

Different environmental aspects can be taken advantage of to create a more environmentally conscious building. Some of these aspects are: rain, sun and wind. Rain can be collected through green roofs. Sun and wind energy can be collected through solar panels and wind turbines. Different Shading strategies can be used to avoid solar gain. Horizontal strategies are best for the southern exposure, and vertical strategies can be used for east and west.

Constraints


Drainage



spandrel panel(can insert PV panels)

green roof

wind turbine

grey water collection tank

SUN

Solar PV panels and Passive shading techiniques

RAIN

Grey water collection and Green Roofs

WIND

Horizontal vs vertical wind turbines


Wind turbines, courtyards, dense neighborhoods, and rammed earth are all strategies implemented throughout history as ways to make the living environment more manageable without the use of technology.

Constraints


Exceptions

IMS 121A URD PDA / EDA

Pre-review Planning Meeting

Applicant Initiating the Reivew

Putblic Notice (within 45 days)

BRA Review and Approval (within 60 days)

Certificate of Consistency

Zoning Commision Approval

Issurance of Permit

General District Zoning Laws

$$

IMS 121A URD PDA

121A DESIGNATION

Gives BRA power to create zoning for specic sites

Allows re-negotiation of pre-established property tax

(15 years max.)

URBAN RENEWAL DESIGNATION

Clear parcels for development

Parcels owned by BRA

Requires approval by zoning commission

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AREA

Public Process

Have to prove how it ts into context of environment

INSTITUTIONAL MASTER PLAN

Zoning exceptions for institutions over 100,000 sf

Needs to relate to institutions overall plan

PRIVATE PUBLIC

INSTITUTION ECONOMIC GOVERNMENT COMMUNITY

Zoning

The Boston Redevelopment Authority (BRA) dictates zoning restrictions in Boston. Zoning tells developers where they can build, how tall they can build, and how some qualities of shared spaces can be preserved. While general district codes apply to most of the city, there are exceptions in some districts that grant developers the opportunity to build taller. This section will focus on the potentials of these Planned Development Areas (PDAs) and latent opportunities to reinvent Bostons historic skyline.

(clockwise starting top left):Institutional Master PlanUrban Renewal Development121A DesignationPlanned Development Area

Constraints

Exceptions

IMS 121A URD PDA / EDA

Pre-review Planning Meeting

Applicant Initiating the Reivew

Putblic Notice (within 45 days)

BRA Review and Approval (within 60 days)

Certificate of Consistency

Zoning Commision Approval

Issurance of Permit

General District Zoning Laws

$$

IMS 121A URD PDA

121A DESIGNATION

Gives BRA power to create zoning for specic sites

Allows re-negotiation of pre-established property tax

(15 years max.)

URBAN RENEWAL DESIGNATION

Clear parcels for development

Parcels owned by BRA

Requires approval by zoning commission

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AREA

Public Process

Have to prove how it ts into context of environment

INSTITUTIONAL MASTER PLAN

Zoning exceptions for institutions over 100,000 sf

Needs to relate to institutions overall plan

PRIVATE PUBLIC

INSTITUTION ECONOMIC GOVERNMENT COMMUNITY


Boylston St

15 ft min

less than 90 ft

Boylston St

15 ft min

less than 65 ft

L

L1

A

B

C

D

SB1

SB2

SB3

H

25

(opposite):A: Street WallB: Height 1C: Height 2D: Maximum HeightSB: Setbacks

(top):L: Length of wall parallel (or within 45o of parallel) to lot line, measured parallel to lot line.

L1: Length of wall parallel (or within 45o of parallel) to lot line, measured parallel to lot line at greatest length above the height below which no setback is required.

H: Height of building above the height below which no setback is required.

Constraints

Boylston St

15 ft min

less than 90 ft

Boylston St

15 ft min

less than 65 ft

L

L1

A

B

C

D

SB1

SB2

SB3

H

25


FAR =total building area (TBA)

total lot area (TLA)

FAR is the measurement that determines the volumetric coverage of the built area within its plot. The higher the allowable FAR of a district, the more dense it becomes with built fabric.

(left): The city is scaled in height according to each districts maximum allowable FAR.

(right): The zoning of the city allows opportunities to add density through Planned Development Areas (rendered in blue).

Constraints

FAR =total building area (TBA)

total lot area (TLA)


North End Local Business

North End Waterfront

North End Business

Government Center

Fort Point Bulnch Triangle

Cambridge St.North

Charlestown Chinatown Leather District / South Station

DorchesterBay

Neponset River Midtown Cultural Huntington Ave /Prudential

lot coverage:height:stories:

TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

40%60 ft520,000 sf10,000 sf2


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

40%60 ft520,000 sf10,000 sf2


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

77%156 ft13100,000 sf10,000 sf10


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

70%120 ft570,000 sf10,000 sf7


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

23%156 ft1330,000 sf10,000 sf3


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

88%96 ft870,000 sf10,000 sf7


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

50%120 ft1050,000 sf10,000 sf5


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

40%60 ft520,000 sf10,000 sf2


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

86%84 ft760,000 sf10,000 sf6


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

86%84 ft760,000 sf10,000 sf6


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

40%60 ft520,000 sf10,000 sf2


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

40%60 ft520,000 sf10,000 sf2


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

70%156 ft1390,000 sf10,000 sf9


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

77%156 ft13100,000 sf10,000 sf10

distri

ct zo

ning

heigh

t lim

it

100 ft

PDA


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

24%396 ft3380,000 sf10,000 sf8

PDA


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

23%156 ft1330,000 sf10,000 sf3

PDA


total area:lot area:

district FAR:

40%300 ft25100,000 sf10,000 sf10

PDA



district FAR:

36%468 ft39140,000 sf10,000 sf14

PDA



district FAR:

48%504 ft42200,000 sf10,000 sf20

PDA



district FAR:

48%504 ft42200,000 sf10,000 sf20

40 40 77 70 23

88 5

0 40 86 8640 40

70 77

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

48 48

36

40

24

23

5 stor

ies

5 stor

ies

13 sto

ries

10 sto

ries

33 sto

ries

13 sto

ries21

stories

8 stor

ies 10 sto

ries

5 stor

ies 7 sto

ries

25 sto

ries

7 stor

ies

39 sto

ries

5 stor

ies

5 stor

ies

13 sto

ries

42 sto

ries

13 sto

ries

42 sto

ries

12

Fixed Site: 10,000 sf Fixed Story Height: 12 ft

North End Local Business

North End Waterfront

North End Business

Government Center

Fort Point Bulnch Triangle

Cambridge St.North

Charlestown Chinatown Leather District / South Station

DorchesterBay

Neponset River Midtown Cultural Huntington Ave /Prudential


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

40%60 ft520,000 sf10,000 sf2


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

40%60 ft520,000 sf10,000 sf2


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

77%156 ft13100,000 sf10,000 sf10


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

70%120 ft570,000 sf10,000 sf7


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

23%156 ft1330,000 sf10,000 sf3


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

88%96 ft870,000 sf10,000 sf7


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

50%120 ft1050,000 sf10,000 sf5


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

40%60 ft520,000 sf10,000 sf2


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

86%84 ft760,000 sf10,000 sf6


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

86%84 ft760,000 sf10,000 sf6


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

40%60 ft520,000 sf10,000 sf2


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

40%60 ft520,000 sf10,000 sf2


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

70%156 ft1390,000 sf10,000 sf9


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

77%156 ft13100,000 sf10,000 sf10

distri

ct zo

ning

heigh

t lim

it

100 ft

PDA


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

24%396 ft3380,000 sf10,000 sf8

PDA


TBA:TLA:

district FAR:

23%156 ft1330,000 sf10,000 sf3

PDA



district FAR:

40%300 ft25100,000 sf10,000 sf10

PDA



district FAR:

36%468 ft39140,000 sf10,000 sf14

PDA



district FAR:

48%504 ft42200,000 sf10,000 sf20

PDA



district FAR:

48%504 ft42200,000 sf10,000 sf20

40 40 77 70 23

88 5

0 40 86 8640 40

70 77

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

48 48

36

40

24

23

5 stor

ies

5 stor

ies

13 sto

ries

10 sto

ries

33 sto

ries

13 sto

ries21

stories

8 stor

ies 10 sto

ries

5 stor

ies 7 sto

ries

25 sto

ries

7 stor

ies

39 sto

ries

5 stor

ies

5 stor

ies

13 sto

ries

42 sto

ries

13 sto

ries

42 sto

ries

12

Fixed Site: 10,000 sf Fixed Story Height: 12 ft


1

5

2

2

4

3

90 (street wall)115

235

350 (max H)

35

15

15

35

35

35

Franklin St.

Wash

ington

St.

Hawl

ey S

t. Hawley Pl

Milk St.

Wash

ington

St.

Franklin St.

Hawle

y St.

Washi

ngton

St.

Washi

ngton

St.

Washi

ngton

St.

Washi

ngton

St.

Tremo

nt St.

Essex St.

Stuart St.

Tremo

nt St.

Washi

ngton

St.

Boston Common

1

2

3

4

51

2 4 3

1010

1515 90 (street wall)155

625 (max. H)

15


400 (max. H)

90 (street wall)155

275 (max. H)10

15

15

15

25

90 (street wall)155

235300 (max. H)

80 (street wall)

32

125 (entry facade)

155465 (max. H)

80 (street wall)155

311 (max. H)

80155

242 (max. H)

1 1

1 4

80

10

Midtown District Huntington Ave. District

setbacks as

determined in

design review

setbacks as

determined in

design review

setbacks as

determined in

design review

setbacks as

determined in

design review

Maximum height

and setbacks as

determined in

design review

Constraints

1

5

2

2

4

3

90 (street wall)115

235

350 (max H)

35

15

15

35

35

35

1

2

3

4

Huntin

gton A

ve.

Belvidere St.

Bolyston St

.

Huntin

gton A

ve.

Belvidere St.

Bolyston St

.

Huntin

gton A

ve.

Belvidere St.

Bolyston St

.

Hunti

ngton

Ave.

Public Allley 402Bolys

ton St.

Stuart St.

Dartmouth St.

51

2 4 3

1010


625 (max. H)

15


400 (max. H)

90 (street wall)155

275 (max. H)10

15

15

15

25

90 (street wall)155

235300 (max. H)

80 (street wall)

32

125 (entry facade)

155465 (max. H)

80 (street wall)155

311 (max. H)

80155

242 (max. H)

1 1

1 4

80

10

Midtown District Huntington Ave. District

setbacks as

determined in

design review

setbacks as

determined in

design review

setbacks as

determined in

design review

setbacks as

determined in

design review

Maximum height

and setbacks as

determined in

design review


Lincoln St.

Kneelan

d St.

Boston Proper District_Backbay

12

3

1

2

Downtown District

North Station EDA

400 (max H)300

125 (street wall)

40

35

50

Cause

way S

t.

Nash

ua S

t.

Cause

way S

t.

Nash

ua S

t.Na

shua

St.

Nash

ua S

t.Na

shua

St.

Nash

ua S

t.Na

shua

St.

Nash

ua S

t.Na

shua

St.

Nash

ua S

t.Na

shua

St.

Atlantic Ave.

South Station EDA

1

1

400 (max H)

70 (street wall)

295

155

5

15

15

465 (max H)

125 (street wall)

155

295

10

20

20

400 (max H)

40

125 (street wall)

Maximum height

and setbacks as

determined in

design review

Maximum height

and setbacks as

determined in

design review

1 2

1 2

1

1

ConstraintsBoston Proper District_Backbay

12

3

1

2

Downtown District

North Station EDA

400 (max H)300

125 (street wall)

40

35

50

South Station EDA

1

1

400 (max H)

70 (street wall)

295

155

5

15

15

465 (max H)

125 (street wall)

155

295

10

20

20

400 (max H)

40

125 (street wall)

Maximum height

and setbacks as

determined in

design review

Maximum height

and setbacks as

determined in

design review

1 2

1 2

1

1


South Station District North Station District


Downtown District Boston Proper District


Chinatown District

Kneeland St.

Marginal Rd.Marginal Rd.Marginal Rd.Marginal Rd.Marginal Rd.

Knee

land S

t.

Kneela

nd St.

Kneela

nd St.

1 2

1 2Fort Point Harbor Water Front District

12

1

2

90 (street wall)

5

300 (max. H)

90 (street wall)125 (max. H)

12 (from the side of the dock)

50 (from the end dock)

250 (max. H)

250 (max. H)

Chinatown District 1 2

1 2Fort Point Harbor Water Front District

12

1

2

90 (street wall)

5

300 (max. H)

90 (street wall)125 (max. H)

12 (from the side of the dock)

50 (from the end dock)

250 (max. H)

250 (max. H)

Midtown District Huntington Avenue District


Chinatown District Fort Point Harbor Water Front District

ConstraintsChinatown District Fort Point Harbor Water Front District


50

14 - 18

2.5 SF/LF

15

SIGNS

(top) Typically, tall buildings touch in the ground in three different ways. There is either a standard lobby(left), a base one story element with commercial activity (middle), or a larger plinth that contains moreretail and commercial space (right).(opposite) For the ground fl oor space to be successful, the space typically needs to meet the guidelines diagramed. There are guidelines for bay size (top, middle), sidewalk width (top, right), signage size (bottom, right), and height (bottom, middle).

Constraints

50

14 - 18

2.5 SF/LF

15

SIGNS


BENEFITS PRESERVATION AGREEMENT POTENTIAL

SHORELINE MUST BE ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC

HARBOR WALKWAY MUST BEPRIVILEGED

PUBLIC LAND USED BY PRIVATEDEVELOPER

REQUIRED TO PROVIDE PUBLICSPACE

MORE PUBLIC SPACE ELIMINATESEYE-SORES

ECONOMIC BENEFIT TO PUBLICSPACE

PROVIDE AMENTITIES TO TALLBUILDINGS

EASE NEIGHBORHOODCONCERNS

PRIVATELY OWNED PUBLIC SPACES IN BOSTON

PDA CH. 91 PUBLIC INTEREST PRIVATE INVESTMENT

0 mi

1

5

0 mi

1

5

Privately Owned Public Spaces in Boston

Constraints

BENEFITS PRESERVATION AGREEMENT POTENTIAL

SHORELINE MUST BE ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC

HARBOR WALKWAY MUST BEPRIVILEGED

PUBLIC LAND USED BY PRIVATEDEVELOPER

REQUIRED TO PROVIDE PUBLICSPACE

MORE PUBLIC SPACE ELIMINATESEYE-SORES

ECONOMIC BENEFIT TO PUBLICSPACE

PROVIDE AMENTITIES TO TALLBUILDINGS

EASE NEIGHBORHOODCONCERNS

PRIVATELY OWNED PUBLIC SPACES IN BOSTON

PDA CH. 91 PUBLIC INTEREST PRIVATE INVESTMENT

0 mi

1

5

0 mi

1

5

Privately Owned Public Spaces in Boston


175

75%

25%

w

w

w + d2

40

d

d

w + d2

15

8

2

17

4 - 6

In a 1961 zoning resolution, the City of New York established incentive zoning. The city made concessions to developers to increase the amount of public space in tall buildings. If developers included plazas, arcades, atriums, and other outdoor and indoor spaces in their designs, more floor space could be built beyond the standard allowances as a bonus. Later a resolution was passed to that specified these spaces must include certain amenities. These amenities are then governed by design standards articulated by the administration. On the opposite page, the specific dimensions for outdoor plazas are included. A similar set of guidelines could increase the public space in Boston. The following pages then articulate the types of amenities incorporated in plazas and the other spaces included in the zoning resolution.

Constraints

175

75%

25%

w

w

w + d2

40

d

d

w + d2

15

8

2

17

4 - 6


water featureartwork (optional)

landscapingseatinglighting

Besides conforming to the larger metrics established on the previous pages, certain amenities must be included in these privately owned plazas in New York. These include items such as seating, lighting, water features, and landscaping. For plazas between five and ten thousand square feet, additional amenities must be provided such as artwork. These plazas can be placed in any number of positions within a site, as seen on the this page.

Constraints

water featureartwork (optional)

landscapingseatinglighting


Interior amenities range from large scale programs such as recreation (top, left), retail (top, right), residential (bottom, right), or office space (bottom, left) to lobby features (opposite top, left) (also important in the classification of leasable office space as seen in a later economics spread), food services (top, right) winter gardens (bottom, right) and loading options (bottom, left).

Constraints


include the historic renovation of an existing structure complying

with historic preservation regulations

must be located in a historic district or listed on a Historic lists

capture a volume of rainwater on the lot equivalent to no less than one inch across that portion of

the surface area of the lot

or provide measures that otherwise result in on-site

inltration of rainwater

areas subject to Article 32, provide (50%) greater recharge than required under Article 32-6

useful congestion relief

on-site combined electrical power and heat generation

system

shuttle service to public transit stations

parking cash out program for employees using publuc transit

fty percent transit pass subsidy for all on-site employees

garage occupancy information monitors

Pre-tax payroll deduction and distribution for T passes for all on-site employees.

covered secure bicycle storage with shower facilities

on-site ATM and direct deposit of paychecks.

preferential parking spaces for carpools and vanpools

preferential parking for alternative fuel or high efciency vehicles

On-site electric charging plug-in stations

BOSTON GREEN BUILDING CREDITS

MODERN GRID HSITORIC PRESERVATION GROUNDWATER RECHARGE MODER MOBILITY

MODERN MOBIBILTY: TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM) REQUIREMENTS FOR OFFICE AND RETAIL PROJECTS

HIGH-VALUE (MEET AT LEAST ONE) BASIC (MEET AT LEAST 4)

In addition to TDM, Prerequisites:

On-Site Transportation Coordinator

Post information about public transportation & car-sharing, transit, bike and pedestrian access informa-

tion on building website;

on-site bicycle racks and storage

Comply with Boston Transportation Department district parking ratios;

join a Transportation Management

Association

US GREEN COUNCIL CATEGORIES

ENERGY AND

ATMOSPHERE

MATERIALS AND

RESOURCES

INDOOR ENVIRONMENT

QUALITY

INNOVATIVATION& DESIGNPROCESS

WATER EFFICIENCT

SUSTAINABLE SITE

Erosion & Sedimenta-tion Control

Development Density

Browneld Redevelop-ment

Alternative Transpor-tation

Light Pollution Reduction

Landscape & Exterior Design to Reduce

Heat Islands

Reduced Site Disturbance, Protect

or Restore Open Space

Stormwater Manage-ment

Water Efcient Landscaping

Innovative Wastewater Technologies

Water Use Reduction

Storage & Collection of Recyclables

Building Reuse

Construction Waste Management

Resource Reuse

Recycled Content

Local/Regional Materials

Rapidly Renewable Materials

Certied Wood

Minimum IAQ Perfor-mance

Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) Control

Carbon Dioxide (CO2 ) Monitoring

Ventilation Effectiveness

Construction IAQ Management Plan

Low-Emitting Material

Indoor Chemical & Pollutant Source Control

Controllability of Systems

Thermal Comfort

Daylight & Views

Innovation in Design

LEED Accredited Professional

Fundamental Building Systems Commission-

ing

Minimum Energy Performance

CFC Reduction in HVAC&R Equipment

Optimize Energy Performance

Renewable Energy

Additional Commis-sioning

Ozone Depletion

Green Power

Constraints

include the historic renovation of an existing structure complying

with historic preservation regulations

must be located in a historic district or listed on a Historic lists

capture a volume of rainwater on the lot equivalent to no less than one inch across that portion of

the surface area of the lot

or provide measures that otherwise result in on-site

inltration of rainwater

areas subject to Article 32, provide (50%) greater recharge than required under Article 32-6

useful congestion relief

on-site combined electrical power and heat generation

system

shuttle service to public transit stations

parking cash out program for employees using publuc transit

fty percent transit pass subsidy for all on-site employees

garage occupancy information monitors

Pre-tax payroll deduction and distribution for T passes for all on-site employees.

covered secure bicycle storage with shower facilities

on-site ATM and direct deposit of paychecks.

preferential parking spaces for carpools and vanpools

preferential parking for alternative fuel or high efciency vehicles

On-site electric charging plug-in stations

BOSTON GREEN BUILDING CREDITS

MODERN GRID HSITORIC PRESERVATION GROUNDWATER RECHARGE MODER MOBILITY

MODERN MOBIBILTY: TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM) REQUIREMENTS FOR OFFICE AND RETAIL PROJECTS

HIGH-VALUE (MEET AT LEAST ONE) BASIC (MEET AT LEAST 4)

In addition to TDM, Prerequisites:

On-Site Transportation Coordinator

Post information about public transportation & car-sharing, transit, bike and pedestrian access informa-

tion on building website;

on-site bicycle racks and storage

Comply with Boston Transportation Department district parking ratios;

join a Transportation Management

Association

US GREEN COUNCIL CATEGORIES

ENERGY AND

ATMOSPHERE

MATERIALS AND

RESOURCES

INDOOR ENVIRONMENT

QUALITY

INNOVATIVATION& DESIGNPROCESS

WATER EFFICIENCT

SUSTAINABLE SITE

Erosion & Sedimenta-tion Control

Development Density

Browneld Redevelop-ment

Alternative Transpor-tation

Light Pollution Reduction

Landscape & Exterior Design to Reduce

Heat Islands

Reduced Site Disturbance, Protect

or Restore Open Space

Stormwater Manage-ment

Water Efcient Landscaping

Innovative Wastewater Technologies

Water Use Reduction

Storage & Collection of Recyclables

Building Reuse

Construction Waste Management

Resource Reuse

Recycled Content

Local/Regional Materials

Rapidly Renewable Materials

Certied Wood

Minimum IAQ Perfor-mance

Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) Control

Carbon Dioxide (CO2 ) Monitoring

Ventilation Effectiveness

Construction IAQ Management Plan

Low-Emitting Material

Indoor Chemical & Pollutant Source Control

Controllability of Systems

Thermal Comfort

Daylight & Views

Innovation in Design

LEED Accredited Professional

Fundamental Building Systems Commission-

ing

Minimum Energy Performance

CFC Reduction in HVAC&R Equipment

Optimize Energy Performance

Renewable Energy

Additional Commis-sioning

Ozone Depletion

Green Power


spandrel panel

building height

core

oor to oor height

diagonal distance

(dashed, top)

building width

building length

LOW RISE HIGH RISE HIGH RISE SUPER HIGH RISE

HIGH RISE CODE CHANGES APPLIES

Must be constructed of noncombustible material

Shafts and vertical penetrations must be enclosed to prevent the

spread of smoke and re

Stair enclosures are to be seperated by at least 30 feet or not less than 1/4 the length of the max. diagonal dimension,

whichever is less

UNDER 75 FEET OVER 75 FEET OVER 120 FEET OVER 420 FEET

ADDITIONAL FIRE SERVICE ACCESS ELEVATOR

No fewer than two re service elevators required

ADDITIONAL EGRESS & HIGHER RATING

Additional exit stairway or re elevator required

Hardened exit and elevator shafts, concrete or masonry

accepted (risk categories III and IV also)

Min. bond strength for sprayed re-resistant materials increases

IBC & LOCAL CODE APPLIES

Code

Code dictates a number of dimensions that affect the design of tall buildings. These include building height and width, corridor dimensions, elevator cab sizes, and the distances that govern core and egress stair locations. Life safety guidelines prevent the spread of fl ames and other potential dangers for tall building occupants; standards for light sharing and air access are also set to address quality of space issues. This section outlines the code requirements that inform tall building design, with a focus on standard practice of core placement in tall buildings.

Constraints

spandrel panel

building height

core

oor to oor height

diagonal distance

(dashed, top)

building width

building length

LOW RISE HIGH RISE HIGH RISE SUPER HIGH RISE

HIGH RISE CODE CHANGES APPLIES

Must be constructed of noncombustible material

Shafts and vertical penetrations must be enclosed to prevent the

spread of smoke and re

Stair enclosures are to be seperated by at least 30 feet or not less than 1/4 the length of the max. diagonal dimension,

whichever is less

UNDER 75 FEET OVER 75 FEET OVER 120 FEET OVER 420 FEET

ADDITIONAL FIRE SERVICE ACCESS ELEVATOR

No fewer than two re service elevators required

ADDITIONAL EGRESS & HIGHER RATING

Additional exit stairway or re elevator required

Hardened exit and elevator shafts, concrete or masonry

accepted (risk categories III and IV also)

Min. bond strength for sprayed re-resistant materials increases

IBC & LOCAL CODE APPLIES


(top): These two plans illustrate the constraints of exit access (IBC 1016.1), corridor width (1018.2), dead ends (1018.4), and stair enclosures (403.5.1).

(opposite, top left): To prevent the spread of fire, exterior openings that are within 5 feet horizontally must be separated with the below story by at least 3 feet. This is typically done with a spandrel panel.

(opposite, top right): Minimum ceiling height is typically 7-6, but it may be reduced to 6-8 in some instances.

(opposite, right): As building height increases from 75 (left) to 120 (middle) an additional fire-service access elevator is required. At 420 (right) egress requirements change as well as fire resistance ratings.

Egress Stair

Janitorial Closet

Electrical Room

Elevator Lobby

Service Elevator

Restrooms

Supply Air

Exhaust Air

Egress Stair

Mechanical Room

Storage

>2.5W

44

44 min.

250 max.

50 m

ax.

Egress Stair

Janitorial Closet

Electrical Room

Elevator Lobby

Service Elevator

Restrooms

Supply Air

Exhaust Air

Egress Stair

Mechanical Room

Storage

>2.5W

44

44 min.

250 max.

50 m

ax.


10% of 25sf

6

10

2

3 1

15

34

6 - 8no more than 50% of egress path may be reduced to

7 - 6 min.ceiling height.

(left): Minimum ceiling height is 7-6, but it may be reduced to 6-8 in some instances.

(right): Exterior openings are to open to the outdoors to yards and court. Yard and court sizes are set to provide minimum dimensions for light wells and backyards of multistory buildings so that these areas provide real light and air to the spaces they serve.

(opposite, right): If an interior room is shared with the main room it must have the minimum of 10% of the interior square footage opening in order to allow natural light from the main room.

Constraints

10% of 25sf

6

10

2

3 1

15

34

6 - 8no more than 50% of egress path may be reduced to

7 - 6 min.ceiling height.


ZONE

1ZO

NE 2

ZONE

3

median wait time = range of wait time = total trip time per elevatornumber of elevators per bank

2 Car Layout 3 Car Layout 4 Car Layout 6 Car Layout 8 Car Layout

Angled Layout

Alcove Layout

Circular Layout

7AM

Outgoing Interoor Incoming

5%

10%

11%

8AM 9AM 10AM 11AM 12PM 1PM 2PM 3PM 4PM 5PM 6PM 7PM 8PM

POPU

LATI

ON O

F BU

ILDI

NG IN

HABI

TANT

S

(middle): A transfer slab is needed at every floor where there is a transfer between elevator banks.(right): In super tall buildings, those taller than 1,000 feet, banking of elevators is needed to maximize the shafts in the core. At every 15 floors a shift of elevators and at every 36 floors a skylobby is used. In addition to the banking of elevators there are shuttles which lead directly to the upper floors.(opposite, top left): A buildings elevator capacity is typically designed to meet the peak demand that occurs within the 5 minutes prior to the start of day. Additional peaks correspond with mid and end of day traffic.(opposite, bottom): Elevator cars are grouped to minimize the distance from the call button to each door and reduce the time a car must wait at each floor.(opposite, top right): While most groupings are linear or parallel, there are a few notable exceptions.

Constraints

ZONE

1ZO

NE 2

ZONE

3

median wait time = range of wait time = total trip time per elevatornumber of elevators per bank

2 Car Layout 3 Car Layout 4 Car Layout 6 Car Layout 8 Car Layout

Angled Layout

Alcove Layout

Circular Layout

7AM

Outgoing Interoor Incoming

5%

10%

11%

8AM 9AM 10AM 11AM 12PM 1PM 2PM 3PM 4PM 5PM 6PM 7PM 8PM

POPU

LATI

ON O

F BU

ILDI

NG IN

HABI

TANT

S


Center Core Split Core End Core Atrium Core

(bottom): Typical core orientations include center, split, end and atrium.(top): The orientation of the core and the number of tenants per fl oor determine access and the placement of circulation paths. Lease span is the distance from core to exterior wall and determines the usable fl oor area.(opposite): The shape and orientation of a core is often determined by building form and program; each confi guration is unique.

Constraints

Center Core Split Core End Core Atrium Core


20121826

1775

Constraints

20121826

1775

Constraints


building height

plan size

building facade

building proportion

building structure

site constraints

building uses

building articulation

lift strategy

UTILITY WATER

TABLES

UNION CRANES

LANDMARKS BCDC

EROSION

INFRASTRUCTURE

CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION STEEL CONSTRUCTION ADDITIONAL PROCESSES & COSTS

SIT

E W

OR

KS

TRU

CTU

RE

FAC

AD

EC

ON

TRA

CTO

RS

P

RE

LIM

INA

RIE

S

$ $ $ $

$$

$$

$$

$$

$$

$$

$$

$$$

$$$$ $$$$

PERMIT DESIGNSOILS ENGINEER SOILS ENGINEER

Economic

While tall buildings do not necessarily correspond to historic centers, the two possess an amount of physical interaction. Design components, construction methods, and lease and land values are the primary fi nancial factors that determine the viability of tall buildings. The clustering of landmarks indicates the center of historic cities, often the focus of economic activity. Tall buildings are built in these areas to leverage high lease rates and rationalize the economies inherent in building tall in expensive areas, causing tall buildings and landmarks to exist in close proximity.

Constraints

building height

plan size

building facade

building proportion

building structure

site constraints

building uses

building articulation

lift strategy

UTILITY WATER

TABLES

UNION CRANES

LANDMARKS BCDC

EROSION

INFRASTRUCTURE

CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION STEEL CONSTRUCTION ADDITIONAL PROCESSES & COSTSS

ITE

WO

RK

STR

UC

TUR

EFA

CA

DE

CO

NTR

AC

TOR

S

PR

ELI

MIN

AR

IES

$ $ $ $

$$

$$

$$

$$

$$

$$

$$

$$$

$$$$ $$$$

PERMIT DESIGNSOILS ENGINEER SOILS ENGINEER


Different methods of construction affect the cost of tall buildings. Here, typical processes for poured-in-place concrete and steel construction are shown, common construction methods for tall buildings in Boston.


(above): Class A buildings represent the highest quality of leasable commercial space and are often commercial buildings constructed after 1970. They provide leased spaces by suite and consequently house many different tenants. Typical vacancy is 5.5%. (center): Class B buildings are the second highest quality of commercial building leases available. These buildings were commonly built from 1800-1925 and have undergone significant renovations to incorporate features such as elevators, lobbies, heating systems, and replacement windows. They also offer property leased by suite. Typical vacancy rate is 18.9%. (right): Class C buildings are characterized as suboptimal commercial property for leasing conditions, and represent the lowest rating for commercial space. They typically are buildings built from 1800-1925 that have not undertaken appropriate levels of renovation.


Desired features and amenities may raise the consumer value of a tall building and enable higher lease rates to offset the buildings initial construction costs. These amenities include street frontage, retail, parking, proximity to services and public transit; corner offices, security, elevators, and an inviting lobby.


A comparison of the heights of current and potential future tall buildings with the relative lease values of these buildings presents a more dense Boston skyline. Historic landmarks provide scale andlogic for tall building clustering.

1,000


$100 / SF

yr= $1,000 ft

$ / SF

yr

Constraints

1,000


$100 / SF

yr= $1,000 ft

$ / SF

yr

Constraints


$380/sf

$0/sf

$95/sf

The land values of Bostons many districts are determined by a number of factors, such as availability of unoccupied parcels. A mapping of historical landmarks across the citys individual districts reveals correlations between the presence of history, tall buildings, and high land value.

(clockwise starting top left): Central Boston, $380/sf; Back Bay, $302/sf; South End, $174/sf; Charleston, $118/sf; Fenway/Kenmore, $109/sf; South Boston, $44/sf; East Boston, $40/sf; Jamaica Plain, $32/sf; Allston/Brighton, $30/sf; West Roxbury, $27/sf; Mattapan, $23/sf; Hyde Park/Roslindale, $22/sf; Dorchester, $18/sf; Roxbury, $16/sf.

Constraints

$380/sf

$0/sf

$95/sf


!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

$380/sf

$95/sf

$0/sf

Among Bostons fourteen districts, two of them contain several prominent historic neighborhoods. These districts, the Back Bay and the South End, have the second and third highest land values in the city. The areas exhibit many qualities characteristic of historic neighborhoods, including small parcel and block sizes, narrow streets and alleys, and restricted building height.

Constraints

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

$380/sf

$95/sf

$0/sf


oor to oor height:stories in 240ft:

gross sf:net to gross:

net sf:

9 feet26585,0000.84491,400

20 stories 17 stories

35 stories41 stories55 stories

26 stories240 ft

500 ft



net sf:

12 feet20450,0000.84378,000



net sf:

14 feet17382,5000.84321,000

GROSS AREA =

GROSS AREA NET AREA

(total length) ft X (total width) ft

NET TO GROSS = (gross area) sf

(area of core) sf

GROSS AREA = 150 ft x 150 ft = 22,500 sf

NET TO GROSS RATIO = 22,500 sf

(60 ft x 60 ft)= 0.84

150

ft

150 ft

60 ft 45 ft

9 ft 12

ft

14 ft

60 ft

Shown here are the typical dimensions of high-rise towers. Planning of the typical core drastically affects the buildings floor plan. When considering the design of a tall building, overall footprint defines the buildings gross area. The net to gross ratio defines how much usable space is left after the core has been factored into the buildings plan. The closer the net to gross ratio is to one, the more efficient a tall building is. This allows for the building to have as much rentable space as possible. Shown to the right are the effects of the floor-to-floor height has on the amount of rentable space in a tall building.

Constraints



net sf:

9 feet26585,0000.84491,400

20 stories 17 stories

35 stories41 stories55 stories

26 stories240 ft

500 ft



net sf:

12 feet20450,0000.84378,000



net sf:

14 feet17382,5000.84321,000

GROSS AREA =

GROSS AREA NET AREA

(total length) ft X (total width) ft

NET TO GROSS = (gross area) sf

(area of core) sf

GROSS AREA = 150 ft x 150 ft = 22,500 sf

NET TO GROSS RATIO = 22,500 sf

(60 ft x 60 ft)= 0.84

150

ft

150 ft

60 ft 45 ft

9 ft 12

ft

14 ft

60 ft


Within urbanized areas contaminated sites, or brownfi elds, have developed around former industrial sites. These plots, usually located near central business districts, are underutilized as well as underdeveloped. In order to increase density within cities, and create greener sites, brownfi elds can be developed by utilizing the typology of the high rise. By using tall buildings, the developments would prove to be more economically feasible, as well as be more successful in bringing large amounts of people back into urban cores.

Soil Removal

Contamination Cover

Site Injection

Constraints

Soil Removal

Contamination Cover

Site Injection


PRIVATEINDUSTRIAL SITE

VOTECost Estimate: 500,000 per acre

LIGHT REMEDIATION

BROWNFIELD GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION

INDUSTRIAL SITE REMEDIATION

Time Estimate: 0.5 -1 yearsCost Estimate:1,000,000 per acre

MILD REMEDIATION

Time Estimate: 1 yearCost Estimate: 3,000,000 per acre

HEAVY REMEDIATION

Time Estimate: 2 yearsTax Benets: ~$135,000 Tax Benets: ~$300,000 Tax Benets: ~ $990,000

seaport:max height:

price per sq. ft:

groundwater/industrialFAA$492.00

240 ft

somerville:max height:

price per sq. ft:

industrial/browneldBRA Code$288.00

everett:max height:

price per sq. ft:


4 stor

ies

36 + sto

ries

24sto

ries

3 stor

ies

36 + sto

ries



LIGHT REMEDIATION




MILD REMEDIATION


HEAVY REMEDIATION


seaport:max height:

price per sq. ft:


240 ft


price per sq. ft:


everett:max height:

price per sq. ft:


4 stor

ies

36 + sto

ries

24sto

ries

3 stor

ies

36 + sto

ries

Constraints



LIGHT REMEDIATION




MILD REMEDIATION


HEAVY REMEDIATION


seaport:max height:

price per sq. ft:


240 ft


price per sq. ft:


everett:max height:

price per sq. ft:


4 stor

ies

36 + sto

ries

24sto

ries

3 stor

ies

36 + sto

ries


An issue with building near the water, as well as remediating this site, is that many are alluvial shores. Alluvial shores are areas of heavy soil and silt content which separates the top soil from the bedrock beneath. Due to their tendency to hold much water, these areas are prone to water contamination, and are thus much more expensive to clean than that of an interior site.

contaminated topsoilexisting sandalluvial materials

bedrock

contaminated topsoil

dense clay

bedrock

$

$

Constraints

contaminated topsoilexisting sandalluvial materials

bedrock

contaminated topsoil

dense clay

bedrock

$

$

TALL BUILDINGS

Each of the precedents shown exhibits a particular interaction with history. We have grouped precedentsinto three categories in order to better examine these relationships. The Scraping Neighborhood category encompasses tall buildings that address their larger surrounding context in some way, including proximity to history as well as fenestration and structural expression. Scraping Neighbor

includes tall buildings that exhibit a direct relationship with their context and may physically interact with an existing building. Tall buildings categorized as

Scraping Infrastructure interact with transportation systems or other historic urban infrastructural conditions. These precedents exemplify built examples of diverse reactions to historical conditions while still addressing the realities of modernity.


The John Hancock Tower is obliquely placed at the southeast corner of Copley Square in Bostons Back Bay, adjacent to H.H. Richardsons Trinity Church and the John Hancock Berkeley Building. Its singular, monolithic form and trapezoidal fl oor plan accentuated the sharpness of this angle and minimize its presence within the square. A highly refl ective glass faade mirrors the historic architecture surrounding a triangular entry plaza at the towers base. At upper levels, the tower disappears into the afternoon sky refl ected in the facade. The placement, shape and refl ectivity of the tower combine to honor the historic architecture and reduce the impact of a sixty-story building on the neighborhood.

Scraping Neighborhoods

Constraints


200

ft

600 f

t

One Boston Place

One Boston Place is situated at the intersection of State and Washington Streets in Bostons historic fi nancial district. The corner is home to the Old State House and the citys fi rst skyscraper, the thirteen-story, masonry structure Ames Building. The dark and structurally expressive 600 foot tower is among the tallest in the city and commands a sense of permanence amid the skyline while diminishing its presence at the ground level, meeting it at only the core and each corner. The sides of the base are open and do not compete with the historic architecture opposite each street.

Constraints

200

ft

600 f

t

One Boston Place


The Seagram Building steps back from Park Avenue in midtown Manhattan and surrenders space to an urban plaza in response to the neo-classical Racquet Club of McKim, Mead and White directly opposite. The plaza creates habitable public space in the dense urban environment and refl ects the architecture of the historic club through materiality, symmetry and the classical proportioning of the towers structural bays. An abstract representation of a neo-classical column can further be found in the composition of the tower and expressed in the vertical fl uting of the mullion applique.

Constraints


250

ft 75 f

t668 f

t

Seven World Trade Center is located within the dense urban fabric of lower Manhattan in close proximityto the World Trade Center Memorial. The oblique plan and refl ective faade of the building clouds its profi le so that is seamlessly vanishes into the sky. This effect respects the adjacency of the memorial and produces a minimal impact on the sensitive site. It also creates an airiness not found in the surrounding buildings and a welcome contrast to the neighborhoods density.

Constraints

250

ft 75 f

t668 f

t


500 Park Avenue shares a narrow site in midtown Manhattan with the former Pepsi Cola building, originally designed by SOM. The towers faade is a combination of masonry, which maintains the character of the historic avenue, and curtain wall, which absorbs the horizontal banding of the existing building to create a cohesive block. A glass volume on the side of the tower cantilevers the existing building to maximize space on the limited site.

Scraping Neighbor

ConstraintsConstraintsConstraints


Atlantic Wharf is located along Bostons historic Fort Point Channel and incorporates three existing mercantile buildings. The Russia Building which fronts Atlantic Avenue is preserved in its entirety while the brick facades of the other two buildings are renovated and form the base of the thirty-two-story tower. The restorations of the old warehouses preserve the texture of the historic site and recall its once maritime industrial function, a theme that is expressed throughout the buildings details. The primary entry is located between the Russia Building and the base of the tower, creating a ninety-foot atrium that highlights the brick faade at the rear of the Russia Building.


25-0The Bank of America Tower is sited at the northwest corner of historic Bryant Park in midtown Manhattan and preserves the existing faade of the Henry Miller Theater on Forty-Third Street. Landmark policy allows the theater interior to be reconstructed while restoring the exterior as an element in the towers faade and retaining an important piece of Broadway history. The canopy height in the park and the massing of the surrounding buildings infl uence the form of the tower at its base near the park.

Constraints

25-0


9 stories

Citicorp Center is located on Lexington Avenue in midtown Manhattan on the site of St. Peters church, originally built in 1905. To accommodate the historic structure, the building is set on four nine-story stilts positioned at the center of each faade that allow its corners to cantilever seventy two feet above the church and a public plaza below. This cantilevering is possible because of a structural system consisting of six eight-story inverted chevron trusses that transfer their load onto the four centered piers.


9 stories


140 75

The Custom House Tower that features prominently amid Bostons waterfront skyline was an early twentieth century addition to the original, mid-nineteenth century Greek revival building which forms the towers base. At the time of its construction, the tower was allowed to exceed the citys 125 foot height limit because it was federally owned, making it the tallest building in the city for half a century. Thestructure of the tower uses the original building as a foundation, preserving the historic dome at the center of the old building and creates an expansive public space within it.

Constraints

140 75


Boston Exchange Place is located at the intersection of State and Congress Streets in Bostons historic fi nancial district, steps from the Boston Massacre site. The 500 foot glass tower steps back from its State Street front and retains the twelve-story, rusticated stone faade on the nineteenth century Boston Stock Exchange. The primary entrance, on Congress Street, is placed between the rear of old building and the base of the tower, creating a six-story atrium that highlights the connection to the historic building and contrasts the architectural styles.

Constraints


40 ft modulespans 4 floors

The Hearst Tower utilizes the cast stone faade of the original, 1928 headquarters building as the sixstorybase of a 600 foot glass tower. The initial plan of the old building proposed the future construction of a skyscraper; it was delayed by the great depression and realized nearly seventy years later. The new tower projects upwards from the original building envelope, highlighting the contrast between the historic faade and the towers steel structure is displayed in the open atrium space a level above the public entry. This structure forms a diagonal grid on the towers faade and stands out amid its surroundings near Columbus Circle in midtown Manhattan.

Constraints

40 ft modulespans 4 floors


3 stories

The Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infi rmary consists of the original 1824 building and an addition that expands the space within the boundaries of the existing site while maintaining as much of the old building as possible. The tower accommodates both constraints by adding vertical space that stays within the tight limits and slipping over the shell of the original building. It utilizes three large piers to receive the forces of the tower above without obstructing the faade of the historic building.

Constraints

3 stories

ConstraintsConstraints


The Penn Mutual Tower is delicately placed among its historic neighbors in downtown Philadelphia. Onthe site of the old Pennsylvania Fire Insurance Company, the tower fronts Independence Park, adjacent to one of the most historic buildings in the country, Independence Hall. The four-story, Egyptian revival faade of the old insurance building is preserved to create a free standing screen at the towers entry which visitors must pass around. The historic faade provides not only a contrast to the glass tower but a scale that respects Independence Hall. The fenestration structure of the tower mimics the proportions of the preserved facade.

Documents

Tall Building in Historic Centers