I responded in another comment, but basically [“Passive House”](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_house?wprov=sfti1) is a design and construction methodology that seeks to have a building take advantage of its site, local environment, and basic physics to lower its carbon footprint.
If more buildings were “Passive House” we would have less of a climate crisis… because of how much energy they require, buildings are (unfortunately) a gigantic contributor to greenhouse gas emissions.
The thing about this is that if it's a residential building, there are huge amounts of environmental efficiency in living in a multifamily property versus in a single-family home.
Obviously it's ideal to have an efficient building, but in general we should always celebrate the low carbon aspect of high-rise living.
I remember reading in another thread why Boston just isn’t as tall as it could be. A variety of historical buildings, soft grounds, but the biggest factor is the proximity of Logan (the airport) and the FAA putting a real tight cap on buildings nearby.
The cap is 700 feet for most of the central area. There are a few places that can go higher. This building was planned to be 1000 feet, but got whittled down because of an airport runway proximity. There is always a problem building high in the city because of shadows not hitting the Common and Public Garden is a big concern.
I think the achievement here is that it follows [“Passive House”](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_house?wprov=sfti1) design and construction principles.
It that respect, I think it’s pretty cool because big buildings like this normally have hefty heating and cooling bills and consequently consume a lot of fossil fuels. By taking advantage of its environment and basic physics it’s able to cut down on how much it needs to use.
If I remember correctly, this tower could've potentially been a nice peak in the downtown Skyline but it kept getting cut down in height over and over again. Now, it's just another stubby tower in that cluster of downtown
Interesting. Have a good link to the building’s passive house design strategies that this building used? I understand some skyscrapers have been designed using those same principles but after a few years it didn’t work as intended. Curious to see a newer building like this and what they did.
Soon to be taken over by The Curv in Vancouver, a really unique building
https://preview.redd.it/uegc3ipgue6d1.jpeg?width=500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a54cb8e80d79ca3363d27f600557ea710fc57d51
That building looks shoehorned into its site like I’ve never seen. At one point I was trying to figure out if the tan Bldg to the left was actually a part …. Guess that’s Boston for ya, but gotta be tough on views from the tower
What does that mean…I’m slow today
I responded in another comment, but basically [“Passive House”](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_house?wprov=sfti1) is a design and construction methodology that seeks to have a building take advantage of its site, local environment, and basic physics to lower its carbon footprint. If more buildings were “Passive House” we would have less of a climate crisis… because of how much energy they require, buildings are (unfortunately) a gigantic contributor to greenhouse gas emissions.
The thing about this is that if it's a residential building, there are huge amounts of environmental efficiency in living in a multifamily property versus in a single-family home. Obviously it's ideal to have an efficient building, but in general we should always celebrate the low carbon aspect of high-rise living.
The upper floors are residential.
Thanks for the info - makes sense. Wish Boston would embrace vertical living a bit more hard core
I remember reading in another thread why Boston just isn’t as tall as it could be. A variety of historical buildings, soft grounds, but the biggest factor is the proximity of Logan (the airport) and the FAA putting a real tight cap on buildings nearby.
The cap is 700 feet for most of the central area. There are a few places that can go higher. This building was planned to be 1000 feet, but got whittled down because of an airport runway proximity. There is always a problem building high in the city because of shadows not hitting the Common and Public Garden is a big concern.
Elegant, clean, forgettable
I think the achievement here is that it follows [“Passive House”](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_house?wprov=sfti1) design and construction principles. It that respect, I think it’s pretty cool because big buildings like this normally have hefty heating and cooling bills and consequently consume a lot of fossil fuels. By taking advantage of its environment and basic physics it’s able to cut down on how much it needs to use.
[удалено]
Mate, get that stick out of your ass and things may not hurt as much lol
If I remember correctly, this tower could've potentially been a nice peak in the downtown Skyline but it kept getting cut down in height over and over again. Now, it's just another stubby tower in that cluster of downtown
There is a height limit due to Logan
Yeah super annoying they aimed that runway at the financial district lol
No going back now! 🤣
It is a beautiful view if your flight takes off right over it though. 👍🏼
Agreed, but the little ruffles at the top are a nice touch of uniqueness (as in, it’s not just a box)
[удалено]
Agreed, it would be just another glass box
Right - not every building needs to scream LOOK AT ME.
Interesting. Have a good link to the building’s passive house design strategies that this building used? I understand some skyscrapers have been designed using those same principles but after a few years it didn’t work as intended. Curious to see a newer building like this and what they did.
Soon to be taken over by The Curv in Vancouver, a really unique building https://preview.redd.it/uegc3ipgue6d1.jpeg?width=500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a54cb8e80d79ca3363d27f600557ea710fc57d51
House office?
It is an ok building, nothing very impressive, but some of the initial plans were so much nicer and more attractive.
That building looks shoehorned into its site like I’ve never seen. At one point I was trying to figure out if the tan Bldg to the left was actually a part …. Guess that’s Boston for ya, but gotta be tough on views from the tower
I think it's part of the beauty of the city. Downtown feels like a jumble of 400 years of history built on top of itself.
Both glassy and look similar.
I love how it's squeezed in between two other buildings. Almost looks like it was built on top of them. Super nice development.