Boston Properties Office Tower | 888 Boylston Street | Back Bay

markberra said:
IMG_7942.jpg
[/URL]
Click to expand...

I like this pic above because 888 Boylston, the Millennium Tower and the Hancock are all within view. Both the Millennium and Hancock have substance to them when viewed from afar. 888 bolyston's glass just seems to blend into the sky. The glass is a miss, too mirror like or something....
 
I like this picture because millennium is now towering over boylston. Very happy this tower is so prominent from so many important locations in the city.
 
For everyone who complains about not having a "crown". HERE is one that actually has purpose.

Lets bring the rhetoric down a bit. We all know that all building are too short, they all lack the charm of everything built in the past, there is not enough street level activity.

Lets just see. Let them finish this off and then we will all have a field trip and walk the streets and then we can shake our fists into the air.

In the end, someone invested a great deal of money to improve our cityscape. Lets give it a chance shall we?

cca
 
cca said:
For everyone who complains about not having a "crown". HERE is one that actually has purpose.
Click to expand...

How do I say this? I'm one of those people who complain about not having a crown. I'm fine with the crown on this "tower" because let's face it, this "tower" is too short for any ornate crown to be noticeable and for it to be aesthetically proportional. I only wish that this "tower" would either be taller or if it has to be short, have setbacks similar to the Mandarin to break up the monotony that is the straight up glass wall. In terms of design, the most redeeming feature for this building is the V shaped supports at the base.

I understand that this crown is more function over form; that being said, I'm still going to complain about not having a crown (in other projects, not this one) because a crown should be well-designed, well-proportioned, and aesthetically pleasing, and this crown doesn't fulfill it.
 
Last edited:
I also don't think a very short tower should have an over the top crown. Crowns are for standing above everything else around it and being recognized. For being a capstone piece on an iconic building. Shorter buildings should compliment the taller towers that have crowns. The old Hancock is an exception, and it works in a few places, but for the most part shorter buildings should be inoffensive and not take away from their taller neighbors.


Theres a right way. Also the times square has quite a few crowns, but they work together in harmony and are all taller than their neighbors, and they are in their own little nook of the city.
Empire_State_Building_from_the_Top_of_the_Rock.jpg


And a wrong way
Cityscape-Dubai-Panorama.jpg



The Burj Khalifa is a beautiful iconic tower, an all time great, but it is surrounded by some of the worst architecture that man kind has ever created and in effect has one of the worst skylines of all time. That being said our skyline is much better and this 1 building is not going to ruin it. Were gonna be fine, just would have been better to not let this one slip through, but well survive.
 
Last edited:
Not everything can or should shout. This building is solid ... if whispering. The previous poster is right. We do not ever want to dream of our city taking on a Dubai like skyline.

Be ok with the projects that are ok. It is what makes the fabric of the city.

cca
 
I'm ok with projects that are ok (such as Avalon North Station). 888 Boylston is borderline and 40 Dalton is definitely not ok.
 
Form follows function should never be used to justify bad architecture.

let alone be so bad that it ruins the neighborhood.
 
Ruins the neighborhood...come on.
 
AmericanFolkLegend said:
+1. I went to Dubai for my honeymoon and the skyline looks like something a 13 year old would draw if you said, "Draw me a skyline from 100 years in the future."
Click to expand...

Lived there for a couple of years in my 20s.

I'd modify that to say "something a 13 year old in approximately 1992 would draw if you said 'draw me a skyline from 100 years in the future"
 
From what I can see that circular blvd road around the Burj is coming along really nice I just think its way too late at this point. I think they kind of figured it out now but they built so fast when they didnt know what they were doing that its ruined forever. It looks like 90% of the city is jersey barriered off high ways surrounded by parking garages. Its insane because you literally can do anything with the blank slate they had. You could take all of the best elements of every city, the best street life, architecture and made an incredible city. Instead they just wanted it built yeaterday and to get there cut basically every single corner to get there.
 
Would Dubai have ever had a great street life with its conservative laws and extreme temperatures? I don't think its city planning is entirely to blame.
 
FenwayResident said:
Would Dubai have ever had a great street life with its conservative laws and extreme temperatures? I don't think its city planning is entirely to blame.
Click to expand...

Dubai's older sections are dense, urban, and vibrant.
 
When Etaly opens you can be sure there will be plenty of pureed songbird on the menu
 
I feel like lately a lot of developers have dubai syndrome. Everybody is trying to be the star of the show. Compliment the taller neighbors dont try to overpower them with gimmicks. I get it you need to stand out to attract investors/tennants but god damn. This aint it. This building literally is a turd burgler. Its a turd and its trying to steal the shine from everybody else. Whatever it still has a decent ground level so well survive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top