Boston Properties Office Tower | 888 Boylston Street | Back Bay

I think the use of circular tube is part of the issue a similar wrapping is being done on the diagonal structural beams for 181 Fremont in SF but the covering is squared and it seems like it will probably read better. The other issue I think maybe the biggest issue is that by adding that strip in the same material it makes the whole system seem decorative.
 
atlantaden said:
Different strokes for different folks. I really like this building (the glass, the crazy top) and how it meets the street. So unusual, so un-Boston like, which is one of the reasons I really like it, it's so unusual! A quick question, in the planters, are the metallic round objects lights to illuminate the trees?
Click to expand...

Not sure if these renderings from the landscape designer's website are current, but if they are they may be receptacles for light columns:

141206_MYKD_888_Perspective_aerial_final-myk-1440x768.jpg


Gensler_888Tower_v01_Dusk_A05-1440x768.jpg


The website describes the light columns as follows:

Highlighting the wind patterns of the site, a series of stainless steel woven light columns define the plaza. Wind vains rotate on the light columns and signal the intensity of wind with changing color that indicate greater and lesser intensity, turning the plaza into a living wind diagram. All the lighting is powered by wind turbines that define the top of the Prudential Tower and highlight the sustainable nature of this project.
Click to expand...
 
dirtywater said:
Gensler_888Tower_v01_Dusk_A05-1440x768.jpg
Click to expand...

Interestingly, the v-columns in the render (above) do not have the thin white bar atop them as seen currently on-site (BeeLine photo credit):

https://flic.kr/p/HfXNc1

I wonder if we are seeing the final end-state or not...

My complaint was not whether the v-columns actually were structural or not, but that the effect of column wrapping and header bar made them appear fake. If they're not done dressing this up, I will withhold judgement. But it seems like it's not going to match the render (which looks better, IMO).
 
Fair warning -- this is not the most substantive of posts, BUT while kayaking on the Charles yesterday, I was pleasantly surprised by how much I not only didn't dislike this building, but actually kind of liked it. It's "working" with the overall Back Bay skyline in a way I didn't foresee (or at least it was from my vantage point).
 
Damn, not only is the building funky and different, the lighting in the plaza is gonna be fun and eye catching. Lighting that changes color with the wind, how crazy fun is that. I'm so looking forward to seeing how that works in person.

dirtywater, thanks for finding that info on the landscaping and lighting!
 
Last edited:
Definitely one of the most engaging/least boring buildings of the last five years. It creates a sense of place we don't see very often.
 
Tombstoner said:
Definitely one of the most engaging/least boring buildings of the last five years. It creates a sense of place we don't see very often.
Click to expand...

Untitled-thumb-520x350-106138.png


All it's missing is the peace wave generator...
 
Hey! Photo dump time and boy do we have some surprises! Let's start out slow, though. Here's the walk through the Shops:



White wash appears to be complete. Again, red brick along the face of 101 Huntington was also painted over:





888 adds presence from inside the central atrium:


WHAT'S THIS? A new entrance to the office building?? Notice the green wall is carried into the lobby (visible through the revolving door):






Plaza's getting finishing touches and as alluded to earlier, they now have the lighting fixtures. Note, these are gingko trees, so we're not ever going to get much of a canopy here:






Tile work is also wrapping up on what appears to be a dedicated entrance to Eataly on the portion abutting the Hynes:




More architectural detail:


Glass overhang is almost completely installed, but they keep breaking panes:



From the small courtyard behind Sephora:

 
Wow! Great photo walk-through, thanks! Those light posts/wind indicators....they look clear! So as I understand it, there are lights on the top and the posts light up with colors to indicate wind speed? Am I getting that right? That plaza is one crazy space! Love it and hope it all comes together as planned.
 
I can't speak to the functionality of the lighting, but they're definitely see-through. Some sort of metal grate/mesh that makes them feel very lightweight rather than simply tall and imposing.

That's a pretty clever way to keep the lighting in this space dynamic, though I'm not sure if people will get the connection between the colour and wind speed. I only recently learnt about the old Hancock tower's antenna colour and its connection to the weather (forecast) because of a post in the Boston subreddit.
 
We're stuck with it so, i'll express my disappointment 1 last time. i was admonished for calling the 888 glass box the worst building in Boston, and was reminded of several 'worserr-still' examples (like, those apartment towers at 1 Emerson place show just how much bad is still possible). But, given it's location, '888' is a blow. Ok doesn't cut it in the heart of Back Bay so close to BPL, Trinity Church and Copley Sq. i know there are some who think the positives make up for the negatives. But we have enough good designers, and a layered review process that should have seen it's height, a/r, massing, cladding, roof, and how badly it would work with the rest of Back Bay – and forced changes. We shouldn't have to get beaned just to advance a runner to second base. We should be hitting home runs. This is perhaps the most detailed, polished turd since Copley Place. Sad to have something so bad done on such an important Back Bay site.
 
Last edited:
odurandina said:
We're stuck with it so, i'll express my disappointment 1 last time. i was admonished for calling the 888 glass box the worst building in Boston, and was reminded of several 'worserr-still' examples (like, those apartment towers at 1 Emerson place show just how much bad is still possible). But, given it's location, '888' is a blow. Ok doesn't cut it in the heart of Back Bay so close to BPL, Trinity Church and Copley Sq. i know there are some who think the positives make up for the negatives. But we have enough good designers, and a layered review process that should have seen it's height, a/r, massing, cladding, roof, and how badly it would work with the rest of Back Bay – and forced changes. We shouldn't have to get beaned just to advance a runner to second base. We should be hitting home runs. This is perhaps the most detailed, polished turd since Copley Place. Sad to have something so bad done on such an important Back Bay site.
Click to expand...

Every opinion matters, and we are each allowed our thoughts. However, I do remember WAY WAY WAY back when this was revised from the curved glass tower, most board members were quite happy with the new design. I think it's been said before, but street interaction is very important here and in many other "so called" design turds. I ABSOLUTELY despise the design of Parklane Seaport apartments, but I have to admit......the street retail and sidewalk activation is much better than most developments. So, I give it somewhat of a pass.

IMHO, 888 Boylston is light years ahead of most recent Boston development in design, materials, and street activation. That being said, yes, it could have been taller but I think the BCDC and the PruPac groups cut it down quite a bit.
 
i2G6Bf.jpg


Look at this scan from the late 1980's and see what we could have had instead. In my opinion.......not too pretty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top