Four Seasons Tower @ CSC | 1 Dalton Street | Back Bay

DZH22 said:
Clearly you have never heard of the Waterview Tower in Chicago. This was a supertall that was put on hold after about 30 stories were poured, and then was eventually finished at about 60% of its original height, with a different design to boot.

If the economy falls off a cliff tomorrow and investors start pulling out, then we don't have this tower. I'm not ready to exhale just yet. You should know by now not to be overconfident when it comes to big towers in Boston. It's not a sure thing until it's DONE.
Click to expand...

I am familiar with it and yes theres always that slim chance, but you can slim chance anything in the world. We could get nuked mid message that im typing right now and go into ww3. Im just saying as it stands now, and with the economy doing well, with this tower moving along on track, theres a MAJOR possibility that this gets built to spec and a lot of people are like "wow where did that come from". For a tower of this size its gotten way less publicity than much smaller projects have so I'm just saying a lot of people are about to be shocked.... in a good way.

I gauge a decent amount of how much people are up to date on certain developments going by whether my dad knows about it or not. He works for a huge company that waterproofs the "bathtubs" before the towers go up and then the floors above that after. If he hadn't known about this until I told him what that "green lit up crane" is about to be then your average joe DEFINITELY doesn't either.
 
Rover said:
A few of them probably have the public's best interests at heart. Unfortunately for the vast majority its all about power and has nothing to do with what's good for the city. The problem is any time a project is needlessly delayed 10 years in order to chop 5 stories off of the original proposal, the city is pissing away all that potential tax revenue. Now add that up amongst a dozen projects and how much money is lost? Hundreds of millions? Maybe more? That opportunity cost analysis is what tends to get lost in all of this - money that could be used on anything from parks to police to schools to transportation.
Click to expand...

Fantastic again! Thise belongs on the LetBostonRise.com site. And that's exactly what this ends up being about. Chopping off as many floors as possible – every time – every project.
 
I think it's mostly safe once it's topped out, though. I have never heard of NIMBYs advocating for the demolition of a building mostly because they are against change.

If it was it would get record for tallest demolished building.
 
odurandina said:
Fantastic again! Thise belongs on the LetBostonRise.com site. And that's exactly what this ends up being about. Chopping off as many floors as possible – every time – every project.
Click to expand...



^ Dina do u kno who came up with let Boston rise... who's behind it pushing this forward? Who's side are they on and do u think theres ulterior motives.. which is always a risk.

Hubman said:
I think it's mostly safe once it's topped out, though. I have never heard of NIMBYs advocating for the demolition of a building mostly because they are against change.

If it was it would get record for tallest demolished building.
Click to expand...

This is something we definitely dont need to worry about at all in any way shape or form.




Mods if this starts getting too off track feel free to move it wherever you see fit.
 
Rover said:
No, I'm saying generally NIMBY's are scummy morons who sue projects to make up for a lack of companionship in their lives to get their names in the paper. This is aided of course by the lazy and talentless reporters of the Globe, who will frame every story as brave citizens standing up against blah blah blah.

However, NIMBY's have been playing the game for years and they know how it works.

So, the "faceless developers angle". Doesn't work against the Christian Scientists. Also that church is part of the fabric of the city as its their headquarters. Its not like suing the Moonies.

Getting free and favorable press from the Globe? Not going to happen in this case for the same reasons. Grandstanding politicians? Far easier villains to grandstand against.

So, faced with all this, what did NIMBY's do? Why, they kept quiet of course, instead of standing on their alleged principles. I'm sure this thing going up is killing squirrely Shirley K and the rest of the trolls, but they know how to pick and choose their battles. Its kinda like how they rarely went to the mat against a project Menino really wanted, or ignored the blatant violation that is the IMAX theatre even though by right that project should STILL be litigation.

NIMBY's are not normal people. They have no principles. But, they realize when opposition to a project will deny them the one thing they crave the most - positive press. Hence, why this project has sailed through despite being the tallest building constructed since the early 70's.
Click to expand...

Yeah...you YIMBYs are not much better or different.

Hubman said:
People over-villafy NIMBYs. Not all of them are bad people. Some are just misguided or scared. And it's not OK to make sweeping generalazations that all of them are assholes who should go to hell.
Click to expand...
+1
 
We use and abuse words on here. Misguided activists and NIMBYs are not necessarily the same people.

NIMBYs are those acting with their own self interest in mind; they may masquerade as activists for the greater good, but it's important to distinguish the two phenomena as differing (potentially overlapping, potentially not).

When an activist's activism just oh-so-happens to align with considerations of their property value, or their desire to constrain housing supply to keep their value high/rent potential high, then they are a NIMBY.

But sometimes an activist is just an activist, with no personal net worth at stake.

The latter is usually less potent. And my hypothesis is that One Dalton encountered less resistance because there were fewer opponents of the NIMBY variety. Very few, if any, peoples' property values are detrimented by One Dalton
 
Hubman said:
Very good point. Why don't you attend some of the BRA meetings and voice those opinions?
Click to expand...

I'm in my mid-40's with two year old twin boys. If I remember to put pants on before I leave the house its a good day. Not a lot of time for anything else. ;)

Regarding NIMBY's opposing all height, yes they do and its for a very good reason. There's one central arguments they make again and again to oppose projects (and keep their influence) which is the "manhattanization" of Boston. Thus every project must be scaled down to prevent this straw man argument. Why? Because what happens if a tall building is built, and Boston DOESN'T turn into Manhattan? Well, then NIMBY's look like idiots and 40 years of fear mongering just went down the drain. The more buildings that get built at or above 700 ft, the less influence they have to drive the conversation.

They left the Dalton St project alone for a huge reason - they had no hope of winning and the public would have turned on them. That in turn would make NIMBY's look impotent. Its similar to MT rising 685 feet above DTX with shadows and all over the Common. Why wasn't that in court? Because not only did Menino want it but because the public was so sick of looking at a giant hole in the middle of downtown for almost a decade these citizens groups knew they'd be vilified if they held it up.

Seeing NIMBY motivations through this prism, you can now understand their vociferous opposition to another project - Winthrop Square. If that one goes up at 700+ then they've really lost the game.
 
Hubman said:
I think it's mostly safe once it's topped out, though. I have never heard of NIMBYs advocating for the demolition of a building mostly because they are against change.

If it was it would get record for tallest demolished building.
Click to expand...

Look right across the Charles:

https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2015/05/20/middlesex/K5N3YJfxc3DZwjaoTj4CEL/story.html




Neighbors who sued to cut Cambridge tower’s height lose in court
By Casey Ross Globe Correspondent May 20, 2015


A $250 million redevelopment plan for the former Middlesex County Courthouse in Cambridge cleared a major legal hurdle when a judge rejected claims by neighborhood opponents of the project.

Massachusetts Land Court Judge Robert Foster ruled late Tuesday that the developer, Leggat McCall Properties, has the right to preserve the building’s 280-foot height as part of a renovation that would add office space, retail stores, and residences.

A group of neighboring property owners, including architect Graham Gund, had argued that the state’s sale of the building to a private owner extinguished an exemption that allowed the building to be significantly taller than surrounding properties. They want to see the building demolished or substantially reduced in size.

Mark Bobrowski, a lawyer for the neighbors, said his clients intend to appeal the ruling.
 
trying to sue to cut a tower's height that's already up. so....... what cognitive function leads to this level and self-indulgence and intolerance toward organized civilization?
 
not that i'm on board with the silly neighborhood opponents of an already existing "tower," but that building sure is fugly.
 
bigpicture7 said:
We use and abuse words on here. Misguided activists and NIMBYs are not necessarily the same people.

NIMBYs are those acting with their own self interest in mind; they may masquerade as activists for the greater good, but it's important to distinguish the two phenomena as differing (potentially overlapping, potentially not).

When an activist's activism just oh-so-happens to align with considerations of their property value, or their desire to constrain housing supply to keep their value high/rent potential high, then they are a NIMBY.

But sometimes an activist is just an activist, with no personal net worth at stake.

The latter is usually less potent. And my hypothesis is that One Dalton encountered less resistance because there were fewer opponents of the NIMBY variety. Very few, if any, peoples' property values are detrimented by One Dalton
Click to expand...

Totally agree there's a difference between pure NIMBYs, and activists who are working to, say, boost affordable housing or improve the waterfront. The latter will ask a lot of a project but are generally open to a deal. And they're not necessarily misguided.
There's also a third - often even more influential - group we're forgetting in all this NIMBY-bashing: Rival developers. They know how to hide their hand but if you're going to build a tower that blocks their tower's view, some of them will knife your ass.
 
DZH22 said:
Crane from the weekend. Actual pics coming momentarily.

IMG_6038 by David Z, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Are they projecting that under armor logo onto the tower or is that a reflection?

Theyve been projecting onto the ESB in NY and Burj Khalifa in Dubai, and if we are on the train now that would be pretty cool.

RTX1MPC5-layout-comp.jpg


obscura-project-change-empire-state-building-designboom-03-818x389.jpg


If not who knows maybe well get this at some point in the future. We did get that art piece on the Hancock for a while...too long in my opinion, but we've shown we're willing to try some new things. The Pru is the beacon of Boston so it would make sense if they were to do this that it goes there.


Anyways thats off topic. This concrete looks to be very high quality to my unprofessional eye, also looks pretty close to finishing the podium too which is when this thing will really take off. One part is 4 floors so that part is done, the other half goes to 6 so 2 more floors to go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top