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

I know there was some discussion a few pages back about the first few floors taking a couple of months but it still seems to be moving a bit slower than anticipated. Or am I making that up?
 
BosDevelop said:
I know there was some discussion a few pages back about the first few floors taking a couple of months but it still seems to be moving a bit slower than anticipated. Or am I making that up?
Click to expand...

The base is comprised of 6 floors. I am guessing this will start accelerating substantially around the 7th/8th floor. However, you are completely right in that we are basically looking at 1 floor every 4 weeks. It was barely into the 5th floor when I took the above pictures last week. It has been almost unbearably slow when you consider it's the only remotely tall building to start going vertical in the last year+, since the Pierce last winter which is only half the height.
 
the base, which is comprised of the first 6 floors, is both wider than the bulk of the actual tower and also comprised of far more/denser concrete. once they get to the 7th floor, it should start going up in roughly the same manner -- and at roughly the same rate -- as the tower portion of MT did two years ago.
 
For reference on the six story base, where 2,3,4 are widest, then 5 and 6 come in on one side.

6598e887-207d-40e5-a3a8-24d779eff402
 
Hmm. Didn't notice that in any of the renderings. Cool, though, and makes it look better from street level.
 
Cell phone pic from tonight. 5 full floors have been poured, and it looks like 2 out of the 3 setbacks were after the 4th. You can see one setback on the left and the other is the corner hidden behind that. The right side will be the same for one more floor then have the last setback on the tower.

Photo1677 by David Z, on Flickr
 
Thanks....

Soon people are going to be saying, "what in the hell is that?".......
 
Just out of pure curiosity and since affordable housing has been a hot topic on another thread, anyone have an idea of what % of Dalton's residential units are slated to be affordable units?
 
chrisbrat said:
zero percent. that's not how projects like this work.
Click to expand...

Well, with city regulations, they have to buy-out the affordable units to fund them off-site. It is not just zero percent.

I have not heard that the developer did that, but assumed that they would. I am also not aware of a target affordable development for the funds. The Walsh administration has tended to want a real development targeted (so the affordable units actually get built), rather than the monies just going into the city affordable housing slush fund.
 
You should be able to see this from Mass Ave coming from the South End really soon. That's exciting.
 
Lol I would love to be the guy who pays 1000 a month for an apartment at the Four Seasons. Affordable housing ftw.
 
^It'd probably be cheaper for them to build them onsite. Their motivations are more they dont want their amazing clientele having to come in contact with the peasants because that would such an injustice.
 
If the units are on-site, will there be a separate entrance, or as in NYC, it is called a "poor door"? This building was all up in the news when it was opened. Note the cheap cladding, too.

http://nypost.com/2016/01/17/poor-door-tenants-reveal-luxury-towers-financial-apartheid/

There are 2 arguments to this: 1. poor tenants are treated as second class citizens with separate entrances and no access to the amenities. 2. there is new, quality made, affordable housing in a prime location where there wasn't any before.

The building in the NY Post article went up in the massive West End vacant lot where Trump once wanted to build a Costco or something next to his buildings on Riverside Drive.
 
^whether an "offset" (e.g., building affordable housing elsewhere) or whether within-building affordable housing is superior is entirely based on execution choices for either option.

If within-building, but made to feel second-class ("poor door," no access to basic shared facilities) then it's no better - or perhaps worse - than an offset option.

But if the "offset" is some out-of-sight/out-of-mind approach...where the offset location has poor transit access, doesn't help integrate /diversify communities, etc, then the offset option sucks too!

So the take away: IMHO, an offset approach can be just fine, IF: the offset affordable housing is thoughtfully planned/located, transit-oriented, great proximity to community assets, doesn't segregate, etc. For example...if a back bay building's affordable housing offset is within back bay and near a transit station, I am not complaining...if it were me seeking the housing personally, I'd rather have that than a poor door.
 
Czervik.Construction said:
If the units are on-site, will there be a separate entrance, or as in NYC, it is called a "poor door"? This building was all up in the news when it was opened. Note the cheap cladding, too.

http://nypost.com/2016/01/17/poor-door-tenants-reveal-luxury-towers-financial-apartheid/

There are 2 arguments to this: 1. poor tenants are treated as second class citizens with separate entrances and no access to the amenities. 2. there is new, quality made, affordable housing in a prime location where there wasn't any before.

The building in the NY Post article went up in the massive West End vacant lot where Trump once wanted to build a Costco or something next to his buildings on Riverside Drive.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't doubt that there would be at least two separate main entrances, one for the hotel lobby, and a separate one for residents, a la the Intercontinental and other similar hotel/residential combo buildings. Don't have the time to look for it now, but I'm sure it would be apparent from the PNF.

I wouldn't think there would be a third entrance just to separate the market units from the affordable units. There would likely only a handful of affordable units, if even that. It wouldn't make sense with only 160 residential units in total.

Millennium is an all-residential tower but has two separate lobbies and entrances, one for the lower floor "city view" condos (generally cheaper) and one for the higher floor "grand view" (or something) residences (upgraded appliances, floors, generally larger, etc., more $$). However, Millennium has ~440 units, so again, may make sense for Millennium, but likely not for 1 Dalton.

Either way, any affordable units at Dalton would definitely be on the lower residential floors. No surprises there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top