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

51BC03CC-8E4F-4835-BFCB-B8B6091C6238.jpeg
C9E4F405-76DA-4984-A567-56983E15FD63.jpeg
24F2F063-F2BB-4D15-8EF8-A95DEB3FDFFB.jpeg
0C486503-D8A4-4628-9887-FAB9E24B81AE.jpeg
 
FWIW I spoke with the concierge this morning to work out logistics for my MIL's stay and when I asked about the boarded windows he said serious issues with the glass manufacturer are in the process of being corrected. Could this be another Hancock-like issue? Is what we see just the beginning?
 
citylover94 said:
I would assume the manufacturer is just slow. The Hancock wasn't a glass manufacturing issue it was an architectural design issue.
Click to expand...
I would tend to agree here. But it's been MONTHS. Also very odd that they still haven't finished the exterior of the building on the ground level.
 
citylover94 said:
I would assume the manufacturer is just slow. The Hancock wasn't a glass manufacturing issue it was an architectural design issue.
Click to expand...
Citylover -- actually more of a structural engineering framework dynamics -- outer envelop incompatibility
issue

Anyway -- it was all about how a cleverly designed tower changed dimensions too much for the design of the windows and the mullions which support them -- when the tower stretched -- the windows fell out under certain other conditions

Solution was mostly to remake the glass panels out of solid glass instead of insulating glass with an air space -- much stiffer panels -- much less flex -- Voi la - no falling panels
 
My father said the original Hancock Glass was more shinier/mirror-y than the stuff that's on it now.
 
10ish years ago I was at the Stuart and Clarendon corner when one of the windows on the fifth or so floors cracked like the safety glass of a car windshield. No shards dropped but a small rain of glass dust fell to the sidewalk. There had been no obvious cause for it like the vibration of a heavy truck passing by so presumably pressure had been building up and finally gave way? Whatever the cause the Hancock still had a window issue 30+ years after the fix.
 
On Friday, crews were replacing a pane or two of glass where the crane was. Weather was ideal, and the guys told me they are only able to do one pane per day -- and that's when the weather cooperates.

Friday was unique however, because the hoist/window washing rig got stuck on the ground -- AFTER they'd removed the panel. They ended up getting it back up, but the glass wasn't installed.
 
I wonder when the Four Seasons tree will be added to the top to give it some light....hopefully soon!
 
Czervik.Construction said:
Several pages back, I think it was communicated that FS was not going to put a lit up tree at the top.
Click to expand...


Nope. Never more than a remote possibility.
In stodgy Boston, deep down, you all knew this.

Further, should we ever build anything that eclipses the JHT,
past is prologue: You can be sure it will be very dark up near the top.
 
Last edited:
indeed. and the reason i was given via instagram (post was deleted shortly after) was that they couldn't figure out a way to do it in a way that wouldn't be obtrussive to residents of upper floors (which is absolute B.S.)
 
chrisbrat said:
indeed. and the reason i was given via instagram (post was deleted shortly after) was that they couldn't figure out a way to do it in a way that wouldn't be obtrussive to residents of upper floors (which is absolute B.S.)
Click to expand...

Since the only ulterior motive here would be impacts to the high-rollers at the top, then I have no reason to doubt them when they actually admit it.
 
given the hundreds of luxury residential towers across the globe with far brighter and more prominent cowns (and closer to hightest habitable floors, as well) than the subtle, lit-up small four seasons tree logo that was in all the renders, i think it's beyond a safe bet to say that there are approaches to applying that signage to 1 dalton in ways that wouldn't have impacted the interiors of the upper-floors. they were very reluctant to reply to the question in the first place, immediately removed the response, and have since said nothing publically about why the lit-up logo idea was abandoned. i take all of that as pretty compelling suggestive "evidence" that they simply cheaped out and decided not to do it. given the 9-plus months of plywood windows, would you truly be surprised that they effed-up this signage detail?

before anyone tosses out some variant of, "do you REALLY think the developers of such a luxe project would cheap out on some final detail like that?" i submit to you the still-incomplete (and never to be completed) roof of boston's "other" luxury residential tower. as with 1 dalton, millenium tower promised one thing, which was approved, and delivered slightly less. in both cases, i'd think the failure to deliver would be actionable and hopefully boston nuts up and takes both 1 dalton and MT to task.
 
Last edited:
But how would the high area's of the mechanical screen at MT or 1000 Boylston be closed off? Aren't they designed to function as a fence, to hide the HVAC equipment, w/ the whole smash to remain open to allow the window washing boom to have maximum maneuverability and functionality? Did you ever wonder if the roof shown in the renders is just an illustration for public consumption.
 
ok -- in that case, why is MT an anomoly on the skyline? i've flown over the city countless times and based on your posts i'd wager you have, as well. every other skyscraper in town manages to have an actual roof and not, as you accurately describe MT's situation, a "fence."
 
Brad Plaid said:
10ish years ago I was at the Stuart and Clarendon corner when one of the windows on the fifth or so floors cracked like the safety glass of a car windshield. No shards dropped but a small rain of glass dust fell to the sidewalk. There had been no obvious cause for it like the vibration of a heavy truck passing by so presumably pressure had been building up and finally gave way? Whatever the cause the Hancock still had a window issue 30+ years after the fix.
Click to expand...
Brad -- Building formerly known as the John Hancock Tower aka 200 Clarendon -- despite adding a bunch more structural steel about 40 years ago --still twists slightly in the wind. When it twists first one way and then relaxes the other way -- torsional pendulum style -- it alternatively gets taller and shorter by a bit
This not a problem for the structural steel or the aluminum mullions holding the windows -- but the glass [not so good in compression] even with some rubber surrounding it -- can get stressed fairly severely. Then if you have a significant change in pressure such as when a front passes -- there can be too much stress for the glass -- and some panes still have to be replaced.

However, nothing like the "Bad/Good" old days -- I was living in an MIT dorm right on the River ideally positioned to see the action. I guess I saw about 10 windows -- just launch from the tower and head on down -- apparently to crash in Copley Square.

content

All that caused in the excess of caution the recladding of the building as the Plywood Skyscraper.

Meanwhile the original structural model was studied in the MIT Wright Bros. Wind Tunnel and lots of computing was applied until the "Mostly" Fix was identified and implemented
 
Last edited:
A roof to the tippity top/maximum geometrical extents of the fence, no.
i don't believe [quite that type of thing] was planned. But a purposeful roof and fence to accommodate the HVAC fans & boom system is there.
Compare to 33 Arch.

Google Earth

earth.google.com earth.google.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top