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

EdMc said:
I like how the architects added some cutouts at the top sides of the tower instead of a 'hat' to end the high rise. Nifty.
Click to expand...

Those cutouts are no doubt balconies for those top floors. I definitely like the look as well!
 
I am not sure if it is shock or that we are simply underestimating it, but this tower is truly amazing. In any city, this would be a standout building.
 
What a fantastic looking building. It's so great to finally see a top-level design coming to the city.

As others have mentioned, there's no way this is only 700 ft. This is nearly as tall as the Pru.
 
Last edited:
DZH22 said:
I think Harbor Towers, followed by Longfellow Towers. Are either of the original Millennium Place towers all residential? Because then that would top the list.
Click to expand...

One of them is. Whatever one doesn't have the Ritz hotel in the lower floors. I think it's Millennium Place I.
 
I'm looking forward to see where this one pops up looking from the west. I love the pru over comm ave and the Hancock over the pike.

Likewise, it would be cool if it got a transmission tower similar to the Hancock. I'm a big fan of a red blinky on top of standout towers like this.
 
Last edited:
Pretty cool that Boston becomes one of only 5 or so cities in the world with 2 Four Season hotels along with world class destinations such as London, Istanbul, Shanghai, LA and Chicago. Now how about a St. Regis or Peninsula?
 
Re: Christian Science Church Center Renovation/ New Towers

Jason said:
I think St Germain is entirely owned by the Christian Science church.
Click to expand...

Actually, all apartments on St. Germain Street are owned and managed by The Abbey Group. Abbey redeveloped Landmark Center 15 years ago, built Landmark Square Apartments (75 Peterborough St), and is currently constructing The Viridian tower(s) in Fenway. I wrote a blog about Viridian that will be published tomorrow--I'll share the link when it goes live.
 
Re: Christian Science Church Center Renovation/ New Towers

dshoost88 said:
Actually, all apartments on St. Germain Street are owned and managed by The Abbey Group. Abbey redeveloped Landmark Center 15 years ago, built Landmark Square Apartments (75 Peterborough St), and is currently constructing The Viridian tower(s) in Fenway. I wrote a blog about Viridian that will be published tomorrow--I'll share the link when it goes live.
Click to expand...

45 Provence, while not in the Fenway of course, is also an Abbey Group development.
 
Re: Christian Science Church Center Renovation/ New Towers

dshoost88 said:
Actually, all apartments on St. Germain Street are owned and managed by The Abbey Group. Abbey redeveloped Landmark Center 15 years ago, built Landmark Square Apartments (75 Peterborough St), and is currently constructing The Viridian tower(s) in Fenway. I wrote a blog about Viridian that will be published tomorrow--I'll share the link when it goes live.
Click to expand...

Actually, #50 & #52 are privately owned.
 
It is about time we saw something tall, slim and elegant. Hopefully, this project will pave the way for similar projects by showing the NIMBY's that tall and slim is better than complaining about height resulting in another 35 storey, wide stump.
 
^Czervik: I share your sentiment but at this point, as obnoxious as anti height and density opponents are, they are not the most formidable barriers to skyline altering, city changing projects.

Boston's strict insistence on the high spine planning concept to dictate height really means that this project will be the most high profile addition to the skyline for years to come. And thank goodness we have the Copley Place project to look forward to, because where else will a developer be able to built a similarly scaled project in the foreseeable future?! It's not that NIMBYs will be able to wield any real influence after this project. It's that Boston has carefully "planned" itself out of the mere possibility of being able to realistically conceive and complete anything else on this scale!

So Congratulations to Carpenter and Co and Henry Cobb for this achievement! (assuming it will be completed, as every Bostonian should have a healthy skepticism about these things.)
 
Actually, in response to my own question, looking at the BRA models, I nominate the freakishly unfortunate Midtown Hotel building to be the next great "Boston tall" development opportunity. I hope that the controlling interest of that property isn't some recluse freak who can't see how painfully attractive his lot is for the alpha-dog developer out there who wants to compete on this level.
 
Besides Copley place we have South Station tower, North Station tower(s) and Winthrop sq to be developed. While you might be right about Back Bay skyline, Boston's has plenty of dev potential.
 
plenty of 60's /70's buildings that can be taken down and redeveloped, Government ctr. garage will be a good start.
 
type001 said:
I am not sure if it is shock or that we are simply underestimating it, but this tower is truly amazing. In any city, this would be a standout building.
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm creeping into the "grumpy old man" phase of life (yes, it awaits you too...) but I am completely baffled by the enthusiasm for both this and the Millennium Tower. Both are perfectly fine--completely inoffensive. But "standout," "amazing" "fantastic"?? I'm not an architect so maybe there's something academically/technically significant about these two buildings that goes over my head and certainly I think the potential for both to animate the street level will be huge (especially Millennium, of course), but aestetically/impact on the skyline/intellectual significance-wise, I doubt anyone would give them a second look in MOST world cities (even US cities).
We get so few opportunities to build something on this scale in Boston, it's unfortunate that when we do, they are so "meh."
 
Tombstoner said:
Maybe I'm creeping into the "grumpy old man" phase of life (yes, it awaits you too...) but I am completely baffled by the enthusiasm for both this and the Millennium Tower. Both are perfectly fine--completely inoffensive. But "standout," "amazing" "fantastic"?? I'm not an architect so maybe there's something academically/technically significant about these two buildings that goes over my head and certainly I think the potential for both to animate the street level will be huge (especially Millennium, of course), but aestetically/impact on the skyline/intellectual significance-wise, I doubt anyone would give them a second look in MOST world cities (even US cities).
We get so few opportunities to build something on this scale in Boston, it's unfortunate that when we do, they are so "meh."
Click to expand...

Tombstoner, I guess I will join you in the old foggy ranks. Happy both these buildings are rising, don't see them as diminishment's of neighborhood or skyline, each modestly handsome in its own way (perhaps for their restraint), but to me they both feel, well, a little dated. I'm not an architect either, T, so maybe I miss something as well. We are so eager on this forum to trash and whine about a building's failings and I have no desire to add to that chorus. (Though I am guilty of it once or twice in the past.) As refined as it may be, I was hoping for more than another glass stalk from Henry Cobb.
 
awood91 said:
Actually, in response to my own question, looking at the BRA models, I nominate the freakishly unfortunate Midtown Hotel building to be the next great "Boston tall" development opportunity. I hope that the controlling interest of that property isn't some recluse freak who can't see how painfully attractive his lot is for the alpha-dog developer out there who wants to compete on this level.
Click to expand...

Actually the Midtown Hotel site is capped at 12 floors, I believe, in the Christian Science Center Master Plan (site is owned by the Church). It has been that way for decades, to allow step down to the St. Botolph and South End neighborhoods.
 
nm88 said:
...each modestly handsome in its own way (perhaps for their restraint), but to me they both feel, well, a little dated.
Click to expand...

This is exactly how I feel. I don't see "amazing design!!!" here one bit, though by no means do I think it's ugly--it's pleasant in an early '80s sort of way. The Millennium Tower I think is perhaps a bit better because of the angles/ripples but it's more or less the same thing: a big, anonymous glass tower that would look as much at home in Houston as it would here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top