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

From the construction website:

Bedrock is 150 feet below surface. Which is why it has to be a special building with a special sales pricepoint to justify the economics of constructing it. (Ink Block is all filled harbor land, so there likely is a trade-off between additional height and additional cost of the foundation.)
 
stellarfun said:
From the construction website:

Bedrock is 150 feet below surface. Which is why it has to be a special building with a special sales pricepoint to justify the economics of constructing it. (Ink Block is all filled harbor land, so there likely is a trade-off between additional height and additional cost of the foundation.)
Click to expand...

Yes, but to the Ink Block comment, 345 Harrison, directly across the street from Ink Block, is going to 14-15 stories. So that developer is doing different math on the cost/benefit.
 
JeffDowntown said:
Yes, but to the Ink Block comment, 345 Harrison, directly across the street from Ink Block, is going to 14-15 stories. So that developer is doing different math on the cost/benefit.
Click to expand...

In 1880, Harrison Ave was the dividing line between the harbor and Boston proper.

1880_Boston_railroads_map.jpg



1583045_8.jpg


IMG0044-1.jpg


^^^^ This is what happens when you build on once-submerged lands, and liquefaction takes place.
 
stellarfun said:
In 1880, Harrison Ave was the dividing line between the harbor and Boston proper.

1880_Boston_railroads_map.jpg



1583045_8.jpg


IMG0044-1.jpg


^^^^ This is what happens when you build on once-submerged lands, and liquefaction takes place.
Click to expand...

All of Harrison, both sides, is fill land. Harrison Avenue (then Front Street -- the east side was waterfront) was created by the Front Street Corporation in 1806-1807 to provide a second route from downtown to the new South Boston Bridge (Now West 4th Street Bridge). Further land in the area was filled by the South Cove Corporation in the 1830's. You need to dig back earlier to find all the fill lands in Boston.

The only "land" in that section of the South End was the Boston Neck, Washington Street, which was only a few meters wide.

That liquification earthquake hazard you are highlighting applies to about 60% of central Boston, including all of Back Bay, most of the South End, Bay Village, the Beacon Hill Flats, the Bullfinch Triangle, most of the downtown waterfront, the entire Seaport District, the South Cove, South Bay...... It is not unique to the Ink Block.
 
Last edited:
Downburst said:
So:

I think this one may measure to 755'.

I was browsing the FAA site for obstruction evaluations/approvals and came across this:
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/searchAction.jsp?action=displayOECase&oeCaseID=206595300&row=2

I can't think of any other development that this could be.

Say hello to our new second tallest?
Click to expand...

"Description of Location: Belvidere St./Dalton St. in Boston, MA."
It's definitely this. I saw it listed as 750' in the Globe I think. Could wind up being the second tallest. It will look like the Pru's slightly thinner twin in silhouette.
 
If the Pru is 749 according to Wikipedia then this is definitely the new second tallest.
 
Actually, the total height on the FAR page listed this at 779 feet. Well then.
 
type001 said:
Actually, the total height on the FAR page listed this at 779 feet. Well then.
Click to expand...

That figure includes the ground elevation at the base of the tower- in this case, about 24 feet above sea level.
 
The tower will not be 755 feet tall. That height includes the crane used during construction. From the actual FAA determination letter (which is a link in the form which Downburst posted a link to):
This determination does include temporary construction equipment such as cranes, derricks, etc., which may be used during actual construction of the structure. However, this equipment shall not exceed the overall heights as indicated above. Equipment which has a height greater than the studied structure requires separate notice to the FAA.
Click to expand...
 
Does anyone know where I can find the picture of this rendered with the copley tower in this rendering? Someone on this forum made it and I cant find it again.

one-dalton-2.jpg
 
dirtywater said:
The tower will not be 755 feet tall. That height includes the crane used during construction. From the actual FAA determination letter (which is a link in the form which Downburst posted a link to):
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure you're the one who is wrong here. For starters, the crane wouldn't be just 55' above the top of the building. MT's crane is a full 200'+ above the top.

Secondarily, here is another link showing a proposed 100' antenna on top of the structure, bringing it to 856'.
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/searchAction.jsp?action=displayOECase&oeCaseID=206595303&row=6

Cranes are usually a separately proposed case. For example: https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/searchAction.jsp?action=displayOECase&oeCaseID=256466300&row=13

Search the archives and sort by structural height to get a better idea of what's out there.
 
stick n move said:
Does anyone know where I can find the picture of this rendered with the copley tower in this rendering? Someone on this forum made it and I cant find it again.

one-dalton-2.jpg
Click to expand...

Yeah it's on the Archboston facebook page.
 
FWIW...there was a major concrete pour on this project last night. Saw at least 10 cement trucks waiting on the Dalton Street bridge last night and assumed they must have been there for the 30 Dalton Project. Upon further exploration, it became clear they were all proceeding into the 1 Dalton site. Perhaps pouring the slurry wall?
 
DZH22 said:
I'm pretty sure you're the one who is wrong here. For starters, the crane wouldn't be just 55' above the top of the building. MT's crane is a full 200'+ above the top.

Secondarily, here is another link showing a proposed 100' antenna on top of the structure, bringing it to 856'.
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/searchAction.jsp?action=displayOECase&oeCaseID=206595303&row=6

Cranes are usually a separately proposed case. For example: https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/searchAction.jsp?action=displayOECase&oeCaseID=256466300&row=13

Search the archives and sort by structural height to get a better idea of what's out there.
Click to expand...

There are indeed different determinations for cranes and for buildings. I made sure this one was labelled as a building, and not as a crane- I fully believe 755' is accurate.
 
jdrinboston said:
I'm not sure if this has been posted, but there is a construction Website for this project that posts periodic updates and contains a detailed overview of the entire project.

www.1daltonconstruction.com/
Click to expand...

The Construction Management Plan (pdf) at the above link is an interesting read with all sorts of details. From that document, here's the overall construction schedule (as of December 2014):

Phase 1 - Enabling and Foundations - October 2015
Phase 2 - Excavation - February 2016
Phase 3 - Building Erection - Concrete - Vertical Construction - October 2016
Phase 4 - Structure - Façade Installation and Interior Construction - April 2018

So going off of this schedule, the tower should be close to topped out by this time next year!
 
Downburst said:
There are indeed different determinations for cranes and for buildings. I made sure this one was labelled as a building, and not as a crane- I fully believe 755' is accurate.
Click to expand...

Of course, does this number include stuff such as the window washing crane? (which we seemed to accept for the Copley Tower) There's a few things left that could affect the final height.

Are we also saying MT will only be 677' now? The FAA site is a little confusing because it doesn't determine the difference between stuff like antennas vs the actual building height itself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top