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

He is the ultimate and most insecure troll that I have ever witnessed. For whatever reason, he couldn't cut it here and is vehemently bitter.
 
That's very cool. Nice work.

Now if you look at those 4 towers in the Back Bay...if only a super tall could be built right in the middle of all of them. Like 900'-1000'. That would look fantastic.
 
^^^I think a new tallest would go really well right in the middle of the picture, between the 2 skylines. Maybe somewhere on Stuart/Kneeland Street. It would create 1 cohesive skyline. Something along the lines of Key Tower (Cleveland), BOA (Charlotte), 1 Liberty Place (Philadelphia), or The Pinnacle (Guangzhou) would look fantastic.
 
DZH22 said:
^^^I think a new tallest would go really well right in the middle of the picture, between the 2 skylines. Maybe somewhere on Stuart/Kneeland Street. It would create 1 cohesive skyline. Something along the lines of Key Tower (Cleveland), BOA (Charlotte), 1 Liberty Place (Philadelphia), or The Pinnacle (Guangzhou) would look fantastic.
Click to expand...

I lived in Philly for years and loved all of Liberty Place, especially #1.
 
DZH22 said:
^^^I think a new tallest would go really well right in the middle of the picture, between the 2 skylines. Maybe somewhere on Stuart/Kneeland Street. It would create 1 cohesive skyline. Something along the lines of Key Tower (Cleveland), BOA (Charlotte), 1 Liberty Place (Philadelphia), or The Pinnacle (Guangzhou) would look fantastic.
Click to expand...

Probably never going to happen there. The lower rise nature of that section of the skyline is due to one thing only, state law about shadows on the Common and Public Garden.

That is why we have a bimodal skyline.
 
JeffDowntown said:
Probably never going to happen there. The lower rise nature of that section of the skyline is due to one thing only, state law about shadows on the Common and Public Garden.

That is why we have a bimodal skyline.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
The only possibility is to build tall over the pike. That would link the 2 skylines from certain angles.
 
1. That crane will definitely be the highest point hit in Boston history, no?


2. There are two distinct spots in the Bay Village/Theater District that still could be developed into towers (the link :rolleyes:) Here is a snapshot.

1. The Building adjacent to the Charles Playhouse and Milner Hotel, facing both Charles and Warrenton. The lot is large, it seems abandoned. Any info on this?
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3498813,-71.0679748,160a,20y,90h,41.77t/data=!3m1!1e3

2. The parking lot in front of the Coconut Grove facing Stuart Street. This could easily host a skinny tower. The lot is a complete dump.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3490869,-71.0683564,157a,20y,41.77t/data=!3m1!1e3

I see a 500-600 foot tower linking the spine
 
Last edited:
What about a redevelopment of New England School or Law building which is block west of the W hotel?
 
bayvillagebrahmin said:
1. That crane will definitely be the highest point hit in Boston history, no?


2. There are two distinct spots in the Bay Village/Theater District that still could be developed into towers (the link :rolleyes:) Here is a snapshot.

1. The Building adjacent to the Charles Playhouse and Milner Hotel, facing both Charles and Warrenton. The lot is large, it seems abandoned. Any info on this?
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3498813,-71.0679748,160a,20y,90h,41.77t/data=!3m1!1e3

2. The parking lot in front of the Coconut Grove facing Stuart Street. This could easily host a skinny tower. The lot is a complete dump.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3490869,-71.0683564,157a,20y,41.77t/data=!3m1!1e3

I see a 500-600 foot tower linking the spine
Click to expand...

IIRC the limiting factor for those sites would be the laws that restrict new shadows on the common and the public garden. They could be decently tall, but I doubt they would be 600 feet.
 
Yea those parcels will never hold anything remotely tall. Dealing with upset west end residents, harbor towers, back bay...etc is absolutely nothing compared to trying to propose a tower that will shadow the common/public garden. It will not happen. These are public spaces for everybody, it affects everybody- not just a few residents in some corner of the city. Mark my words you will not see anything tall between arlington and tremont street EVER. The tallest you can go would be over the pike which is decades in the future and even then will not be significant.
 
The W is '301 tall. You don't think they could go up to at least 400 in a spot such as this open lot with a mobile office? (adjacent to Charles PH)

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3486191,-71.066322,148a,20y,41.79t/data=!3m1!1e3

It would be blocked by the W for the most part. Seems like the poster above is adamant that nothing will ever touch higher than 300 in this area.

Just bringing it up as a talking point. I'd love to see what the height restriction is for this lot, and lots south towards the pike (pass pike towers, chinatown center, etc).
 
bayvillagebrahmin said:
The W is '301 tall. You don't think they could go up to at least 400 in a spot such as this open lot with a mobile office? (adjacent to Charles PH)

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3486191,-71.066322,148a,20y,41.79t/data=!3m1!1e3

It would be blocked by the W for the most part. Seems like the poster above is adamant that nothing will ever touch higher than 300 in this area.

Just bringing it up as a talking point. I'd love to see what the height restriction is for this lot, and lots south towards the pike (pass pike towers, chinatown center, etc).
Click to expand...

Higher than 300 is definitely possible. You suggested 500-600 before, which is probably too high. Remember millennium is 625. Ultimately you'd need to see how high you could go before you cast a shadow on the common at high noon. So break out the geometry and sun tables.

There is also the bay village neighborhood right next door to that spot, which may or may not care about a big tower right next to their brownstones.
 
Mongo said:
Higher than 300 is definitely possible. You suggested 500-600 before, which is probably too high. Remember millennium is 625. Ultimately you'd need to see how high you could go before you cast a shadow on the common at high noon. So break out the geometry and sun tables.

There is also the bay village neighborhood right next door to that spot, which may or may not care about a big tower right next to their brownstones.
Click to expand...

Exactly my point. There will be no tower that bridges the gap in the skyline between the Hancock and downtown in any significant way....ever. 400' to MAYBE 500 is possible, but nothing significant will ever be built here. Just the way it is. As long as we keep improving our two separate skylines I see no problem with it. Its kind of cool to have two separate completely different skylines.
 
Mongo said:
Higher than 300 is definitely possible. You suggested 500-600 before, which is probably too high. Remember millennium is 625. Ultimately you'd need to see how high you could go before you cast a shadow on the common at high noon. So break out the geometry and sun tables.

There is also the bay village neighborhood right next door to that spot, which may or may not care about a big tower right next to their brownstones.
Click to expand...

Bay Village Neighborhood Association is a cult for sure. This would be quite a hassle, and I still would do it. The city needs a link.
 
stick n move said:
Exactly my point. There will be no tower that bridges the gap in the skyline between the Hancock and downtown in any significant way....ever. 400' to MAYBE 500 is possible, but nothing significant will ever be built here. Just the way it is. As long as we keep improving our two separate skylines I see no problem with it. Its kind of cool to have two separate completely different skylines.
Click to expand...


Stick -- depending on the vantage point there is also a cluster of towers developing in the Congress Street Garage to North Station area

And of course there is the burgeoning lower-top towers in the Seaport / Innovation District

as an aside the ideal spot for a major tower is the 60's era Paul Rudolf disaster of a building known as the Hurley Building on Staniford St.
 
Wondering about the possible effects this and 30 Dalton will have for future dev. In order of feasibility, 3 ideas. First, the intersection between Dalton and Belvidere is a mess for pedestrians already. Perhaps a raised pedestrian crossing? Second, activation of the Belvidere street wall by expanding the Sheraton hotel to meet up with the street. And lastly, how long does the Hilton last before the tear it down and build a 600 foot hotel, 2050?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top