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

[EdMc]

Eye-opening comments from developer Richard Friedman from batesrealestatereport.com dated March 7, 2014:

Asked what makes the project viable now, Friedman immediately discussed the interest foreigners have in the city. “It’s mind blowing how much people are excited about Boston,” he said, and then recounted meetings with the investors from the Middle East, Turkey, and the United Kingdom all of who were anxious to invest in Boston. Friedman said that he also met with China’s largest construction company and they are preparing to invest “billions and billions of dollars” in San Francisco, New York and Boston. He added, “The world is in lots of turmoil and people want to invest in cities and countries where they think there is a great future and Boston has become one of those places.”

Friedman also provided some economic insights to the Dalton Street project, explaining that big hotels are generally uneconomical to build in the short-term, but good long-term holds. He said, ”A five star hotel today will cost more or less a million dollars a key.” As a result of the immense cost of building a hotel, developers typically subsidize the project by selling luxury condominiums at the site and use the profits from condominium sales to help cover the cost of the hotel development. How expensive will the 160 condominiums be at One Dalton? “We are going to build a project that which will be priced at a higher level than anything that has ever been built in the city,” Friedman said.

 

[type001]

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 specifically as it may be, I was hoping for more than another glass stalk from Henry Cobb.

This building is truly unique in the mere fact that it is triangular, with nice rounded corners to add. It looks as if it is meant to have a presence similar to JHT where it is towering over a neighborhood with the option to either be seen or ignored. One could argue that it is truly iconic or not iconic at all. The subtle balconies on the upper floors add the right amount of detail without detracting from the vertical lines that accentuate the height. This is exactly what should be in that neighborhood. This tower is truly Boston, and specifically the Back Bay.

 

[Suffolk 83]

I think there's a triangular building with rounded corners in chinatown that would argue about this being unique... and that building sucks. I think this works because overall: there arent too many plain glass towers in boston, but after this and filenes we might be at our plain glass tower threshold.

 

[fattony]

I think there's a triangular building with rounded corners in chinatown that would argue about this being unique... and that building sucks. I think this works because overall: there arent too many plain glass towers in boston, but after this and filenes we might be at our plain glass tower threshold.

And what is your brick threshold? Or limestone? We wouldn't have a city if we only tolerated a small amount of each building material. Would you have us stop at a couple dozen buildings for the sake of each being a unique snowflake?

And I wouldn't call the Radian triangular at all. It is a pie slice. This is an equilateral triangle. Not to mention that they are not in same league. Nor same part of town. I don't think we'll be totally burnt out on triangles once The Point comes up in Fenway either. Variety is the spice of life, man, and there aren't too many building shapes to choose from. Most have 4 corners, some have 3. Heaven forbid, some have none at all...

 

[Equilibria]

And what is your brick threshold? Or limestone? We wouldn't have a city if we only tolerated a small amount of each building material. Would you have us stop at a couple dozen buildings for the sake of each being a unique snowflake?

Well, when you're building the first 700'+ building in the city in 40 years, I'd hope the standards for uniqueness are a bit higher. That said, I think this building looks lovely. I wouldn't want some crazy La Defense thing just for the sake of being different.

 

[fattony]

I wouldn't want some crazy La Defense thing just for the sake of being different.

Amen. Boston is handsome and reserved. I'll take an elegant but "boring" tower over a garish "inspired" one any day.

 

[type001]

^+1!

 

[gravedigger4444]

Is 699' the absolute height or will the mechanical penthouse put it over 700'? I think I saw somewhere 691' plus mechanical penthouse...

 

[fattony]

Is 699' the absolute height or will the mechanical penthouse put it over 700'? I think I saw somewhere 691' plus mechanical penthouse...

I think the consensus above was 699 + mechanical penthouse. The increase from 691 to 699 is within the allowed margin of change without needing approval.

From the renderings, the mechanicals are disguised by the curtain wall, so this will have substantial architectural elements surpassing 700 feet.

 

[JeffDowntown]

I think the consensus above was 699 + mechanical penthouse. The increase from 691 to 699 is within the allowed margin of change without needing approval.

From the renderings, the mechanicals are disguised by the curtain wall, so this will have substantial architectural elements surpassing 700 feet.

Very cool and well placed in the skyline!

 

[Arch101]

Anyone hear anything about who's going to build this? Suffolk? Turner?

 

[kz1000ps]

Would bids have been put out yet if they're planning on starting "by the end of the year"?

 

[nm88]

This building is truly unique in the mere fact that it is triangular, with nice rounded corners to add. It looks as if it is meant to have a presence similar to JHT where it is towering over a neighborhood with the option to either be seen or ignored. One could argue that it is truly iconic or not iconic at all. The subtle balconies on the upper floors add the right amount of detail without detracting from the vertical lines that accentuate the height. This is exactly what should be in that neighborhood. This tower is truly Boston, and specifically the Back Bay.

Type0001, all good points. I also agree with Fattony, I'll take restrained any day. I have no doubt both will become landmarks that we all come to love, no matter the result; we've come to accept and even praise far less deserving examples in our city. I hope the quality of glass used in both buildings live up to our hopes.

 

[AmericanFolkLegend]

Would bids have been put out yet if they're planning on starting "by the end of the year"?

They've probably already got a GC on board during design phase to keep things within budget. 95% of the time the GC who helps with the design ends up getting the job.

 

[Tombstoner]

God save us from Paris and all that gaudy architecture!*
Let's pray that Boston remains the bastion of restrained (well...comatose) architecture that doesn't call attention to itself.

*and buttery croissants, rich cream sauces, and the Metro (which, let's face it, is a pale imitation of the T).

 

[Equilibria]

God save us from Paris and all that gaudy architecture!*
Let's pray that Boston remains the bastion of restrained (well...comatose) architecture that doesn't call attention to itself.

*and buttery croissants, rich cream sauces, and the Metro (which, let's face it, is a pale imitation of the T).

Paris is beautiful. La Defense is a fine contrast with contemporary buildings, but some of the towers proposed in the last ten years are simply hideous. Fortunately the Euro crisis seems to have killed the really hideous ones for now.

I know you're joking, and I know that architecture is one of those things you can't really critique online (like music, and airline liveries...) because everyone has such an emotional reaction to things. There is, however, nothing comatose about this building - it simply looks nice. I will never understand how people can be so averse to things that look nice, endlessly seeking garish experiments in the hope that one in a hundred actually works.

The people of Paris, by the way, love experimental architecture so much that they made all their buildings look the same and imposed strict height limits on the city when a single modernist high-rise was built over their objections, so I don't think they're the best example for you. Their croissants, however, are indeed incomparably good.

 

[statler]

I think Barcelona might have been a better pick.

 

[Equilibria]

I think Barcelona might have been a better pick.

Yes, well their gaudi architecture I like...

 

[Tombstoner]

I think Barcelona might have been a better pick.

 

[AmericanFolkLegend]

I will never understand how people can be so averse to things that look nice, endlessly seeking garish experiments in the hope that one in a hundred actually works.

+1