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

Greg, thanks for doing that. Even though I was the one that originally asked if this tower should have a spire or not, I think it looks better without it. And your point about it looking funny being so close to the Pru is probably a good reason to avoid it.

Now let's get this thing built.
 
cgsVoQ6.jpg
 
I recall from the community & approval meetings how the developer touted the triangular layout of this building as a nod to the triangular nature of the Christian Science Center (CSC) site. Even the mother church has a mostly triangular footprint. Initially, I thought a triangular rooftop like citylover94's flickr image would be in line with the triangularity of the whole CSC. But now I'm wondering if that's such a good idea.

The more I think about it the more averse I am to having a solid pyramid atop the triangle--this kept popping to mind:

cyberdyne_systems_wallpaper_l_by_senatormattlock-d2zrfoi.png


(which as a sci-fi fan would be too freaking amazing/terrifying)

Something more creatively sculptural cannot be out of the question though. More interesting than a spire/antenna, but less bulky then a solid pyramid. If only I was design savvy like some of you, I'd illustrate what's going thru my head.
 
The Elder Wand antenna on the raised platform actually reminds me of the top of the Trump Tower in Chicago (and Harry Potter).
 
abdinoor said:
cgsVoQ6.jpg
Click to expand...

It doesn't look bad and that's probably the best look if it were to have something on top..

But if this ends up looking like it is rendered, it is so sleek and high quality looking I prefer it with the flat top - sleek and minimalist, without unnecessary frills.
 
FK4 said:
It doesn't look bad and that's probably the best look if it were to have something on top..

But if this ends up looking like it is rendered, it is so sleek and high quality looking I prefer it with the flat top - sleek and minimalist, without unnecessary frills.
Click to expand...

+1 I don't think it looks BAD, but I do think that the spire detracts from the rest of the building. It's huge, it's unnecessary, and it makes the tower itself seems less sleek than without it.
 
The tower as designed is elegant. The spire detracts from the form of the tower and, in my view, looks out of place and awkward.
 
Missing from these spire renders is the Prudential for context. Two spires/antennas so close together would be overkill. I think this is great as is.
 
I'm just glad it doesn't have a slanted roof, really tired of that trend!
 
Steel rising on smaller tower:



The big guy's site, now treeless (imagine what this'll look like in a couple years):

 
^ Yes. We have a thread for that one somewhere...
 
AmericanFolkLegend said:
I might be wrong, but that looks like steel H-piles that will be used for support of excavation. If that's the case they'll be going down before they start going up.
Click to expand...

3 choices for building big on top of a filled swamp aka the Back Bay:
  • 1) drive steel or concrete piles to bed rock or at least the deep marine or glacial clay -- the approach of the Pru & Hancock
  • 2) build slurry walls or drive sheet piles then excavate and pour a thick slab -- the approach of the MIT Student Center -- essentially your basements are the hull of a boat
  • 3) drive wooden piles into the mud and then set your building on top -- the approach of Richardson for Trinity Church

From what seems to be happening -- it looks like it could be #2 with a pit to be excavated and a mat to be poured
 
Good info but can this be discussed in the other thread specifically for the smaller building?
 
KentXie said:
Good info but can this be discussed in the other thread specifically for the smaller building?
Click to expand...
I second this, but I've feared that thread would never actually get used. People are just going to keep posting about it in this thread.
 
whighlander said:
3 choices for building big on top of a filled swamp aka the Back Bay:
  • 1) drive steel or concrete piles to bed rock or at least the deep marine or glacial clay -- the approach of the Pru & Hancock
  • 2) build slurry walls or drive sheet piles then excavate and pour a thick slab -- the approach of the MIT Student Center -- essentially your basements are the hull of a boat
  • 3) drive wooden piles into the mud and then set your building on top -- the approach of Richardson for Trinity Church

From what seems to be happening -- it looks like it could be #2 with a pit to be excavated and a mat to be poured
Click to expand...

I will answer this in the other thread for the smaller building.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top