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

[jdrinboston]

488' doesn't include the mech crown. It's like Millennium Tower claiming to be 625' all the way up to the moment it was really 685'. 1 Dalton is 699', except then it's really ~748'-749'. You need to do more research for the true heights. It helps to find a diagram. Then for 1000 Boylston you'd see the 488' is drawn below the crown.

At the risk of getting into the weeds....based on Millennium's history, do we know if the 691-feet for Winthrop Square is the true top or could the mechanical push it over 700?

 

[DZH22]

At the risk of getting into the weeds....based on Millennium's history, do we know if the 691-feet for Winthrop Square is the true top or could the mechanical push it over 700?

The 691' included the mech. The main difference between that and MT though is that it's 691' to a flat roof. MT is 685' to the upper corner, and also built on a hill so its highest vertical wall is just 677' (down to Washington Street) while "official" height allows us to count it from the low point on Hawley Street.

In that respect it will probably give an impression of being a couple floors taller than MT from many angles in person, while in actuality only being 6' taller officially.

 

[ngb_anim8]

488' doesn't include the mech crown. It's like Millennium Tower claiming to be 625' all the way up to the moment it was really 685'. 1 Dalton is 699', except then it's really ~748'-749'. You need to do more research for the true heights. It helps to find a diagram. Then for 1000 Boylston you'd see the 488' is drawn below the crown.

Cool - thanks for the clarification. Happy to be wrong when we can rise above '500 in that part of the city.

 

[Brookline-ish]

https://www.wbur.org/bostonomix/2019/01/09/one-dalton-crane-view

Very cool WBUR story about a day in the life of one of the crane operators for One Dalton - and some awesome pictures from the top, including a great shot of how the mechanical floor is hidden

 

[johnboy008]

Thx Brookline, compelling stuff, gets the blood pumpin’ thinking about the every day risks these sky warriors encounter..

 

[bosdevelopment]

https://www.wbur.org/bostonomix/2019/01/09/one-dalton-crane-view

Very cool WBUR story about a day in the life of one of the crane operators for One Dalton - and some awesome pictures from the top, including a great shot of how the mechanical floor is hidden

Thank you One Dalton, very cool!

 

[Boston02124]

 

[FK4]

^Some nice shots of the future Pike parcels to be developed, too.

 

[chrisbrat]

shame how so many views of this pretty fantastic skyscraper are marginalized by truly terrible architecture (sheraton towers being the worst/main offender). meanwhile the inarguably lesser (from an aesthetic standpoint -- minus history/nostalgia/etc.) prudential is virtually unblocked from nearly all angles.

 

[DAVE]

I think this fits in well with the vernacular occuring in New York city architecture, with examples like:
111w57th

53W53

9 Dekalb, Brooklyn

125 Greenwich Street

and 45 Broad Street

Overall I think these examples are a little nicer than one dalton, but we do see some similarities. You can see a strong emphasis on vertical lines as a key element to almost all of these. This is also tied to structural elements being married to aesthetic elements, with 53w53 being the best example of this, and would've been an even more extreme example had the height not been cut.

 

[mass88]

shame how so many views of this pretty fantastic skyscraper are marginalized by truly terrible architecture (sheraton towers being the worst/main offender). meanwhile the inarguably lesser (from an aesthetic standpoint -- minus history/nostalgia/etc.) prudential is virtually unblocked from nearly all angles.

It's too bad they can't implode the Hilton, Sheraton, Marriott and Westin hotels in this area. Ugly buildings that have not stood up the test time very well at all. Replace them with modern towers that are almost entirely glass.

 

[JeffDowntown]

It's too bad they can't implode the Hilton, Sheraton, Marriott and Westin hotels in this area. Ugly buildings that have not stood up the test time very well at all. Replace them with modern towers that are almost entirely glass.

Well the Westin and the Marriott at Copley Place both could be reclad. Probably due sooner rather than later, as that 1980's cladding system is probably close to its "sell by date".

 

[odurandina]

The Westin/ Marriott ain't going anywhere, or getting taller in our lifetimes.

The Sheraton Towers complex is hideous and dated. The North Tower is the most egregious:
its massing and appearance are a disastrous blight, and has been a millstone on the quality
of High Spine west of the Pru since most of us have been alive.

With it's fair massing, the South Tower doesn't need to go–it just needs to be re-glazed.
Such an upgrade would be a "home run" for the South Tower imo.

The City can inquire with Marriott Hotels about giving these (Sheraton) towers a facelift.

Such a request would be unusual, but hardly unreasonable.

The North Tower would (obviously) benefit greatly from the facelift, but there exists an even better
opportunity to "fix" the Sheraton complex (however incredibly slim) in an significant way....

https://www.google.com/maps/place/S...4bcfbe62b2c7d3!8m2!3d42.3465151!4d-71.0839224


Let's take a look....












It is highly unlikely that circumstances ever make it desirable for Marriott Hotels to remove the North Tower.

Therefore; cut 2 or 3 cells/rows of rooms from the east side of the North Tower (closest to the Pru),
and build a tall tower joining the North and South Towers at the east side of the parcel,

Build it tall; 35, 40, 50 stories up to 600' and beyond, possibly rising in a peak toward the South Tower,
as to greatly reduce the loss of views from 1 Dalton over Back Bay.....

 

[Beton Brut]

^ Your plan would likely require Sheraton to sacrifice most of their meeting space, front of house, and kitchen facilities. I'm not sure they'd see value in that.

There is a lovely parking garage just across Dalton Street...

 

[odurandina]

there isn't enough meeting space to support additional hotel density at the Sheraton....

Sir, the architect team is tasked to solve this or they're all fired.

The BPDA never met a truss they didn't like.

^ Your plan would likely require Sheraton to sacrifice most of their meeting space, front of house, and kitchen facilities. I'm not sure they'd see value in that.

There's lots of room to add to & replace the 1950's HoJo Ranch lobby/meeting house directly below the new tower, and even add 2, 3 or 4 floors for some seeeerious cooking/dining up in there!

There is a lovely parking garage just across Dalton Street...

i've been led to believe that garage is untouchable.

 

[stick n move]

Westin Copley is fine. Its ugly but in a classic old Boston facade type of way with good massing. Its ugly in a Pru type of way... a good ugly. Those kind of buildings need to stay to keep the Boston feel. You reclad all of these to glass and its not Boston anymore.

Idk to be honest the more I look at these these “are” Boston too.

I say we just do what were doing and add 1000 boylston, huntington, pike parcels, thatll draw your eye towards the shiny new glass and itll look great. Im not really with this whole erase history thing. I think you need the variances in styles from the different eras to be next to the new glass towers going up. We already have 1 dalton, r2d2, 888 boylston, then were getting 1000 boylston, a glass tower at parcel 14, and 2 glass towers over the pike. Thats enough glass... You need a few different styles or its going to look like a blob of glass. Luckily this is exactly whats going to happen n all the shit u guys r talking about isnt tbh.

 

[393b40]

The Westin is only a disaster because of it's abysmal ground floor.

 

[KriterionBOS]

It's too bad they can't implode the Hilton, Sheraton, Marriott and Westin hotels in this area. Ugly buildings that have not stood up the test time very well at all. Replace them with modern towers that are almost entirely glass.

I disagree.

I think some of these older-yet-still-modern buildings belong in any skyline. Obviously, gleaming glass towers like MT or 1 WTC in lower Manhattan are awesome, but the Pru is not ugly. Neither are the Westin/Sheraton/Hilton buildings in the Back Bay. They might be a little to short to really make an imposing Bay Back Skyline from a distance, but from a 1-2 mile radius, the Back Back skyline is still quite imposing.

I'm from Nashville, and the Back Back skyline alone is at least as impressive as Nashville's. Back Bay has 5 buildings in the 150+ bracket, Nashville only has 2. Hancock, Pru, 1 Dalton are all well over 200 and Nashville's tallest is only 180 something (the roof height is well under 150). And Nashville is a decent sized city (bigger than Boston proper in fact).

That being said, I'd love it if the Back Bay was able to get a 1000 footer in there and a couple more 500+.

 

[Justin7]

Hotels don't have much incentive to reclad.

Though I do wonder if the Sheraton could bump out and update its street level across from 1 Dalton.

 

[citylover94]

Boston is a much larger city than Nashville though unless you look at city proper population which doesn't give a good picture. Nashville's city proper is 504 square miles in land area. Boston's is only 48 square miles and Nashville as of the most recent population estimates is estimated to have 691,000 people compared to Boston's 685,000 people. If Boston included all the urbanized small cities nearby with densities greater than 8,000 people per square mile it would have a population of just over 1 million in only about 80 square miles.

I am not bashing Nashville I am just trying to illustrate that it isn't exactly surprising that Boston has a bigger skyline than Nashville which has a metro population closer to Providence than Boston.