#159 l John Hancock Tower l BOSTON l 241m l 60fl

John Hancock Tower
Boston, USA

HEIGHT: 241m/790 feet
FLOORS: 60 floors
COMPLETION: 1976
ARCHITECT: Pei Cobb Freed & Partners

In another city, the John Hancock tower wouldn't be anything special -- just another reflective glass box in the crowd. But because of the way Boston and the rest of New England has grown up architecturally, this "70's modern" building stands out from the rest. Instead of being colonial, it sheds breaks new ground. Instead of being quaint, it soars and imposes itself on the skyline. And Instead of being white like so many buildings in the region, this one defies the local conventional wisdom and goes for black. For these reasons and more the people of Boston have fallen in love with this 790-foot monster looming as the tallest building in New England. In the mid-1990's, The Boston Globe polled local architects who rated it the city's third best architectural structure. Much like Boston's well-loved baseball team, the building has had a rough past, but still perseveres, coming back stronger to win the hearts of its fans. The trouble began early on. During construction of the foundation the steel gave way, and the sides of the pit collapsed, nearly sucking Trinity Church into the hole. Then in late January, 1973 construction was still underway when a winter storm rolled into town and a 500-pound window leapt from the tower and smashed itself to bits on the ground below. Another followed. Then another. Within a few weeks, more than 65 of the building's 10,344 panes of glass committed suicide, their crystalline essence piling up in a roped-off area surrounding the building. The people of Bean Town have always been willing to kick a brother when he's down, and started calling the tower the Plywood Palace because of the black-painted pieces of wood covering more than an acre of its façade. Some people thought the building was swaying too much in the wind, and causing the windows to pop out. Some thought the foundation had shifted and it was putting stress of the structural geometry. It turns out the culprit was nothing more that little beads of lead solder running along the window frame. They were too stiff to deal with the kind of vibrations that happen every day in thousands of office buildings around the world. So when John Hancock Tower swayed with the wind, or sighed with the temperature, the windows didn't and eventually cracked and plummeted to Earth. It cost $7,000,000.00 to replace all of those panes of glass. The good news is, you can own a genuine piece of the skyscraper. According to the Globe, the undamaged sheets were sold off for use as tabletops. So start combing those garage sales. For any other building, the hardship would end there. But the Hancock building continued to suffer indignities. The last, and most ominous, was revealed by Bruno Thurlimann, a Swiss engineer who determined that the building's natural sway period was dangerously close to the period of its torsion. The result was that instead of swaying back-and-forth like a in the wind like a metronome, it bent in the middle, like a cobra. The solution was putting a pair of 300-ton tuned mass dampeners on the 58-th floor. The same engineer also determined that while the $3,000,000.00 mass dampeners would keep the building from twisting itself apart, the force of the wind could still knock it over. So 1,500 tons of steel braces were used to stiffen the building -- the Hancock building's final architectural indignity was surmounted.

[RafflesCity]

8/10

Nice large slab of glass. What year was it built?
Why dont u edit the poll to include more choices..like 7.5 9.5 etc.

The John Hancock was built in 1976 by I.M. Pei. It is 60 stories and 789 feet high.

[AG]

During construction, the glass kept on popping out of their frames during high winds and smashing to the street below.

John Hancock Tower is a bit plain, but not bad.

7/10

[RafflesCity]

I find the building in the 4th pic interesting.

Jason..yup..I want it to be standardised too..cos this building appears in the Top100!

[Patrick]

a lovely glassbox but not more 7.0

No detail but nice glass box.

7.5/10

[SUNNI]

i love glass boxes

[Homeroids]

A relatively simple design. Not bad. 7/10

[DrumCorpsAlum]

For one I love glass, but for a box this building is pretty cool. 8/10.

[SteelCity32]

woo. Looks like a tv. well kinda. 8/10

[Caledon1981]

i likes it! it looks a good approach from the freeway

[Fabian]

Plain design. Could of been more creative 6/10.

[cgrassham]

Nice use of glass, but I do find it a bit bland, its not as good as the chicago centre. 7/10

[CTroyMathis]

Pei and pals almost had a big 'oops' with this one. To think this building once could have fallen over on a narrow end (of all ways) until re-fitted. Nice though, always had a like for this one in Beantown! 7.

Never liked it. The early glazing failures are such a disgrace as are all the antennas cluttered on the roof. It comes off looking cheap. The color of the glazing has not aged well.

Sure it gives great reflections but by itself is boring and awkward. Boston deserves better.

4/10

I can't see the pictures so I can't vote.

Now that I can see them I will vote and give it a 6.5, because I don't like buildings that just look like a big box.

[Liz L]

7/10 - Nice facade that really dances with the light, but the shape is only so-so, and it shows one reason to dislike flat tops - they can quickly get unsightly antenna acne...We really need skyscraper clearasil, to quote Paul Goldberger...

[DamienK]

Interesting plan shape. 8/10