Mandarin Oriental | 776 Boylston St | Back Bay

Re: Mandarin Oriental

I knew it! It seemed to be the most logical answer (outside of Arson) all things considered.

Any indications as to whether fire supressions systems were installed (2 hour doors, sprinklers, etc.)

The hotel was still under construction, was not to open until later this year. Picture here.

http://www.mandarinoriental.com/beijing/

Statement here:
We can confirm that the fire at the construction site of Mandarin Oriental, Beijing, which was scheduled to open in the second half of 2009, has been extinguished. CCTV, the developers of the hotel, has placed the following statement on their website: ?Beijing Fire Control Bureau says CCTV staff responsible for the construction of the new TV complex, hired staff to ignite large festive firecrackers outside the building, and caused the fire. The move did not receive approval from related authorities. The fire has caused severe damage. CCTV sincerely apologizes for the damage that the fire caused, and the inconvenience it has brought to the public.? All 64 Mandarin Oriental employees, who are located at an offsite pre-opening office, are safe. It has been confirmed that a fireman has lost his life and our sympathy is with his family. We would like to express our appreciation to everyone who has conveyed their concern about this sad incident. It is too early at the present stage to assess the full extent of the damage. We understand that a full investigation is underway and will take time to complete. Mandarin Oriental has signed a long term contract to manage the hotel and has no ownership interest in the building. Further updates will be issued as appropriate.
 
Re: Mandarin Oriental

^ I guess that was my point...if they hadn't reached the point of installing/connecting fire supression systems/life systems yet, and the place was filled with paints, glues, etc, then its little wonder that is burned so quickly and would not necessarily indicate that lax building codes led to the level of destruction. If all fire safety systems WERE in place and operational, well, Mr. Koolhass, you just designed a very expensive high-rise fire simulator, and back to the drawing board.
 
Re: Mandarin Oriental

Mind-boggling the display that building put on...

Back to Boston, the last section of ground-level retail is now in place:

img5391di1.jpg
 
Re: Mandarin Oriental

Mind-boggling the display that building put on...

Back to Boston, the last section of ground-level retail is now in place:

image

I love the "water feature" in the First Republic Bank, owned by Merrill Lynch, owned by Bank of America.

Ostentious and arrogant waste of money.
 
Last edited:
Re: Mandarin Oriental

There are still banks?
 
Re: Mandarin Oriental

IMG_7583.jpg

IMG_7584.jpg

IMG_7585.jpg


We need more of this
IMG_7586.jpg


And of these
IMG_7589.jpg


IMG_7587.jpg

IMG_7588.jpg
 
Re: Mandarin Oriental

I've seen that Saks design on the ca. 1959 Mass State Trooper barracks along the Pike.
 
Re: Mandarin Oriental

^^ Word.

Architecture for a police state.

And unnecessary. I liked the old facade. Nothing wrong with it.
 
Re: Mandarin Oriental

The old facade wasn't bad, but I suspect Saks wanted to add square footage and pushing out toward the street was the only way.
 
Re: Mandarin Oriental

Architecture for a police state.

Although I like the way you took up the police conceit, I think the aesthetic has more to do with an explicitly anti-totalitarian idea of "transparency" that was very popular in the Western bloc in the late 50s (hence the "international style" that traveled everywhere but Moscow, until well after Stalin, at least).

The problem is that both Saks and the Mass State Trooper barracks are done particularly shoddily.
 
Re: Mandarin Oriental

It's just wrong. Everything about Saks' building is wrong: massing, materials, architectural treatment, single-use, relationship to grade.
 
Re: Mandarin Oriental

Personally, I don't think Saks is terrible. Not great, but not that bad. It has a stylishly retro 50's kind of Laguardia-esque look to it that is appropriate for a merchant selling fashion. It's a throw-away design that will be re-done in twenty years to keep up with whatever the "look" is at that time. "Relax, it's just fashion".
 
Re: Mandarin Oriental

Fifties Revival, huh? I can see your point with regard to the style. You could see the Midtown Motor Inn as charming for the same reasons --and it's even an original!! The massing still sucks.

Here's a thread devoted to some originals in the same general style:

http://www.archboston.org/community/showthread.php?t=2008
 
Re: Mandarin Oriental

Oh cmon, Ab..you can't seriously compare Saks' with the Midtown. Saks' is simply a false front put onto an existing building in a shopping plaza. Midtown, along with the rest of the examples on your link (great aerial photos, by the way. You must be really, really tall) are mostly about context. And some could even be argued as having positive attributes. The Mackey School for instance, prepares it's students for life inside a correctional institution. Sort of like being architecturally scared straight.
 
Re: Mandarin Oriental

I don't see why Saks' context renders its form any more tolerable.
 
Re: Mandarin Oriental

Do you go to Disneyland and snark at Cinderella's castle?
 
Re: Mandarin Oriental

Actually, I already know the answer to that question.
 
Re: Mandarin Oriental

The Sak's redo is no better or worse than the Lord and Taylor redo. I would think there'd be more noice about the latter since it fronts a major street. Most people look at Sak's from either end of Ring Road, and from those angles, it's not bad. It fits in neatly with the general mediocrity of the entire Pru center and Copley place. I wouldn't expect a "great" piece of architecture in that context. Witness the Mandarin and the Hynes: adequate, not great, and at least better than the rest.
 
Re: Mandarin Oriental

Doesn't look half bad from 1,000 feet away!
 

Back
Top