Raffles Boston (40 Trinity Place) | 426 Stuart Street | Back Bay

^^this
DZH22 said:
Blasphemy!!!
From a skyline perspective, these are all basically on par with a Westin or Marriott, as opposed to Copley which would have topped the 111 Huntington and Parcel 15 level. These are just more fat blocks for the lower level plateau jumble of Back Bay. Not to mention, from many angles these lower quality fatties are going to crowd out solid views of the Hancock. Copley wouldn't have done that due to much better proportions.
Also, that gap where Copley would have gone is still going to be there, even after all these other developments!
Click to expand...
^^and this

DZH22 said:
Plus, Copley was pretty much the tower I was most looking forward to out of all the proposals. Nothing so far can replace that, certainly not this and certainly not the underwhelming proposal at the Back Bay garage!
Click to expand...
i want to agree. But 1 Dalton, MT, Winthrop, SST & Harbor Garage, the four additions at North Station &, podium along with GCG (in its totality) are all incredible additions to the City. But this Copley Tower: build everything that's approved for Back Bay (5 more highrises + all the air rights).... but then, add CT--and it's my "whoa..." moment. Maybe CT was our 181 Fremont.
 
Last edited:
Losing Copley sucks not so much because of the tower (it was a nice design), but because it was a chance to fix the front of Copley Place which has a very lacklust suburban feeling mall front (set back, lot of concrete...)

Back on topic...
 
I am stepping into the breach. Foolish, no doubt, but patience has worn thin. This forum, to my mind, once a prodigious (remember aBlarc, and others) resource of pictures and thoughtful observations about our city, architecture and urban issues has become something quite different. It seems now mostly adolescent fetishism for erections. (Allusion, regretfully, intended.)

But then, this is where the internet has taken us, I suppose, and there is nothing to be done about it.

Filling the gap? Really? Let other cities race to "fill gaps." Our gaps are part of our brand. Our signature symbols stand mostly alone. And it succeeds! Our identity is to be different, not to be like other cities. This is good and should be protected at all cost. How many other cities look like us - large and small - and still provide the street setting we offer? Few. Very. At least in America.

If filling the gap leads to erecting a building like 40 Trinity, I say no thank you. Is any question at all raised among any of you height enthusiasts that the only alluring image of this building is a helicopter view of the top few floors that favors the view more than the building itself? And that render is likely out-of-date. This building diminishes JHT. One reason JHT works is that it stands alone as sculpture and place-making, as well as architecture. 40 Trinity does neither.

Speaking of brands - Raffles' is well-established. That their first foray into the US would be in such an underwhelming piece of architecture is, frankly, surprising - and possibly brand-injuring. Considering the buildings they currently call home - 40 Trinity is not their equal. What were they thinking?

Again, this building means demolishing something. Okay, the building we are losing may not be place-making, but it is a piece of Boston - and more place-making, I'd argue, than what we are about to get. We are getting generic glass and steel, more real estate deal than architecture. Send it to Houston. They'd love it.
 
The disdain that that my comment brought to the typical complainers gives me utter joy. Consider this a knife twister... Boylston Place.
 
Copley was a gorgeous tower; that's why its a big loss. Not about gaps or whatever. Very prominent location, very visible. I hope it still happens.
 
nm88 said:
Filling the gap? Really? Let other cities race to "fill gaps."
Click to expand...

The decision to demolish what is there and replace it with the hotel was already made, and it wasn't by anyone on this forum (most likely). We are just remarking on the renders.

nm88 said:
Speaking of brands - Raffles' is well-established. That their first foray into the US would be in such an underwhelming piece of architecture is, frankly, surprising - and possibly brand-injuring. Considering the buildings they currently call home - 40 Trinity is not their equal. What were they thinking?
Click to expand...

I just did a search on existing Raffles hotels, and I didn't find anything architecturally stunning. Do you have an example to share that you think is great? Jakarta, Istanbul, Dubai, etc?

nm88 said:
Again, this building means demolishing something. Okay, the building we are losing may not be place-making, but it is a piece of Boston - and more place-making, I'd argue, than what we are about to get. We are getting generic glass and steel, more real estate deal than architecture. Send it to Houston. They'd love it.
Click to expand...

The thing that is replacing the building that you agree is not "place-making" is a very large hotel that Boston desperately needs more of.
 
nm88 said:
I am stepping into the breach. Foolish, no doubt, but patience has worn thin. This forum, to my mind, once a prodigious (remember aBlarc, and others) resource of pictures and thoughtful observations about our city, architecture and urban issues has become something quite different. It seems now mostly adolescent fetishism for erections. (Allusion, regretfully, intended.) ....

Filling the gap? Really? Let other cities race to "fill gaps." Our gaps are part of our brand. Our signature symbols stand mostly alone. And it succeeds! Our identity is to be different, not to be like other cities. This is good and should be protected at all cost. How many other cities look like us - large and small - and still provide the street setting we offer? Few. Very. At least in America.

.....
Click to expand...

Up to a point I agree with the above sentiments.

However, above all --- the principal reason that Boston is unique has nothing at all to do with the land, buildings, trees -- its all about the kind of people who've made Boston their own for 400 years. From Winthrop's original command and admonishment that We are to be as a City on a Hill --- not in terms of the literal hills -- but rather that people would see what Boston was doing and we should not hide out achievements. And we haven't -- the people who have made this place home have contributed more innovation than many other cities combined in fields as diverse as medical procedures and missile guidance.

But putting that human component aside and looking to the Boston aesthetic -- its a product to a large extent of hills, coves, rivers and the sea. Basically we are the product of the Last Ice Age which provided the underlying land forms. And upon which we not only built -- but to a large extend we have restructured the underlying land to fit our reeds at the time in a way few other cities have attempted. From building wharfs into the harbor and then filling in behind -- e.g. State Street and Atlantic Ave.; to filling whole swaths of tidal flats {Back Bay, South Boston Seaport, Logan] to dismantling hills for fill [Beacon, Pemberton, Fort Hill]. And above all the conversion of the tidal Charles River into the engineered and managed Charles River Basin and the banks in Boston and Cambridge.

We don't have a rectilinear grid of streets over any large extent because of the hills and the coves which created the "cow paths" early on. Where we do have a rectilinear grid its because the land is all fill and limited as a foundation for building big. The rivers too shallow and limiting in length for commerce nevertheless isolated all of the uplands from each other giving rise to an opportunity for sculpting the rivers into recreational channels.

All of this and more gave us the High Spine in the Back Bay along with the Charles River Basin and the hump of downtown following the contour of the filled harbor edge. Hence the traditional Boston Skylines.

Now however, things are changing to the tune of the newly defined Seaport Skyline with its limits imposed by Logan and the Kendall Cambridge Skyline still very much a work in progress.

As a result of the above -- With the exception of few iconic towers most of the Skyline is interesting because of the unexpected juxtapositions of the various tall buildings due to the curving streets. The only other place where this is the norm is London.

That is also to a significant extent the reason that details on buildings are less important than they would be where everything is lined up along streets and avenues running at right angles.
 
FWIW, the Copley Tower developers rightly judged the city as verging on overbuilt in the ultra-lux segment, so a major 'white glove' res tower would be a huge gamble. That was 2016; look to NYC now and you'll see the developers' hesitation was prescient.

But take heart: Boston's commercial developers are increasingly keen to go tall.
 
HarvardP said:
FWIW, the Copley Tower developers rightly judged the city as verging on overbuilt in the ultra-lux segment, so a major 'white glove' res tower would be a huge gamble. That was 2016; look to NYC now and you'll see the developers' hesitation was prescient.

But take heart: Boston's commercial developers are increasingly keen to go tall.
Click to expand...

But Boston is not NYC and prices in Boston are still rising. Copley Place tower would have been a run away success, probably coming to market next year. I dont understand why you jumped to compare it to NY.
 
awood91 said:
But Boston is not NYC and prices in Boston are still rising. Copley Place tower would have been a run away success, probably coming to market next year. I dont understand why you jumped to compare it to NY.
Click to expand...

Highly debatable on the runaway success, but hope doesn't spring eternal on aB, it gushes.
 
HarvardP said:
Highly debatable on the runaway success, but hope doesn't spring eternal on aB, it gushes.
Click to expand...

Dude, the most expensive condos in Boston in Millennium Tower and now the new Four Seasons have both set all time price records. What about Copley Tower would prevent it from being successful, ASIDE from economic growth collapsing, which isn't on the horizon yet. The location and views from high floors are arguably better than Millennium and FS, so just how is it so highly debatable?
 
When comparing to NYC and ultra-luxury condo sales / prices, you need to look at the inventory. There is a glut, literally dozens of ultra-high end condo and rental buildings that were built in the last 5-7 years. Add that to the buildings built in the pre-recession boom (8 Spruce, Armani Casa, etc.), plus all the buildings built over the decades.

In the last 3 years, within 10 N-S blocks and 2 E-W avenues of me, there have been 3 700ft+ rental towers (60+ floors and often over 700-800 apartments each), plus 2 35-story rental buildings, with another 700 footer on the way. This is addition to a ton of 10 floor condo buildings along the high line by BIG, Hadid, etc. along a few 1,000 footer condo buildings.
So, even a place like NYC has it's limits.

Boston has barely any high-rise full service buildings, but has plenty of people with money that want to live in the city... and not everyone wants to live in a brownstone.
I think Boston can absorb several more shiny, tall residential rental / condo buildings. This is not Miami where stuff is being built like crazy and no one has any idea who is going to live there.
 
Massachoicetts said:
Now is this design chose for this parcel/site? If so, do we have any information on the height/use of the building? Great looking unique building! I am really liking this design!
Click to expand...


What an uglybug building!!!!:eek:
 
Czervik.Construction said:
Boston has barely any high-rise full service buildings, but has plenty of people with money that want to live in the city... and not everyone wants to live in a brownstone.
I think Boston can absorb several more shiny, tall residential rental / condo buildings. This is not Miami where stuff is being built like crazy and no one has any idea who is going to live there.
Click to expand...

this

awood91 said:
Dude, the most expensive condos in Boston in Millennium Tower and now the new Four Seasons have both set all time price records. What about Copley Tower would prevent it from being successful, ASIDE from economic growth collapsing, which isn't on the horizon yet. The location and views from high floors are arguably better than Millennium and FS, so just how is it so highly debatable?
Click to expand...

and this. nice.

lurking and looking up at the tall peaks in Grand Teton Natl Park (i can't do heat). :roll:
 
At the end of the day, it might not be anything like that to cause a "crash". Rumblings are that the new "mansion tax" is putting NYC into a "chill".

But it could be temporary, or maybe the real estate people are trying to scare everyone.

https://www.housingwire.com/article...e-as-wealthy-buyers-rush-to-avoid-mansion-tax

Czervik.Construction said:
When comparing to NYC and ultra-luxury condo sales / prices, you need to look at the inventory. There is a glut, literally dozens of ultra-high end condo and rental buildings that were built in the last 5-7 years. Add that to the buildings built in the pre-recession boom (8 Spruce, Armani Casa, etc.), plus all the buildings built over the decades.

In the last 3 years, within 10 N-S blocks and 2 E-W avenues of me, there have been 3 700ft+ rental towers (60+ floors and often over 700-800 apartments each), plus 2 35-story rental buildings, with another 700 footer on the way. This is addition to a ton of 10 floor condo buildings along the high line by BIG, Hadid, etc. along a few 1,000 footer condo buildings.
So, even a place like NYC has it's limits.

Boston has barely any high-rise full service buildings, but has plenty of people with money that want to live in the city... and not everyone wants to live in a brownstone.
I think Boston can absorb several more shiny, tall residential rental / condo buildings. This is not Miami where stuff is being built like crazy and no one has any idea who is going to live there.
Click to expand...
 
Demo prep appears to have begun including barricades being setup and junkers taking stuff out of the Dunkin.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top