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

Serious question: What is the limit of the city's legal authority to reject a building application on the grounds that it utilizes a glass façade that would look too different from an adjacent building with a glass façade? Wouldn't a rejection on those grounds be prima facie example of an "arbitrary and capricious" regulatory decision?
 
393b40 said:
Bloomberg wasn't wrong tho for the ESB. Either you move forward or you decide your cities skyline is a museum piece (which isn't necessarily a bad thing)...
Click to expand...

I completely agreed with him. By the same logic, the ESB would have never been built if people didn't want the Chrysler Building to be overshadowed.
 
jdrinboston said:
Serious question: What is the limit of the city's legal authority to reject a building application on the grounds that it utilizes a glass façade that would look too different from an adjacent building with a glass façade? Wouldn't a rejection on those grounds be prima facie example of an "arbitrary and capricious" regulatory decision?
Click to expand...

It seems like every initial proposal is asked for some type of revision. What's so hard about saying "we'd prefer claddings that aren't just blue glass right next to the Hancock" especially before the first renders even show up? Just say "we have enough blue glass, please propose something different" and we'll get those different proposals.

We already get too tall, too dense, too busy, blah blah blah. Just add too blue into the mix with the rest of the general criticisms.

Frankly, for once in my life I'd love it if they said "it's too fat, it will wall off the neighborhood, please make it taller and thinner."
 
DZH22 said:
We already get too tall, too dense, too busy, blah blah blah. Just add too blue into the mix with the rest of the general criticisms.
Click to expand...

But those are all routed in objective calculations that can be applied to regulations. "Too much blue glass" would seem to encroach onto the territory of "personal taste," which I would argue begins to tread toward "arbitrary and capricious."
 
Speaking of glass, I'd love to see some different colors... I love the green on the Vertex building. An Amber glass building would be fun. Black glass... there's a lot of options to play with.

One of the Wintrop Square proposals had green glass and I fucking loved it.
 
When two historic enterprises - owners of world-famous, standard-setting properties - come together to build, one hopes, one even expects, an icon.

The glass here is the least of the problem.

The Saunders family and the Raffles organization have let us down.

No matter how successful the interior programming, it’s simply another glass tower. Undistinguished, no matter its color.

The blandification of Boston. And, I reckon, ultimately, a diminishment of their brands.
 
type001 said:
Yep, too bad. I immediately thought of this from back in the day when Bloomberg allowed for 15 Penn Plaza to move forward despite people not wanting it to distract from the ESB

Council OKs New Neighbor For Empire State Bldg – CBS New York (cbslocal.com)
Click to expand...

Unfortunately Penn 15 has changed into this which is a freaking travesty that these mega turds are going to block the esb.
penn-district.jpg


the original concept was a million times better
15penn_(c)pelliclarkepelli.jpg
 
Blackbird said:
The original proposal was just a copy/paste of San Francisco's Salesforce Tower..
Click to expand...

This was proposed before Salesforce. It was around the same time that they were chopping down Tower Verre from 1250' to 1050' (and they allow tons of junk at full height and Tower Verre was lost in the crowd before it was even finished). This building is taller, wider, and has a less pronounced crown. I think it was only 60-something stories for over 1200'! Personally, I think that makes a skyline look bad because the low floor count totally throws off any sense of scale, especially in a building this tall. However, at this point, NYC is going completely bonkers so even 1200' will only blend in and be far from dominant.
 
nm88 said:
The blandification of Boston. And, I reckon, ultimately, a diminishment of their brands.
Click to expand...

It's not like Boston has ever been known for standout architecture. Don't confuse its ornate 19th and 18th century buildings for interesting architecture, they were about as generic and boring back then as we think of this newer stuff today. This is just continuing a bland-streak that has been present in the city since the Puritans crossed over from Charlestown.

The only truly interesting piece of architecture the city has in it is the Mother Church. That thing is grand.
 
393b40 said:
It's not like Boston has ever been known for standout architecture. Don't confuse its ornate 19th and 18th century buildings for interesting architecture, they were about as generic and boring back then as we think of this newer stuff today. This is just continuing a bland-streak that has been present in the city since the Puritans crossed over from Charlestown.

The only truly interesting piece of architecture the city has in it is the Mother Church. That thing is grand.
Click to expand...

Wow, I heartily disagree with the exception of your opinion of the CS Mother Church being a grand piece of architecture.
 
Last edited:
atlantaden said:
Wow, I heartily disagree with the exception of your opinion of the CS Mother Church being a grand piece of architecture.
Click to expand...

seriously. find me an architect or architecture student or professor who believes the mother church (don't get me wrong; i love it) is more signifcant (or "grand" or whatever) than trinity church. that's just a/the obvious counterpoint example, but boston's got plenty of "standout architecture."

i'm curious why someone who thinks boston's architectural merits are so meagre has posted nearly 2,000 times here. i'm not super jazzed about the architecture in gary, indiana, so i've never bothered to seek out any online forums on that topic and, if i were to find one, i can't imagine visiting it/them, much less posting frequently.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top