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

Re: New hotel tower Trinity Place near Copley Sq.

jass said:
We need the geniuses at MIT to come up with that kind of tree.

They could call it an "evergreen".
Click to expand...

Smartiro said:
Just build them from plastic :)
Click to expand...

Nah, needs a fancier name.

They're going to be green all year, it 'll look fake, like a con. Plastic won't be good enough to make them out of, we need something stronger like steel, or some other ferrous metal. Con-ferrous trees. Coniferous trees. That sounds better.
 
Re: New hotel tower Trinity Place near Copley Sq.

Will you guys please stop coning around in this thread. I pine for the days when joking around wasn't so poplar.
 
Re: New hotel tower Trinity Place near Copley Sq.

OK, I'll bough out before the thread gets hemlocked.
 
Re: New hotel tower Trinity Place near Copley Sq.

You all really need to spruce this thread up a bit!
 
Re: New hotel tower Trinity Place near Copley Sq.

JeffDowntown said:
You all really need to spruce this thread up a bit!
Click to expand...

Common -- you folks have got to realize that the acorn which never falls far from the Oak is the Apple of the poster's eye -- so just stop being Ash-holes and hijacking all the threads
 
Re: New hotel tower Trinity Place near Copley Sq.

NIMBYs delay vote because they don't want their condo views blocked: http://www.bostonglobe.com/business...-bra-agenda/wW30bDoudH3UNFoqH0AuzH/story.html

A proposal to build a 33-story hotel and condominium tower in the Back Bay was abruptly pulled from the Boston Redevelopment Authority’s agenda Tuesday amid persistent complaints from neighbors about the project’s impact on wind and traffic.

Developer Trinity Stuart LLC requested that a planned board vote on 40 Trinity Place be postponed because it was not advertised long enough in advance of Thursday’s BRA meeting. The mix-up could have given additional legal ammunition to neighbors who continue to object to the proposal.

A Trinity Stuart executive asserted Tuesday night that the project — which would rise near the Hancock Tower — has generated significant support among city residents, but continues to draw opposition from condominium owners who live in an adjacent building.
Click to expand...

Sounds like they didn't advertise it long enough, so I'm ok with more of a public process. Gotta do things the right way even if you give the NIMBYs more time.
 
Re: New hotel tower Trinity Place near Copley Sq.

Favorite quote:
Neighbors said they are not opposed to a major redevelopment of the site, but that the developer is trying to build too densely. “The size of the building they have proposed is so over the top,” said Tom Iannotti, a condo owner at the neighboring Clarendon Residences. “The developer and the BRA are so determined to rush the project that they are not taking the time to look at the implications.”
Click to expand...
 
Re: New hotel tower Trinity Place near Copley Sq.

Guess how many floors The Clarendon has?
.
.
.
33
 
Re: New hotel tower Trinity Place near Copley Sq.

bostoneophyte said:
Favorite quote:
Click to expand...

Comments like that are what drive me over the top. It's the classic "I got mine but don't want you to get yours" mentality which I think 95% of NIMBYs have.
 
Re: New hotel tower Trinity Place near Copley Sq.

Wonder if Tom Iannotti of the Clarendon was so concerned about the wind/traffic/shadows/density/size/views impact that his new home building had on the immediate surrounding neighborhood built just a few years before? I'd be embarrassed to have my name printed in the paper with these concerns if I were he!
 
Re: New hotel tower Trinity Place near Copley Sq.

atlantaden said:
I'd be embarrassed to have my name printed in the paper with these concerns if I were he!
Click to expand...

He should be. But hey, his Facebook photo has Jeno Leno in it!!!!

https://www.facebook.com/#!/tom.iannotti?fref=ts

If this hotel goes up, it's going to block his view of snowfall in the Back Bay.

This guy looks exactly like the kind of tool that I would have imagined saying that.
 
Re: New hotel tower Trinity Place near Copley Sq.

^^^ type001

A personal attack seems out of line in a public forum. More generally, IMO, citing NIMBYism adds nothing to the dialog regarding the actual proposal. I'm surprised there isn't more discussion in the Globe about architecture, street level, etc. Boston deserves better.
 
Re: New hotel tower Trinity Place near Copley Sq.

^Those are fair criticisms of any project. But complaining a 33 story residential building is an unfair burden on your 2 year old 33 story residential tower is straight NIMBYism. Say that the street level sucks and the design is poor and will exacerbate wind tunnels more then a properly designed building would, but not that this thing is totally out of place on that side of Boylston street.
 
Re: New hotel tower Trinity Place near Copley Sq.

choo said:
^Those are fair criticisms of any project. But complaining a 33 story residential building is an unfair burden on your 2 year old 33 story residential tower is straight NIMBYism. Say that the street level sucks and the design is poor and will exacerbate wind tunnels more then a properly designed building would, but not that this thing is totally out of place on that side of Boylston street.
Click to expand...

My point is that a dialog that focuses on IMBYs vs. NIMBYs has little to nothing to do with the project... it's a tired debate over process where IMBYs are concerned they are losing the debate. So let's agree the process sucks and move on to the project itself.
 
Re: New hotel tower Trinity Place near Copley Sq.

in this part of the city, attention to wind effects is essential.
 
Re: New hotel tower Trinity Place near Copley Sq.

Sicilian said:
I'm surprised there isn't more discussion in the Globe about architecture, street level, etc. Boston deserves better.
Click to expand...

Guys, I think a lot of you are mis-reading Sicilian's comment. When he said "Boston deserves better" he meant not this particular building but the quality of "the dialogue" in general.

i.e., the main concerns about any project are views, "wind," "shadows," etc. Not architecture. While I think this particular building is OK (from what I've seen), I fully agree with him on that.

Sadly, no city in the US is primarily concerned about architecture when a new development is proposed. We all deserve better.
 
Re: New hotel tower Trinity Place near Copley Sq.

Simply build taller and thinner: less wind and shadows, more elegant looking development and views better preserved in both old and new buildings.
 
Re: New hotel tower Trinity Place near Copley Sq.

itchy said:
Sadly, no city in the US is primarily concerned about architecture when a new development is proposed. We all deserve better.
Click to expand...

You could make a case for Chicago, but otherwise, yeah...
 
Re: New hotel tower Trinity Place near Copley Sq.

choo said:
^Those are fair criticisms of any project. But complaining a 33 story residential building is an unfair burden on your 2 year old 33 story residential tower is straight NIMBYism. Say that the street level sucks and the design is poor and will exacerbate wind tunnels more then a properly designed building would, but not that this thing is totally out of place on that side of Boylston street.
Click to expand...

Most of those critiques are also just dressed up NIMBYism. To this guy's credit, he isn't pretending it's anything else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top