“The owner of a neighboring building is blocking Apple Computer’s plans to remove this fire escape, which leads to a building Apple wants to raze for a new Back Bay store,” Brian Kladko reports for The Boston Business Journal.
“Apple Computer Inc.’s seemingly smooth drive toward opening a gleaming store on Boylston Street in the Back Bay has hit a roadblock, and it has nothing to do with clashing architectural styles. The problem? A humble fire escape,” Kladko reports.
Kladko reports, “The owner of a neighboring building has withheld consent to Apple’s plan to remove an exterior staircase that extends from the neighbor’s third and fourth floors to the roof of the building Apple wants to demolish.”
Full article with free photo (paid subscription required for full text) here.
Related articles:
Apple amends design for planned store in Boston’s Back Bay – June 14, 2006
Apple’s proposal to raze site worries Boston’s Back Bay panel – March 09, 2006
Report: Boston to get major four-story Apple Store on Boylston Street – February 09, 2006
Maybe the guy wants to unload his inventory of Sony batteries first.
That’s how things work in Boston…If you don’t want something moving next to you, take advantage of one of the many complicated local zoning, planning or building code regulations to put the brakes to any unwanted development. That fire escape is probably unsafe (like so many are), but is grandfathered and removing it will force the owner of the neighboring building to pay for a new state-of-the-art fire protection system.
Burn his building down then.
that’s retahded …
Couldn’t they build around it ?
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”LOL” style=”border:0;” />
Wow, I was prepared for some comments, but I was not prepared for these. IT’S A FIRE ESCAPE!
Grow up people, and stop acting like “children” (which is the MDN magic word).
I think I’m going to have to go with Cpt. Obvious here.
Anyone got some matches?
Have Ives design him an “Escape Pod”.
Ive. Not Ives. There’s just ONE of him.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_ive
Simple. Change the fire escape to chrome and glass.
The owner of the building is just after some quick cash. Nothing else.
Big Whoop. Apple can afford to pay for a re-routed fire escape staircase. They probably have offered this. I suspect there is more to this fact-less story. Don’t burn down the building….burn the write of this useless story at the stake!
“Ive. Not Ives. There’s just ONE of him.”
Maybe he meant Burl. “Have a holly jolly iPod…”
Microsoft probably bought the building just to shaft Apple.
What? It’s no more ridiculous than the other bullshit people are pulling out their asses.
It’s not a matter of building him another one. They want to demolish the building. That will leave the neighbor without this fire escape for the period of time it takes to build the new store and replace it.
dennis-Maybe he meant Burl. “Have a holly jolly iPod…”
Good on you Blue. Your allright-yo’re alrite- you’r allryte-you’re OK. Oh, Ive’s screwed up again.
Just leave his ladder there and remove the building. He’ll come around when he has to drop two stories to get to the ground.
@maczac, that, like most of the other posts here, was a JOKE! Buy yourself a sense of humor!
ndelc: I have a sense of humor, but some don’t. And I really really fail to see any humor in some of the posts here, including yours.
And btw, I have RTFA. The neighbor is not looking for money, nor looking to hold up the project, it is merely looking to retain a legal fire escape during demolition phase. There is another fire escape that services the same top floors, however there were safety concerns about it.
The neighbor is merely doing what any reasonably prudent landlord would be required to do in this situation.
Do me a favor before you respond, and lookup “Coconut Grove” and most recently the “Station Nightclub.” Both of those horrific fires are in the minds of everyone concerned about fire safety in this area. Fire egress even for the shortest period of time, should never be compromised. It’s no joke, ever.
Now why don’t you go buy a sense of resposibility and maturity.
“Apple Computer Inc.’s seemingly smooth drive toward opening a gleaming store on Boylston Street in the Back Bay…”
Uh, seemingly smooth? Have they forgotten about the troubles with the Back Bay Architectural Commission?
Why don’t you go buy me a doughnut and buy yourself a sense of urgency about it.
Oh and if they have fresh coffee, buy that too.
maczac: “I have a sense of humor, but some don’t. And I really really fail to see any humor in some of the posts here, including yours.”
Most of the posts here were attempts at humor. I didn’t say they succeeded. Mine included. Are you sure you have a sense of humor? Doesn’t sound like it. BTW, I’d like to RTFA, but it requires a subscription. Seeing as how I live in New Mexico, I’m really not that interested in paying to read about business in Boston.
All kidding aside, it appears from the photo that the fire escape in question is a relatively short staircase that goes from the other guy’s building to the roof of the building that Apple purchased, so that, essentially, he’s using someone else’s property as the fire escape for his property. So please, in all seriousness, explain to me why Apple is responsible for providing this guy’s building with a fire escape. Is that explained in the article? From what has been offered here without a subscription, it sounds as if the building owner is failing to take responsibility for this situation. I believe that’s why so many here are joking about it. Obviously none of us thinks that being hurt or killed in a structure fire is amusing, so feel free to get off your high horse now.
“Most of the posts here were attempts at humor. I didn’t say they succeeded. Mine included. Are you sure you have a sense of humor? Doesn’t sound like it.”
Thank you, yes exactly: I do not have a sense of humor when it comes to issues like this, simply because I fail to see any humor in it. Even tongue in cheek.
As for reading the article, click the picture to enlarge, then click the corresponding link back to the article. (apparently the coding is not very good, because this gets you by the subscription page and directly to the article.)
I don’t recall in any of my posts saying how Apple is responsible for the neighbors fire escape. I merely commented on the fact that the neighbor was trying to preserve a fire escape.
In summary the article is unclear on whether or not the neighbor has an existing agreement/easement for the fire escape, but seems to indicate that he does not. Apple does not own the building upon which the fire escape is located. Instead, Apple intends to take a long term lease for the real estate and raze the existing structure and rebuild. Apple wants to proceed post haste with the demolition, the neighbor is simply trying to preserve his fire escape, until some other means of egress is possible. I am sure that the parties will solve the issue. I agree that the neighbor is responsible for his maintenance of a safe fire escape, but at the same time, if that is the current situation (ie, onto the building that Apple intends to demo) then the neighbor has every right to protect it until and alternative can be located. Again what is unclear is the level of license that the neighbor has for that fire escape. In any event, I am sure that a new fire escape will be located (may just involve rehabbing the other one on the back of the building), and that Apple will proceed, just not in the time frame they were hoping for.
The point of my posts was not who is in the right (as it appears both parties are trying to solve it), but since you mentioned it, and in case you cannot get to the article, I tried to summarize it. My point was to comment on the fact that this is not a funny issue, and I could not believe the level of maturity from some of the posters. All to often on MDN when it is Apple vs. (fill-in-the-blank) Everyone automatically assumes Apple is in the right and who ever is on the other side must be flamed (now how is that for humor?). Notwithstanding, I still fail to see any humor in this issue. And quite frankly makes those who love Apple and apple products look like a bunch of insensitive zealots.
Hey, has any one checked to see if this is Steve Ballmer has been slumming in the area?
God bless the “engineers” who put the damn thing there in the first place. I could do a better job with AutoCAD and a blindfold. Heck I could probably eye-ball it and get a better result.
For those not familiar with Boston: Some of the most poorly designed buildings are here in Boston. This is a great place for soon-to-be architects to learn how not to design a building.
And Don’t forget your maps. If you think the buildings are confusing, wait until you try the roads.
The owner is holding out for one of Stevie’s glass staircases.