Dramatic, Inspiring Architecture - Go To CHICAGO!

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from CVanHecht. Show CVanHecht's posts

    Dramatic, Inspiring Architecture - Go To CHICAGO!

    Boston is truly a great city and I love living here! For it’s size, the city has an impressive array of outstanding restaurants, world-class museums, distinguished universities and renowned historical attractions. With such remarkable attributes, obviously there were and are people in city government with vision, so why is modern Boston so devoid of dramatic, iconic architecture? Did such aspiration die in the 1970’s? Why is Boston losing it’s architectural significance now of days?

    Below is a short list of examples of what vision we can and should expect from the BRA:

    - Chicago Spire:
    http://www.thechicagospire.com/
    - St. Mary’s Axe: http://www.30stmaryaxe.com/index2.asp
    - Guggenheim Museum Bilbao: http://www.guggenheim-bilbao.es/visita_virtual/visita_virtual.php?idioma=en
    - MFA Boston: http://www.mfa.org/about/index.asp?key=56
    - Navy Pier: http://www.navypier.com/things2do/things_home.html
    - Burj Dubai: http://www.burjdubai.com/
    - Rowes Wharf: http://www.bhh.com/

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Genz1. Show Genz1's posts

    Dramatic, Inspiring Architecture - Go To CHICAGO!

    you're on to something. i don't think the problem wholley lies with the BRA but also with the local neighborhood associations and over zealous citizen groups who play an important role, but in boston have too much power over the process.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from heynow98. Show heynow98's posts

    Dramatic, Inspiring Architecture - Go To CHICAGO!

    Yeah.......i'm sure Mumbles will get right on it.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from cuchalain. Show cuchalain's posts

    Dramatic, Inspiring Architecture - Go To CHICAGO!

    so, go already
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bynxers. Show Bynxers's posts

    Dramatic, Inspiring Architecture - Go To CHICAGO!

    A GREAT resource for this type of discussion is the web-forum:

    www.archboston.com

    There are some greats posts and discussions on projects and plans in the City regularly.

    Now- for my two cents and I will say this openly- I have never seen more control by NIMBYs or questionable actions by a local government than in Boston. Did you know they want to put up an amazing new iconic tower in the Back Bay that will almost be as tall as the Pru or John Hancock? Guess what- by the time the NIMBYs and BRA are done with it, it will be a short squat unremarkable little thing.

    I attribute most fo the "landscrapers"- the bland, short (but elongated) condo developments we are seeing throughout so much of the City to this NIMBYism and strict enforcement powers by the BRA. The "no-casting shadows on the Common or Commonwealth Ave Mall" rule is almost as stupid and obtuse as the "no buildings taller than William Penn's hat on City Hall" rulle Philadelphia used to go by.

    The whiny patrician element that can AFFORD to live near such wonderful new development should embrace it and the fact that property values will continue to sky rocket for them. If they don't like it move to Newton or Ipswich or something!

    Architecturally- look at the citys in America alone that are just zooming past Boston- New York, Chicago, Miami, San Fran- they all have FRESH, ICONIC, and TALL new buildings on in the pipeline or going up that will redefine the skyline and add great architectural value to the urban landscape. Heck- even "dirty, murder-riddled, classless" Philadelphia will soon have a skyline completely unrecognizable with modern fresh designs in the American Commerce Center, Cira Center 2 and Post Office Expansion and more- just checkout:

    www.phillyskyline.com

    Boston needs to get its act together fast architecturally- the disater of all those ugly 1970's and 80's BOXES in the downtown is about to be repeated on Fan Pier/ Waterfront (where it already seems to have taken hold) and then exemplified with all those new landscrapers in Fenway, the West End, etc.

    Atleast Menino's Trans-National Place/ Keyboard Tower was inspired as is South Station Tower.

    Until NIMBYs go away and the BRA actually lets developers exercise their own land rights- I would expect more of the same boring uninspired design.

    Despite all of our groundbreaking and progressive social ideals- this city's conservatism is as clear as day when you look at the architecture.

    Beautiful brownstones and landmarks can exist next to new and breath-taking ones- look at London, NYC, Philadelphia, Chicago, Berlin, the list goes on!!

    We should be LEADING THE WAY not losing the race!!!
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from tangent. Show tangent's posts

    Dramatic, Inspiring Architecture - Go To CHICAGO!

    The race? And who is this "we" you keep talking about? When Boston gets all paranoid about its architecture, then "we" get a race to the bottom with buildings like Boston City Hall and the new ICA building. Maybe turning architecture (and buildings) upside down isn't a good idea? What is wrong with simple functional and economical architecture?
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from SNAPPA52. Show SNAPPA52's posts

    Dramatic, Inspiring Architecture - Go To CHICAGO!

    I was a young guy growing up in Boston and I remember when it was announced that the Hancock company was going to build its signature tower in the Back Bay and I was truly excited about the tower. What I remember most was all the complaining by neighborhood groups. Nothing in Boston gets built simply because of people and their belief that living in a commercial district gives them the right to stop progress.

    South Station is a perfect example, lofts created in the South Boston warehouses ajacent to the Fort Point channel are trying to stop the tower from going up there because it would block the sun light that some artists use. Complaints have also been heard over mumbles plans for a major office tower in the Winthrop Sq. section of Boston. So how can developers possibly build anything in Boston.

    I'm still in aw that the Big Dig ever got off the ground, the only reason was simply put, it was necessary and they (neighborhood groups) had no choice.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from noslen. Show noslen's posts

    Dramatic, Inspiring Architecture - Go To CHICAGO!

    just came back from toronto, wow! Talk about bold.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from BilltheKat. Show BilltheKat's posts

    Dramatic, Inspiring Architecture - Go To CHICAGO!

    I appreciate the power of the NIMBYS in this case. Otherwise, Boston would be an sprawling, overdeveloped, shadowy city of prudential building type of architecture with little green space swallowing up the history that is Boston.

    The trademark red brick buildings in the Back Bay and South End would've been bulldozed a long time ago for that fugly 70's style prefab colorform crap.

    I for one, like the oldness of the city. Remember, there is not a lot of real estate and what becomes available should be managed properly.

    You can see where it wasn't, Government Center for e.g. Don't get me wrong, Im all for trashing areas like parts of the theatre district, Chinatown, and some other spots, just stop building for ego and build responsibly.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from frazzle. Show frazzle's posts

    Dramatic, Inspiring Architecture - Go To CHICAGO!

    I'm with Bill the Cat. Having lived in modern western cities, the historic architecture of Boston is a breath of fresh air - literally - you can see the sky. And look at all the tourists snapping photos of our brownstones. Those tall glass towers are very impersonal and boring, and unlike brick and wood, glass and steel does not age well. It just looks dingy after awhile.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Genz1. Show Genz1's posts

    Dramatic, Inspiring Architecture - Go To CHICAGO!

    [Quote]I'm with Bill the Cat. Having lived in modern western cities, the historic architecture of Boston is a breath of fresh air - literally - you can see the sky. And look at all the tourists snapping photos of our brownstones. Those tall glass towers are very impersonal and boring, and unlike brick and wood, glass and steel does not age well. It just looks dingy after awhile.[/Quote]

    i would agree to a point and would also add - have you been to the south end (where the largest collection of victorian row houses in the country are) recently? a majority of those lovely brownstones you speak of are in terrible disrepair. busted fences, peeling paint, overgrown front yards, broken stairs, filthy cracked windows, structural damage...

    sad indeed! where is heck is the neighborhood association when you need them? oh, they're busy complaining about progress in the back bay :-)
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bynxers. Show Bynxers's posts

    Dramatic, Inspiring Architecture - Go To CHICAGO!

    Ok- let's get a few things straight here:

    -I can't think of many people even IN the profession of architecture or urban planning who still celebrate much of the crap that went up in the 70's. ESPECIALLY Boston City Hall- for which the City lost one of its greatest and most historical treasures (Scollay Square) which is now a disaster of urban space and building, you can throw the West End onto that one as well BTW.

    However, today we see the backlash from that. Modern development IS responsible takes into account how buildings "meet the street" and fit into the skyline. The problem is, there is generally a whole boatload of potential LOST because of the intervention by neighborhoods groups and naysayers.

    For instance- designated historic districts- clearly today no one would DREAM of demolishing any of the gems in the Back Bay or South End. But there are plenty of places where new developments would be great- that could take up an entire forum itself.

    Boston has a GREAT set up for modern large buildings: There is downtown- which should be allowed to develop as all modern downtowns do with tall modern skyscrapers and vibrant development and then there is the "high spine" of the Back Bay which is perfect as a long thin set of tall and monumental developments which cause minimal effect on the South End or Back Bay and provide MUCH NEEDED housing space and skyline character. Think about it- we already have 3 designated zones for development in this City: Back Bay, Downtown, and Waterfront.

    The fact is this- many other major competitor cities have many great new developments and many of which define the skyline. Boston is getting to be alot like Pittsburgh, Cleavland, Buffalo and others- no notable and impressive new buildings or developments. Everything ends with a period- nothing with an exclaimation point. Something as simple as replacing the yellowish lights on the Pru with those awesome blue LEDs again permanently would go a long way when put next to a new beautiful tower in the Back Bay.

    And again- aesthetics aside; we need MORE office space and MORE residential space in this city. Otherwise offices may continue to move out to the burbs and secondly- housing will remain at an over inflated premium.

    I love old architecture, I love historic buildings and saving as many as possible. If you want good examples of cities who have done this- see London, Berlin and Philadelphia. And- in those cities- there is still modern inspiring architecture nestled right in with the older stuff.

    So- if we continue to do as we have in Boston- expect nothing more but the same squat/ short glass and steel boxes that are meant to blend and not offend. In conclusion- Boston's conservatism TRULY bleeds through when you looks at the City's architecture. What new modern developments do we have that truly inspire or draw people? The ICA, new BU tower and the Zakim Bridge? That's about it right? Everything else is conservative cookie cutter landscrapers and boxes.

    Just saying...
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from BilltheKat. Show BilltheKat's posts

    Dramatic, Inspiring Architecture - Go To CHICAGO!

    [Quote]

    i would agree to a point and would also add - have you been to the south end (where the largest collection of victorian row houses in the country are) recently? a majority of those lovely brownstones you speak of are in terrible disrepair. busted fences, peeling paint, overgrown front yards, broken stairs, filthy cracked windows, structural damage...

    sad indeed! where is heck is the neighborhood association when you need them? oh, they're busy complaining about progress in the back bay :-)[/Quote]

    Those brownstones are being bought and restored back to their original splendor with spacious interiors, updated plumbing and wiring. Not bulldozed for some glitzy Trump Tower. THIS is exactly what I mean.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from BilltheKat. Show BilltheKat's posts

    Dramatic, Inspiring Architecture - Go To CHICAGO!

    [Quote]I remember when Trinity Church and the BPL were BLACK![/Quote]

    Oh, isn't it just like you to play the race card!
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from mtbr1975. Show mtbr1975's posts

    Dramatic, Inspiring Architecture - Go To CHICAGO!

    Perhaps you have missed some of the new structures being built such as the new WGBH head quarters, new Boston Convention Center, the new Apple store or the new ICA all are new modern architectural marvels... now there is a new skyscrapper slated for the downtown as well...
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from H2. Show H2's posts

    Dramatic, Inspiring Architecture - Go To CHICAGO!

    I agree with "Billthecat" on the idea of avoiding the sprawling "coldness" of a modern city with its multitude of skyscrapers. Boston has always been kind of unique in that way b/c for the most part it focused on preserving the current architecture and not forcing pedestrians to walk in the shadows of towers. To be quite honest, I have heard many a vistor to Boston state how pretty the skyline is for precisely that reason-it's different from what you would expect. Also, I was in London at the end of last year and unfortunately, the seem to be having a hard time integrating the modern towers with the "ye olde buildings". I saw the layout of the city from the London Eye and it looks like the playset of a two-year-old that randomly places buildings next to each other without a lot of thought.
     

Share