Academic Building @ Suffolk U | 20 Somerset Street | Beacon Hill

It would be a fine building elsewhere. It's still a downgrade from the prewar building it replaced and still a continuation of this area's urban renewal policies of the '50's.
 
Rode through here last week and it dawned on me that the pseudo-3d-polygons here have a dialogue with the Teachers Association building on the other side of Ashburton.

d025ea3c42ce427ba3362ee9678d87de.jpg


Which is not to say that it's an elegant dialogue, or even an intelligible one. But it may offer a clue to the "What were they thinking" question.
 
For those concerned about the ugly facade, NBBJ tends to design from the inside out; they specialize in complex programs and interior design.
As far as the ugly (I will admit, it's sort of ugly) angled texture, it was experimental. I would've liked to see the vertical lines, but (from an anon source) something about engineering an extremely thin and efficient facade meant making it angled. I didn't get to ask how making lines angled rather than vertical was thinner and more efficient, but then again, I'm no pro in engineering, just an architecture enthusiast.
 
The best I can say about it is that it's contextual. It fits in better with its (hideous) surroundings (McCormack, Saltonstall), than did the fairly attractive/classical old MDC building it replaced.
 
It's such an unusual looking building that, the more I look at it especially with these latest pictures, the more I like it. And I agree with itchy, it fits in well with it's neighbors. I give it a thumbs up!
 
It's a great building for 128. A good building for the Seaport. A terrible building for Beacon Hill.
 
statler said:
It's a great building for 128. A good building for the Seaport. A terrible building for Beacon Hill.
Click to expand...

Why is it terrible for Beacon Hill? Assuming the old building couldn't be saved, what would you propose instead?
 
Walked by yesterday. It actually fits in surprisingly well. I was not expecting to find it so innocuous.
 
TimeToChill said:
Why is it terrible for Beacon Hill? Assuming the old building couldn't be saved, what would you propose instead?
Click to expand...

According to what cca has said about masonry construction and modern code I doubt anyone would be able construct a decent building on Beacon Hill without it being a complete vanity project.

Apparently we are stuck with buildings like this. I can accept that, just don't ask me to celebrate it.
 
I like the day time photos of the building.
I don't like the nighttime photos building.
 
This buildings ok the mismatched paneling is a little weird. I do agree it fits in well I'm just bummed we can't make any sort of skyline impact. This areas looked the same since the early 70s and we've only got a few opportunities to make a change here.. I do like the updates to the grounds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top