Amazing shit other cities get that Boston doesn't

The DC metro expansion isn't that impressive. It's long, but almost entirely intended to serve Dulles. Boston has had an international airport-heavy rail connection since the Blue Line was laid out, and, love it or hate it (okay, you hate it) the Silver Line augmented that service. It was kind of pathetic that the nation's capital hadn't caught up to the world standard in airport ground transportation; the fact that National Airport was hooked up to Metro was meaningless when the larger Dulles was not only unserved, but only accessible by expensive private toll highway.
 
Personally I'm very jealous of DC's metro. I believe it's expanding in other directions too, or atleast thats what the metro map said last october. But I read a little on that extension out to the airport. I believe it's going to cut through some of those VA cities in DC's metro area like Tyson's Corner. Never been over there but it should make things more exciting.
 
Not to derail this discussion (arrrgh) but DC's metro is largely style over substance. The area of dense coverage is far smaller than what the T covers, and even within that there are many stations that are Bowdoin-esque in their use as M-F 9-5 worker bee stops. Meanwhile, major residential areas are completely unserved. And then beyond the central hub the metro quickly becomes something much more akin to the commuter rail in several directions.
 
Like DC, Miami's heavy rail expansion is intended to serve as a link between the airport and downtown, via the Earlington superstation that connects to commuter rail. They really need to link out to South Beach--long overdue.
 
Miami's:
17374258813422793207213.jpg
 
An expansion is an expansion. A new rail to the airport is an improvement for both cities. Has Boston made any improvements in trying to get people to places? And no, the Silver Line doesn't count.

And I believe that Boston only benefited having a line serving an airport early because of Logan's close proximity. Dulles is 25 miles from D.C. and MIA is 8 miles away.
 
KentXie said:
An expansion is an expansion. A new rail to the airport is an improvement for both cities. Has Boston made any improvements in trying to get people to places? And no, the Silver Line doesn't count.

And I believe that Boston only benefited having a line serving an airport early because of Logan's close proximity. Dulles is 25 miles from D.C. and MIA is 8 miles away.
Click to expand...


True, but Logan's proximity has always made it a more valuable asset for Boston than Dulles has been to downtown DC (as compared to National). But your point is taken: millions spent on expanding transit infrastructure in other cities, while our system remains less than satisfactory to our liking.
 
That was a good article on Miami. It is URBANE....not URBAN as I had claimed in an earlier post in the "White Flight" topic.
 
Unveiled? How did they conceal this while it was being built?
 
I sent this to someone today. Like the Macallen Building on steroids. A little Paul Rudolph, a little Zaha Hadid, a little Frei Otto.

Why not in Southie? Or Maverick Square?
 
Ron Newman said:
Unveiled? How did they conceal this while it was being built?
Click to expand...

Ron, it's just the rendering that was unveiled.

Why not in Southie?
Click to expand...

It's sad that Boston hasn't been able to embrace bold architecture on the South Boston Waterfront (beyond the ICA) considering it was the one place in the city without significant NIMBY opposition to virtually anything novel or unique being proposed. New York has banked on a similar waterfront opportunity and the West Side Highway has slowly become a boulevard of futuristic starchitecture.
 
Egad - send that monstrosity back to Dubai where it belongs.

czsz - "slowly" must be the operative word regarding the West Side Hwy. I've been travelling that road quite a bit over the course of the last few months. The only thing that could be deemed "futuristic" is Gerhy's IAC building - and even that's a stretch.
 
It's much better and more thought-out than the one BIG proposed for our waterfront/s. Boston. The checkerboard was just eurgh.
 
Inhabitat is hyperbole central. I can't read it without my eyes exploding.

e.g. Incredible New Amazing Transparent Material Allows Residents to See Outside Without The Terrible Fuss of Feeling Cold Air!!
 
I love the title to this thread. But hey, as bad as you may think Boston is behind (which in some aspects they may be) it is not a half bad city.
 
It's a great city. Mostly because of what was built 50-100+ years ago.
People are bemoaning the fact that we haven't exactly lived up to our predecessors high standards.
 
well put, Statler. I think the same feeling exists everywhere that has a good starting point. They really don't make 'em like that anymore. And when they try (new urbanism), often the result is ersatz urbanism (artificial feeling). I wonder if all new projects start out with that feeling? Can anyone name an "instant" classic (as contradictory as that may sound)?

For anyone who follows the Architect's Newspaper (I have a facebook feed), that site has plenty of other renderings of this project, some of which cast it in a better light imo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top