Boston's Best Modern Urbanism

[garbribre]

Oops. I forgot about this thread.

Mr. Brut got one of my Boston potentialities--NikeTown.

Also, if Copley Place is on this list of options, then The State Transportation Building should be, too. It my be a lumpen pile of brick but, skin treatment and landscraper aspirations aside, it's a most relevant example, fitting what we are discussing here, that grew from a firm who gained a notoriety for its short window of modernist, ummmm, style.

Also consider the former Knoll Building on Newbury.

As for Cambridge, I think Harvard and Central Squares both have additional examples, though not stellar, to fit your criteria. I'll let you brainstorm a bit more. Heheh

Aside--I was JUST commenting to somebody the other day about how many realty offices now have for lease signs on them all around the Bay Area. I'm finding that juxtaposition quite amusing. Not amused by all the other empty storefronts, though. And the abandoned buildings along Auto Rows throughout the Bay Area and in downtown Oakland. All about that in another thread on another day. It's not pretty out here, and the worst as we know it out here now is probably heading your way.

 

[ablarc]

As for Cambridge, I think Harvard and Central Squares both have additional examples, though not stellar, to fit your criteria. I'll let you brainstorm a bit more. Heheh

I give up.

 

[ablarc]

As for Cambridge, I think Harvard and Central Squares both have additional examples, though not stellar, to fit your criteria. I'll let you brainstorm a bit more. Heheh

Aren't you going to tell us?

 

[pelhamhall]

No, they have all kinds of categories ranging from adult entertainment through dry cleaning establishments, bars, all the way to realty offices.

Retail is generally classified by noxiousness.

And let's not forget Complete Idiot Mike Ross had a plan to throw out all the realty and insurance agencies from Charles Street so it could be more "lively" - in his perfect world, he would be able to dictate exactly which store can go where "I want a restaurant on this block, but not too pricey. The next building should have a florist shop - no, a florist shoppe! - because flowers are really pretty and smell nice. Next on the block I would want to see a cafe. A really expensive and top-quality cafe. But not a Starbucks, I won't allow that. Next I think a fancy wine shop - no, a wine shoppe - that only sells really expensive wine so homeless people don't start showing up..."

He acts as if government can decide things through more and more regulations that people have the inborn liberty to decide for themselves. His entire concept of governing is wrong.

He's make a great Minister of Lifestyle Choices in a communist regime, but as an American politician he is a true and perfect failure.

I wish somebody had the goodwill and charity to give Mikey a real job so he could enjoy earning a paycheck for once in his life, and seeing how the real world and business works.

 

[Ron Newman]

Those uses don't contribute anything positive to the streetscape. They deaden a commercial district. Since realty offices are already closing, it would be nice to replace them with retail or restaurants.

 

[garbribre]

^ Realty offices are useful for some people. However, many of them scattered along a few commercial blocks is kind of absurd, temporary supply and demand arguments aside. (Kind of like how I feel about Auto Rows. That argument is for another thread.)

Impatience ablarc? Must be really quiet in your world right now.

These choices will provoke discussion.

In Central Square:

University Park. I saw bits of this during construction. Haven't seen the completed project. It seems to be built out by now. I find this to be viable, modern, and it fits your criteria.

The new structure anchoring the corners of Mass and Western Aves, and River Street. I am not liking something about the way the wedge opening faces the intersection, though. I like the way it holds and defines the street and the height it adds for that corner, even on its back side, where they could have ignored details on Green Street. It provides mixed use. It creates a reasonable, human-scaled fenestration above, and at the street level. However, is the courtyard private? This may eliminate it from my list then.

In Harvard Square

Charles Square. Combined with the later infill projects on its flanks, it seems to do what it was meant to do--enliven that end of Brattle Square (which is an extension of Harvard Square, to me anyway, rather than its own identity).

One Brattle Square. Basic, streetwall forming, mix of uses, defines a previously bad corner better, though not optimally. That sidewalk is too wide. Therefore, not related to the structural form itself.

Many of you may ask, 'Why are these here?' I know that most of these examples are not stellar, unique, or 'wow!' aesthetically, but Copley Place is on the list. Yet the State Transportation Building was omitted. Curious, ablarc. Something against Goody Clancy? Plus, you put the CSC, which just seems 180 degrees from the other, more commercially-oriented, public ventures. In retrospect, think CSC fails miserably along Huntington and Mass Aves. I welcome infill structures. However, I do feel, as others have said, that it should be carefully (respectfully?) done.

Personally, I think the criteria here are too varied for comparison for these building uses.

Therefore, for me, a few of Sert's buildings, already disavowed, should qualify as examples, their failings at ground level aside, compared with CSC's 'successes' at ground level, which aren't 100% either, or having the Hancock Tower as an example, which totally fails at the street and is as totemic as they come.


An additional thing I forgot about: The Gropius buildings, northern end of Harvard beyond the Kallmann structure you seem to admire, ablarc. What would you say about that grouping of structures? Too isolated and inward-facing to be considered urban, for this survey, I think. Pity it was somewhat of a blueprint for the kind of lame modernity that defines what is modern for the Boston/Cambridge environs during the 50s. It set a bad precedent, eh? How did it go from those few, immediate, post-war 'ooooo, this could all become so cool looking' examples at MIT to that bland mess at Harvard?! (I know you have the answer.)

 

[ablarc]

These choices will provoke discussion.

In Central Square:

University Park. I saw bits of this during construction. Haven't seen the completed project. It seems to be built out by now. I find this to be viable, modern, and it fits your criteria.

Tries hard, but misses by a mile. Not really connected, needs a subway entrance. Seems like it's surrounded by wasteland. Dull.

The new structure anchoring the corners of Mass and Western Aves, and River Street. I am not liking something about the way the wedge opening faces the intersection, though. I like the way it holds and defines the street and the height it adds for that corner, even on its back side, where they could have ignored details on Green Street. It provides mixed use. It creates a reasonable, human-scaled fenestration above, and at the street level. However, is the courtyard private? This may eliminate it from my list then.

So-so.

In Harvard Square

Charles Square. Combined with the later infill projects on its flanks, it seems to do what it was meant to do--enliven that end of Brattle Square (which is an extension of Harvard Square, to me anyway, rather than its own identity).

One Brattle Square. Basic, streetwall forming, mix of uses, defines a previously bad corner better, though not optimally. That sidewalk is too wide. Therefore, not related to the structural form itself.

So-so again. Corpulent.

Many of you may ask, 'Why are these here?' I know that most of these examples are not stellar, unique, or 'wow!' aesthetically, but Copley Place is on the list. Yet the State Transportation Building was omitted. Curious, ablarc. Something against Goody Clancy?

Yeah, they're hacks. And the Transportation building is clumsy, overbearing and symbolically out of control. Copley Place gives something to the city in spite of (or perhaps because of) being inward-looking. It scores remarkably high on the Best Shopping Area poll.

Plus, you put the CSC, which just seems 180 degrees from the other, more commercially-oriented, public ventures. In retrospect, think CSC fails miserably along Huntington and Mass Aves. I welcome infill structures.

Christian Science Center is a Monument. Monuments function according to rules that are the exact opposite of those for infill structures. Monuments should be free-standing, exhibitionistic, sculptural, precinctual, removed. Christian Science is all of those.

Therefore, for me, a few of Sert's buildings, already disavowed, should qualify as examples...

I like Sert too, but except for Holyoke Center his commissions don't have urban settings. Not his fault...

...the Hancock Tower as an example, which totally fails at the street and is as totemic as they come.

A fair assessment; Hancock too is a monument; that's its function in the city's context.

The Gropius buildings, northern end of Harvard ... What would you say about that grouping of structures? Too isolated and inward-facing to be considered urban, for this survey, I think. Pity it was somewhat of a blueprint for the kind of lame modernity that defines what is modern for the Boston/Cambridge environs during the 50s. It set a bad precedent, eh?

All true.

How did it go from those few, immediate, post-war 'ooooo, this could all become so cool looking' examples at MIT to that bland mess at Harvard?! (I know you have the answer.)

Gropius. Another hack. (Though I confess to a guilty infatuation with Harkness Commons as free-standing composition and form adrift in space. The recent renovation has ruined it as a leftist political statement by substituting conventional good taste for its former proletarian glitz.)

Sorry to take so long to respond.

 

[ablarc]

Holyoke Center would have been my 4th choice. I like the building; even more, I like how it's grown into its place as a focal point in the Square, a urbanistic role equal to the building's scale. The Mass Ave plaza is an active meeting-place and a great perch for people-watchers in warmer months; the Mt Auburn side is sunny and quieter -- book and coffee territory. Dunster Street has retail to engage the passerby, but (ironically) the Holyoke Street facade is a Chinese wall. This failing alone kept it off my list.

The price you pay for underground parking (thought to be a virtue).

With Kallmann McKinnell's little masterpiece, the scale elevates the building's stature. I also love the details that show the craft of the building's structure. The spirit of Kahn and Aalto are very strong here -- timeless and humane Modernism. Also consider the juxtaposition of the Winthrop Building across Washington Street; it's like a good piano recital, a little Bach, a little Shostakovitch.

Add Old South Meeting House, and Old City Hall, and you round out the recital with some Mozart and Brahms. Throw in the Globe Corner bookstore, and you have to send out for a virginal.

Pei's CSC is another masterpiece. Corbu's sculpturalism, Kahn's timelessness, Chandigarh or Dhaka in miniature. Only the most sensitive intervention on this site should be allowed.

Are they about to wreck it with redevelopment? Lincoln Center, a similar piece of modernist classicism is being butchered as we speak (by Diller and Scofidio, hacks who would be geniuses).

And Ben Thompson's concrete display case. It serves its purpose well as a retail store and an urban corner-anchor to one of Cambridge's most architecturally eclectic streets. It plays quietly and well with its neighbors. The mystery of the dark, compressed passageway to Mt Auburn Street, and the rewarding release of the small court yard you encounter, are hallmarks of smart design.

Ben used to own Harvest (quite good, very expensive), the restaurant on this passage; I believe it now belongs to the guy who developed New York's Time-Warner Center.

 

[Ron Newman]

there's no more Globe Corner Bookstore in downtown Boston. Hasn't been for several years. Now a junky jeweler ;-(

 

[ablarc]

The building's still there. Has been since the early 1700's.

Oh, and the building opposite it is no longer called the Five Cents Savings Bank.

 

[czsz]

The building is officially known as the "Old Corner Bookstore", no matter the tenant on the ground floor. It held various bookstores for a little more than half its history (from 1835 to 2002), though it actually contained an apothecary when it was first built - in 1718.

 

[Ron Newman]

When I first encountered the building, it contained a small branch office of the Boston Globe. You could drop off classified ads or press releases there. The business that was called Old Corner Bookstore had moved a block over to Bromfield Street.

It later became the first Globe Corner Bookstore, selling travel books and maps. Globe Corner became a small local chain, but eventually closed this one and contracted back to a single store in Harvard Square. The Boston Globe Store replaced it, with similar merchandise, but that too closed. Ultra Diamonds is a very poor use of a space that has so much historic association with publishing and bookselling.

 

[ablarc]

It would make a great antiquarian bookstore, though it might be too easy to burglarize.

 

[czsz]

Judging from the antiquarian bookstore in the basement of the Old South Church (which puts its books up on the street) and from the Brattle (which fills an outdoor parking lot with them), these places aren't too worried about theft.

 

[ablarc]

The antiquarian bookstore I was thinking of sells priceless rarities and first editions.

 

[ablarc]

After 42 votes, Five Cents Savings Bank continues on this poll as Boston's best example of modern urbanism.

What can be concluded from that?

 

[Ron Newman]

It tells me that the right street-level use can redeem Brutalism. Would it have gotten so many votes if it were still a bank?

 

[ablarc]

^ Probably not.

Does that say that if you insert a bookstore you automatically have a winner?

 

[kennedy]

No, not only bookstores. Just stores that engage the customer AND the passerby.

 

[JohnAKeith]

Anyone by chance have photos of the Boston Five building when it was still a bank before it was Borders? A friend's looking.