City Hall Discussion - Redevelopment - Preservation - Relocation

The City of Boston could also make a deal with the developer to become a tenant in an office building(s) built on the site.
 
Never can I remember so much hub bub about some sort of development in Boston. Driving around today all I heard on talk show after talk show was this topic, most people strongly in favor of the move. I am positive that this is going to happen. It makes too much sense.

As far as "fixing" a brutalist structure goes, the best analogy I can draw is taking a mack truck and adding rims, ground effects and a spoiler to boot.

When I was in college, there was a lot of "talk" about "fixing" the BU law tower. One look at that building and you'll realize immediately that you can't fix anything about it. You can reclad and enclose things in glass all you want but in the end it will still look like a hulking giant mass. That's the whole point behind the design. It was built to remind all of us that government (in BU's case The University and maybe even the law, now that I think about it) is an all powerful and unforgiving, not inviting by any means and that we are all mortal peeons.

I overheard a call in from a developer on 96.9. He was part of a group that did a feasibility study on how to improve city hall plaza about ten years ago. The idea then was to build a midrise hotel and some smaller buildings. It was shot down by the feds in the JFk building as they claimed that shadows would be cast by 1:30 and their views of the plaza would be gone. If necessary the city should take action to eject them and move them to the waterfront along with city hall. It wouldn't be bad if they "fixed" this building as it is fixable (recladding etc). I'm not sure who owns it but I want to say the city does.

The big idea with city hall gone would be that Hanover street would run all the way from the North End to Cambridge Street. That type of contiguity would spur all sorts of crap that we can't even think of at this point.

JFK.jpg
 
I think you can pretty much count on a Silver Line conversion to light rail if this project goes through. There is no way a bus could handle the type of traffic this would generate, they are too slow. The city knows this, and a major overhaul of the SBW transit system would follow close on the heels of a City Hall relocation. We might even see our beloved "silver line trolley on the greenway" built in an effort to better connect City Hall to the rest of the system (blue, green, and orange lines).

And the city needs to start thinking about pushing more exciting developments on the SBW if it is going to become Boston's civic center. Architecturally dull projects, like the BHR, simply won't do.
 
Maybe a Silver Line conversion to light rail could make that Aqua Line that someone (i think ablarc) was talking about possible.
 
I don't see why a light-rail vehicle in the current Silver Line tunnel would be either better or worse than the current electrified bus of the same size in the same tunnel. And what would you do about the airport access?
 
Well, maybe in the end there isn't too much of a difference. But LRT is faster, usually more reliable, and probably most important is that it is more attractive. I can guarantee that 100% of those who are complaining about taking the SL to the new City Hall site would have much less of a problem if it was light rail. Although I like the idea of the SL, such an important location shouldn't be served by a transit experiment. I think most of us have already said that eventually, as the SBW gets filled in, the SL would be converted to LRT to provide a more efficient transit option. The new City Hall would be an early catalyst to this type of rapid development. LRT would also make more sense if one looks at the possibilities of extending the SL north along the greenway to North Station and beyond, providing easier connections to the rest of the transit system.

Basically what I'm trying to say is that with the new City Hall, the SBW would be added as part of the vital core of Boston. The SL bus was built to coax the SBW into development, LRT (or even better, heavy rail) is for when the area is fully established. And unfortunately, it seems like yet another harbor tunnel would be the best way to connect to the airport (also important). The city can't expect to just slap together a project of this magnitude. Transit and access to the new City Hall needs to be just as state-of-the-art as the new City Hall itself.
 
Ron Newman said:
I don't see why a light-rail vehicle in the current Silver Line tunnel would be either better or worse than the current electrified bus of the same size in the same tunnel. And what would you do about the airport access?
Click to expand...
You said it: you can couple multiple tram units into a single train, but not buses. That together with the need to maintain headways between separate buses reduces capacity. Another issue is that trams would be faster, since they're on rails and so can't run into walls.

As for the airport access, the place to watch is Seattle. They're in the process of converting their downtow bus tunnel into a mixed bus/tram use. With the gray line (what the hell is wrong with the basic colors?), the ultimate solution would probably be a conversion to trams for the Dudley-to-Waterfront stretch, and a mixed operation with airport buses between SS and WTC. The buses could turn around using the existing loop.

justin
 
... and on to the topic at hand. Infuriating. You may or may not like City Hall, but there's no contesting its boldness. Judging on the developments of the past decade or so, Boston has lost all capacity for boldness and is not compensating with some new-found sure-fire sense for great architecture. Razing city hall would be an act architectural vandalism on par with the destruction of Scollay Square.

The net balance of Menino's latest grand projet is likely to be this: 1. A bland red-brick-with-metal-accents corporate development on the location of City Hall, divided into 2-3 oversized blocks and graced with a stunted tower or two. 2. Another second-rate, pretentious, stand-alone primadonna on the waterfront. 3. A heritage building lost, while the landmarks comission is busy weighing the historical vs. architectural merits of the office building down the street.

Developer interest in the prime parcel? Bulfinch Triangle, South Station, Hayward Place, Winthrop Sq., Columbus Ctr... all still empty.

Depressing.

Mumbles is obviously casting about for a legacy. Notice how similar the reactions are to this and to his previous bombshell: great buzz, lots of interest from developers, a promised Steinway of a building. And what do we end up with: a single developer hawking an upright Piano. My only solace is that Menino failed in the relatively modest task of fixing the plaza, and that his grander plans have a good chance of going the same way.

justin
 
justin said:
...



Mumbles is obviously casting about for a legacy. Notice how similar the reactions are to this and to his previous bombshell: great buzz, lots of interest from developers, a promised Steinway of a building. And what do we end up with: a single developer hawking an upright Piano.

justin
Click to expand...


It's almost as if you expect Winthrop Square to be built by now.l
 
John Keller suggests moving city hall to Dudley Square.

http://cbs4boston.com/kellerblog/local_blogentry_347074304.html

City Hall, R.I.P.

Dec 13, 2006 7:38 am



It?s good to see Boston Mayor Tom Menino talking about getting rid of the hideous Boston City Hall and its wasteland plaza and moving the whole operation elsewhere.

Let?s get something straight right from the start ? there should be no talk of saving any part of that ridiculous, ugly, unusable building. The architects who designed the thing have some nerve defending it, but they still do, as do a handful of other "critics" who are really frustrated penitentiary wardens, who relish the thought of locking people up in dreary, leaky dungeons.

Every last person who created that mess ought to spend every winter weekend clearing the snow and ice off every last brick in the plaza with their breath, because that?s the only way to keep it from becoming an unwanted skating rink.

So Menino is right on to want to bulldoze the place and start generating some tax revenue off it. But he?s all wet with this idea of building a new city hall on the South Boston waterfront. Talk about turning your back on the city. Instead, how about moving City Hall to Dudley Square in Roxbury to spur the ongoing but slow economic recovery of that area?

Placing City Hall so close to the scene of the recent gang crime resurgence might help focus city government on finding some better answers to that horrific problem. One of the city?s biggest high schools, Madison Park, is just down the street ? maybe some City Hall internships and part-time jobs could be found for the kids there who need a break.

Mayor Menino has been attentive to the needs of black Bostonians, but moving City Hall to Dudley Square would help ensure that that beleaguered community would finally feel that it?s issues were front and center on the city agenda at all times. And that might be the best legacy Menino could possibly leave behind when he steps down, in 2056.
 
Probably not big enough, and hasn't a developer already been issued a permit to build there?

While a new City Hall should not have a huge plaza like the current one, it also shouldn't be totally hemmed in by other buildings. Some amount of ceremonial grandeur is appropriate.
 
Who owns the land under the Post Office Annex? Is it federal government property? This is to be closed in the near future, I believe.

While they are at it, lets move the Holocaust memorial to a different location, along with the statues and benches along Union Street. The west side of the street could then be built upon to recover at least some of the original density in this area.
 
The original plan, which you can still see in some old maps at Government Center station, was to build a long Center Plaza-like office building on that land.
 
Ron Newman said:
The original plan, which you can still see in some old maps at Government Center station, was to build a long Center Plaza-like office building on that land.
Click to expand...

It was a motel/office building. I have a picture of a model of the Government Center area in the late 1960s here:
http://bostonhistory.typepad.com/notes_on_the_urban_condit/2006/06/government_cent.html
with descriptions of some of the buildings. It is interesting to see the unbuilt tower for the State Social Services building designed by Paul Rudolph.
 
TheBostonian said:
John Keller suggests moving city hall to Dudley
Click to expand...

City Coucil president Charles Yancey suggested a similar move last night on Jim Braude's show on NECN, but if I remember correctly he suggested Roxbury Crossing. Then again, it might have been Dudley Square.. Either way, Jim quickly chided him with something to the effect of "ok and you're sticking to the script/pandering to your constituents," which was rather amusing.

Also, Scott Van Soarhees made an appearance on the same show. Bosdevelopment makes a good point when he says this whole thing is creating massive waves -- for me to see Scott twice on TV in less than a 24 hour span says something..
 
cityrecord said:
It is interesting to see the unbuilt tower for the State Social Services building designed by Paul Rudolph.
Click to expand...

Although I'm no fan of Brutalism in general, I too find the unbuilt tower interesting. At least in model form, it looks to be a good design, perhaps up there with BU's law school tower.
 
Wouldn't surprise me to hear more about it on the Sunday morning talk shows this weekend (Urban Update, CityLine, Liz Walker).
 
My first instinct was to say they should build a new, tower-like City Hall on part of the plaza, demolish City Hall, and sell the rest off. But the waterfront City Hall would spur development there, allow more revenue to be had by the city, and allow a more set back City Hall-style building, rather than another office type of building. Plus it might allow the Silver Line to be put completely underground and spur on Phase 3. Light rail is really not necessary, but being 100% grade separated is. Otherwise, you have buses getting caught in traffic and slowing down, causing an infuriating amount of wait between buses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top