City Hall Discussion - Redevelopment - Preservation - Relocation

Why is everyone so up in arms about this? It is an opinion piece, and the opinion is one that is not new or controversial and is widely shared. The accompanying renders were done by the author, an art professor, not an architect. I'm sure there are plenty of other "artists" here in Boston who think they have brilliant ideas about what to do with City Hall, just like I'm also sure most of the firms in the city are probably having a good laugh at these renders this morning. The idea of rehabilitating City Hall is not going anywhere, but this one guy's idea isn't adding anything to the conversation; it shouldn't be getting any airtime. I think the more troubling thing is who is working at the Globe that would actually give this guy the space to publish this kind of glib nonsense.
 
Leave architecture to the architects. That's why we're mad because this junk is going to tarnish the public's opinion of CH improvement plans. I completely support additions to the front and back, like Bruner/Cott did with the BU Law Tower.
 
Bubbybu said:
Philly's hall, on the other hand, is both an awesome building and well situated.
Click to expand...

The redone plaza is pretty nice as well.

DilworthPark3.jpg

605001605446375285-dilworth-overhead-fb.262.0.675.675.full.jpg
 
KentXie said:
Dull and cookie cutter...can you please elaborate? This is an honest question as I can not imagine how anyone can find SF city hall dull and cookie cutter. That's like saying Buffalo's city hall is dull and cookie cutter because it looks like every other art deco tower.
Click to expand...

Well, just a layman's opinion. My view is certainly not gospel. And it's obviously not an ugly building. But I think the original city hall there prior the earthquake was a lot more exciting. It had angles, lack of symmetry and just seemed like a masterwork.

On the new one, I just find everything so flat and safe. Someone trying desperately to copy a style.

I like Buffalo's. Timing is also relevant imo. That was built at the height of Art Deco, while SF's new one was built much later in the American copycat phase of Beaux Arts.
 
And they discovered that the original, pre-earthquake city hall in SF was built of plaster of Paris and balsa wood, or close to it. Huge scandal ensued. The opposite problem for Boston...the concrete will last 500 years. And I think bold moves could sufficiently alter the lower portions to create entry into the majestic inner courtyards. Glass in the area to the left, under the "stilts" and another winter garden could be fashioned. I like the new city hall as architecture....worth saving even if the top floors are abandoned and used for storage.
 
W.H. Harrison died from a cold (and his doctors). Lincoln had Booth. McKinley had Czolgosz. Ford almost got it courtesy of Squeaky Fromme.

Who is the would be assassin behind these new drawings?
 
Re: City Hall Plaza

statler said:
Wow. That's impressive. They've managed to obscure all the building's strong points while solving exactly zero of it's problems. Well done.

0726Bartnick-color5.jpg


0726Bartnick-color4.jpg
Click to expand...

It's terrible and pointless, but I like the concept of a glass skirt at the ground level of the building. Just not just this much and not poofed out like this.

In an earlier thread I suggested a glass skirt or glass wall below the overhang of the top 4 floors. But don't just drape a greenhouse around the outside of the place... It would be good if someone with better skills than I could mock up an exterior renovation that is more tasteful and includes some notion of functional form. And get rid of the brick walls at ground level, don't just put glass over them.
 
If the dark glass used on 22 Liberty Drive were used in this plan it might be better...
 
Charlie_mta said:
Lipstick on a pig......
Click to expand...

I would have thought the same about this ugly building with its first floor facade seemingly designed primarily for anti-zombie defense:
newlibrary.jpg


But this is a very thoughtful redesign of the street level facade:
Boston-Public-Library.jpg
 
I'm not sure why an architect thought transforming City Hall into Copley Place circa 1988 would be a good idea.
 
The Johnson wing of the BPL is an example of modern architecture that retains traditional urban form. Although the architectural style is nothing like the original part of the BPL, by being built up to and oriented toward the street, the Johnson Wing is part of the urban fabric. Because the fundamental form is good, a simple renovation (bye bye zombie walls) is able to greatly enliven the building.

City Hall, on the other hand, is a case of modern architecture with fundamentally bad urban form. Because the building has no connection to the surrounding urban fabric, I see little potential for a renovation to make the building right.
 
TheBostonian said:
The Johnson wing of the BPL is an example of modern architecture that retains traditional urban form. Although the architectural style is nothing like the original part of the BPL, by being built up to and oriented toward the street, the Johnson Wing is part of the urban fabric. Because the fundamental form is good, a simple renovation (bye bye zombie walls) is able to greatly enliven the building.

City Hall, on the other hand, is a case of modern architecture with fundamentally bad urban form. Because the building has no connection to the surrounding urban fabric, I see little potential for a renovation to make the building right.
Click to expand...

Heck put a Starbucks and Bar at ground level on Congress St and there is your Urban fabric. The plaza is another matter.
 
I think these ideas such as the glass curtain are taking it in the wrong direction. How can the Hall be altered aesthetically in a way that's functional and symbolic of the city's progress....necessitating the change? That's the competent way to go about it. And if it can't be figured out, it shouldn't be touched, just bombed.

Anything else is just like a shroud of shame. It would be like the Elephant Man walking through the street of London. We all know what's under there.
Elephant+Man+close+up+60.jpg


What about the Pompidou as a model?
 
Last edited:
There is no reason why the plaza can't be filled with small buildings cuddling up to the lower stories of city hall, just as Medieval towns grew up around the cathedral. I suggest that an organic redevelopment of the hall itself will emerge as the area around it comes alive as a viable place of commerce and social life...think of an extension of the Blackstone Block. Leave the hall as is until the street life begins to take over inside and around and define how the building could be used. I also see studios for artists in the upper floors, with galleries for artists of all kinds of media, taking over the larger chambers. And why not a culinary school? A ceramics studio (no fear of kilns burning down the building!)? But the key is opening it up from the outside, in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top