Gov't Center Station Rebuild

Should have curved something in homage to all the curving buildings and streets in the area
 
All these shoulda', woulda', coulda' responses are really oversaturating the thread.

If it's "not", then too bad...design has been finished & construction is well underway. I wish focus would be on what it IS and WILL BE than what personal dreams it won't fulfill.

This is a huge undertaking, not only for ADA compliancy but for the next generation of kids who pass through this station and will know it for the redesigned format it will be (likely a grand improvement from what I grew up knowing, despite having a place in my heart for it).

Some responses have been a spotlight on why people can't have nice things...some assbag is waiting to critique the crap out of it, some before the first shovel hits the ground.
 
This whole design should be a set of intersecting double crescents -- echoing the Sears and Center Plaza crescents. I know "curves cost money", but don't pretend that glass sarcophagus doesn't cost money as well.
Click to expand...


Should have curved something in homage to all the curving buildings and streets in the area
Click to expand...

JeffDowntown said:
Agreed. My comment at #420.
Click to expand...

Jeff -- sorry I missed your post -- right on --- well said
:cool:
 
I thought this was a stupid ass waste from the very first plan released.

It's just a shame most of the people in charge of approving this stuff are all "SHINY, NEW!!!" It is right to critique this for the mess it is, before it happens a third time*.

*Kenmore
 
It must be nice to be psychic, and already know how something like this will pan-out over the next 20 - 30 years. And yet, here you and I are, still just on a message board...a great use of such psychic powers, indeed.
 
Curves = Pandora's box of issues*, including but not limited to custom fabrication, cost, performance, leakage, etc. Do we really want our own swoopy curvy Calatrava WTC Station boondoggle?

*This is especially relevant for the call for "intersecting double crescents"
 
djimpact1 said:
All these shoulda', woulda', coulda' responses are really oversaturating the thread.

If it's "not", then too bad...design has been finished & construction is well underway. I wish focus would be on what it IS and WILL BE than what personal dreams it won't fulfill.

This is a huge undertaking, not only for ADA compliancy but for the next generation of kids who pass through this station and will know it for the redesigned format it will be (likely a grand improvement from what I grew up knowing, despite having a place in my heart for it).

Some responses have been a spotlight on why people can't have nice things...some assbag is waiting to critique the crap out of it, some before the first shovel hits the ground.
Click to expand...

Oh, I thought this was an architectural discussion forum. Silly me!
 
djimpact1 should try to get through a single studio.




Critique is the bread and butter of being a designer. If you can't handle the heat, get out from under the drafting lamps.


datadyne007 said:
Curves = Pandora's box of issues*, including but not limited to custom fabrication, cost, performance, leakage, etc. Do we really want our own swoopy curvy Calatrava WTC Station boondoggle?

*This is especially relevant for the call for "intersecting double crescents"
Click to expand...

I would have wanted the T to explore options for an overbuild, incorporating a headhouse.

1) since when in history has daylight been considered something necessary for a subway platform?
2) Huge glass monolith = any sort of practicality?

Honestly I just got off work and have been drinking... the perfect time to post to aB, no?
I stand by my arguments, I'm just probably not making them that well.
 
davem said:
1) since when in history has daylight been considered something necessary for a subway platform?
Click to expand...

If the idea was to get as far away from the WW2 bunker design then daylighting is a great idea. Also the platform is so close to the street, why not?

The Brooklyn Bridge-City Hall station in NYC (part of the original subway) has square glass bricks used in the ceiling of the fare mezzanine and it's a really cool effect both underground and above ground.

2) Huge glass monolith = any sort of practicality?
Click to expand...

Easy to wash? I mean just send out some power washers or every time it rains it gets cleaned.
 
davem said:
I thought this was a stupid ass waste from the very first plan released.

It's just a shame most of the people in charge of approving this stuff are all "SHINY, NEW!!!" It is right to critique this for the mess it is, before it happens a third time*.

*Kenmore
Click to expand...

As much as the T's Glass Palace obsession is idiotic, if there's any place to put a Glass Palace, I gotta imagine a major transfer station in the middle of a major downtown location is it. I just can't find the energy to get outraged about it. On the long list of things the T does stupidly, the new GC station is pretty far down the list.
 
djimpact1 said:
It must be nice to be psychic, and already know how something like this will pan-out over the next 20 - 30 years. And yet, here you and I are, still just on a message board...a great use of such psychic powers, indeed.
Click to expand...

Not just psychics, but armchair architect psychics.
 
If the T nails budget and schedule (I bet they are ahead vs a March 2016 deadline) that has to be ranked as the more important win for Boston infrastructure, mobility, riders, and taxpayers.
 
Arlington said:
If the T nails budget and schedule (I bet they are ahead vs a March 2016 deadline) that has to be ranked as the more important win for Boston infrastructure, mobility, riders, and taxpayers.
Click to expand...

Yeah. The glass fetish is kind of a cheeky in-joke, but it's more rooted in the fact that these stations where they've over-focused on aesthetics have to-date tended to be way late, way over-budget, occasionally had shoddy workmanship on some of the bread-and-butter basics, and in some cases have involved design compromises that made them less functional than before. Ashmont rebuild being the gold standard in mismanaged station projects.

I doubt anyone is going to care if the damn thing is just 1) on-time, 2) on-budget, and 3) less-awful than what was there previously. #1 and #3 look like optimistic targets. We'll see what the verdict is on #2, and whether the workmanship was solid enough to avoid incurring extra maint costs. About the only thing disappointing about this was having the Blue-only egress cut from the design. They're already building the mini-headhouse for the emergency exit, so any which way they were halfway-or-better to full follow-through. That's an annoyance in the same vein as not doing the Berkeley St. entrance to Arlington with that station's rebuild. But it's small potatoes in the long run, and nothing prevents them from tacking it on years later as an independent extra should they find the need.
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
That's an annoyance in the same vein as not doing the Berkeley St. entrance to Arlington with that station's rebuild. But it's small potatoes in the long run, and nothing prevents them from tacking it on years later as an independent extra should they find the need.
Click to expand...

The weird part is that the Berkeley entrance was modernized (so they could renovate the main Arlington one) and is closed for absolutely no reason. It's got fare gates, FVMs, code compliant lighting... Everything. Why is it closed?
 
datadyne007 said:
The weird part is that the Berkeley entrance was modernized (so they could renovate the main Arlington one) and is closed for absolutely no reason. It's got fare gates, FVMs, code compliant lighting... Everything. Why is it closed?
Click to expand...

It was closed because the Mass Architectural Access Board determined it would have to be accessible if it was to remain open as a permanent secondary entrance.
 
davem said:
djimpact1 should try to get through a single studio.

Critique is the bread and butter of being a designer. If you can't handle the heat, get out from under the drafting lamps.
Click to expand...

I never said it wasn't. But neither you or I designed the new headhouse, nor will any criticism at this point alter the inevitable fulfillment of its design. (Again, refer to my "shoulda' woulda' coulda'" comment).

Regardless, I assume my point will be lost/thrown by the wayside so that playing imaginary head designer on a project not likely to be altered can resume. The hell w/ ADA compliancy and a functional station, it looks funny, etc.

BTW, clichés are nothing but non-informative dialogue filler.
 
winstonoboogie said:
It was closed because the Mass Architectural Access Board determined it would have to be accessible if it was to remain open as a permanent secondary entrance.
Click to expand...

Oh, MAAB... what a pain in the ass you always are. Accessible entrances are literally 1-2 blocks away in either direction. Oh well. Thanks for the answer. Don't want to derail this further.
 
winstonoboogie said:
It was closed because the Mass Architectural Access Board determined it would have to be accessible if it was to remain open as a permanent secondary entrance.
Click to expand...

Funny how requirements like this have unintended consequences. So instead of having an entrance that MOST people can use, we get no entrance for anyone. I know that's not the spirit of the law, but that's how it goes when the T doesn't have money to put elevators everywhere.

There was a similar situation with the Community Path Extension where folks asked if there could be a staircase up to Lowell St from one side (there is already a staircase and ramp planned for the other side.) It was decided that no there cannot be a second staircase because there would have to be a second ramp too (which there is neither physical space nor a budget for.) So yeah...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top