I Think We Should Collectively Write An Article!!!

C

ChitchIII

New member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Messages
68
Reaction score
10
Not too long ago in the Berklee Expansion thread Briv made a very astute comment that has had me up in arms ready to kick some ?NIMBY? A$$ ;

?Berklee, and every other college in this city, should be encouraged to use their existing property in the absolute most efficient manner possible, so not to necessitate further property acquisitions that only serve to erode the city's tax base. This means building taller and denser. Opposing height here will only increase the likelihood that this entire area will eventually be completely gobbled up by Berklee's outward sprawl.?

1) We should start with a layout. Now I know there are a lot of Architecture buffs here who would like to discuss the building?s aesthetics, but for this exercise I think we should stay with and Urban Development and Density theam.
2) Facts must be taken from Government Agencies or the Schools themselves (No quoting the board)
3) Does anyone actually think that if this were to be a reasonable article someone would actually pick it up? Anyone got any connections?

Anyone interested?
 
I've got friends at the Herald, but we'll have to keep it on a second grade reading level.
 
I used big words in a letter to the Herald editor in 2003 (in which I criticized their sensationalized, pro-NIMBY coverage of Columbus Center), and it got printed...
 
i like the article idea too, it will give us some recognition. get some new members. and people will realize how dumb they are.
 
i'd volunteer to copy-edit, etc. have experience and spell-checker...
 
Maybe the time has come to organize, establish an advocacy group - the article can be a part of the launch. There is a similar theme on the Shreve thread, about a need for action. There are so many intelligent ideas on this board, maybe it's time to the board had a public voice.
 
...been talked about a million times.
 
...so stop talking, start doing, while the rest of the country is on this change binge so can we.
 
If this is done it should not be a diatribe blaming NIMBYs. The country is tired and worn out with blaming-the-other guy and pointing-the-finger journalism. Decide what is positive about our position and what brings many people into the tent, all kinds of people, not just like-minded geeks such as those of us who frequent sites like this.
 
I'm game. No diatribes. Most of us articulate well enough; we need merely to present a united front. We need a leader.
 
riffgo said:
We need a leader.
Click to expand...

Well, I have nominee, but I don't want to throw them under a bus.

Here are my suggestions for criteria:

They should live in Boston. (This eliminates my top two nominees)

They should have some experience with community activism.

The first and second name of their board nick should start with the same letter. ;)
 
singbat said:
i'd volunteer to copy-edit, etc. have experience and spell-checker...
Click to expand...

I'm better at spell checking than you. If you don't believe me, we'll have a spell-check-off.

I nominate whoever comes forward first to be the leader.
 
statler said:
The first and second name of their board nick should start with the same letter. ;)
Click to expand...
BetonBrut, I guess you're the Chosen!

(... unless maybe it's BostonBoy ... ?)




JimboJones?
 
I take it AblArc doesn't live in Boston, so BedtonBrut it is! Congratulations!
 
nm88 said:
Decide what is positive about our position and what brings many people into the tent, all kinds of people, not just like-minded geeks such as those of us who frequent sites like this.
Click to expand...
The positive thread that unites ArchBoston forumers is enthusiasm for cities. Like any enthusiasm, this leads to better-than-average understanding, which in turn enables better critiques. People who spend their spare time as tourists in their own cities can be relied upon to have their opinions firmly grounded in such realities as how it feels to be standing on a sidewalk in July with too much sun and an adjacent blank wall; they know it feels about the same whether it's 15, 185 or 900 feet high.

From dealing with them on a weekly basis, I know that most folks who work for municipal planning departments are not urban enthusiasts. They don't tour their own city with their eyes peeled, they don't small-talk about urban aesthetics, they're likely to live in the suburbs, they spend their days back-stabbing at the office, and their opinions on cities were received fully-formed and immutable from professors and textbooks in planning school. And we all know what balderdash is served up there as wisdom.

These people have nothing further to learn, and though they have internalized much material, it's not anything that would gratify the requirements of a man in the street. They exist to stoke the machine and keep it running for developers, government departments, citizen groups and other special interests. The man in the street has no spokesmen.

There are, however, other groupings of folks you might mistake for urban enthusiasts. These include activists who inject themselves noisily into the minutiae of master planning in such places as Allston, Prudential and the South End.

Problem with these people is that they suffer from theories. They've heard just enough from the professionals and the ignoramuses who purvey these theories to be genuinely dangerous and harmful to the environment. They "know" such things as: tall buildings are evil, greenery is always better than buildings, shadows cause suffering, unfamiliar forms and materials should be opposed, density must be lowered. And they know these things about all places equally --as though all places could thrive on the same strictures and formulas.

These opinions are often unworthy of respect precisely because they are not opinions at all, but rather the mindless parroting of statements made elsewhere at another time --possibly by folks equally deluded. Of course, the vehemence with which these views are stated is in direct proportion to their preposterousness. If what you say doesn't hold water, you repeat it more loudly and with a helping of anger. Of course.

These are the people we should be reaching out to. If we can get them to lay aside their received theories and step outside into the light of experiential truth, their enlightenment is assured, because their senses will convey the rest to them as they do to us. Untroubled by the "wisdom" of theories, we pretty much all feel the same things. After all, we're all members of the same species.

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, and we need to encourage folks to set aside what they think they know in favor of the truth that's right there in front of their noses.

.
 
Last edited:
If everyone could just read and understand what your just wrote, we probably wouldn't need to write an article
 
Ablarc, the maladies you just described so masterfully all fall under the realm of ignorant urban notions, and they are true maladies resulting in sick cities with poor prognoses.

How do we find a cure?
 
For a lot of people around here, suburbs = good, city = bad. The concept of a livable city with 24 hour neighborhoods is alien to them. Boston is a place where people go to school and then live for a few years until they can move out to the suburbs with the big SUV. It's a place they pass through, not a destination. And while they are here, the character or lack thereof the place makes no impression on them. I wonder how many have actually seen another city outside of Boston - they have no "urban frame of reference." It's ironic that a place with so many universities and a constant influx of young people can be so culturally sterile.

You can't convince anyone of anything until they understand what a city is and can be, and then take a look at Boston.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top