Lovejoy Wharf - Hoffman Building | 160 North Washington Street | West End

Makes sense, tho it seems to me the noise of construction would be annoying to office workers
 
Deetroyt said:
Makes sense, tho it seems to me the noise of construction would be annoying to office workers
Click to expand...

It could be a funding requirement. They might not get their money until the building is occupied. If they are getting any historic preservation tax credits for this thing (which I doubt, but they might), it HAS to be done before they are released. It could also just be logistics. The site might not have enough room to work on both projects simultaneously.
 
13730803355_49029b70f9_b.jpg
 
That's an awesome little gap between those buildings on the left. Very cool shot.
 
This is going to be a great development. It's shaping up very well imo
 
I just find it sad that architects have completely given up on doing anything sympathetic to older buildings. It could be an addition that will be utterly integrated into the original structure and all we'll get is the most brain-dead gridded glass design possible. It's like we've gone back to the '50s and '60s in how much current designs say "screw you" to the originals but without any of the intellectual rigor--real or imagined--that came with capital "M" Modernism.

Fuck it, bring back the PoMo. At least they were trying.
 
Last edited:
So how would you characterize the Johnson addition to the BPL? If any addition says "screw you" to the original , his addition says it loud and clear!
 
I really don't get the hatred for the Johnson addition. Of all the hulking libaries built in the '60s and '70s, I feel like we got one of the better ones. The tombstones never bothered me, and I actually kinda like the granite they used.
 
kz1000ps said:
I really don't get the hatred for the Johnson addition. Of all the hulking libaries built in the '60s and '70s, I feel like we got one of the better ones. The tombstones never bothered me, and I actually kinda like the granite they used.
Click to expand...

It still looks more like a bunker than a library
 
Notice how most architectural design over the last 40 years seems to cater to the occupants and their views more than how the building itself relates architecturally to the environment and/or the older surrounding parts? Two very different exceptions: City Hall and Hancock tower. Both were created as urban sculptures, neither cater to the street life around them. The former does little for the occupants if according to critics. The latter manages as sculpture to relate somewhat through reflections. Neither care about pedestrians. The new BPL is just a box for books and meeting rooms as it stands now and at least does not compete with the McKim piece. It's one instance when Johnson didn't push his narcissistic ego into everyone's face. I presume the Converse redo is meant to highlight the brick portion without trying to compete with it, unlike the stupid multi-toned tiling of the roof on the addition to the Sears Crescent.
 
I don't think this is a tax credit project, but (emphasis mine)

An addition should be designed to be compatible with the historic character of the building and, thus, meet the Standards for Rehabilitation. Standards 9 and 10 apply specifically to new additions:
(9) “New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment.”
(10) “New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.”
Click to expand...

These are the two driving forces as of late regarding how to deal with additions. They should be distinct, identifiable to the layperson, and if removed have no effect on the original building. At that, the Converse addition does a MUCH better job than the pomo disaster behind it.
 
Lovejoy is probably the Best development near North Station so far. This area has been so disappointing.
 
TheRifleman said:
Lovejoy is probably the Best development near North Station so far. This area has been so disappointing.
Click to expand...

Completely agree...the area has so much potential though...GCG and TD towers along with the new haymarket and parcel 9 and the neighborhood would be buzzing for sure...

Why do these things take so long to start? Where's merano and all these other projects?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top