Photo of the Day, Boston Style: Part V (2012)

Status
Not open for further replies.
czsz said:
Those houses on Mass Ave are on my in-need-of-densification hitlist.

Lawns on Mass Ave between Kendall and Porter = unacceptable.
Click to expand...

CZ -- Cambridge is already one of the densest cities in the US

By the way -- by far the biggest lawn is City Hall's followed by several of MIT's
 
Cambridge is statistically dense overall because it doesn't have vast parklands or industrial areas like a lot of other cities do. Same for Somerville. That's not really the kind of density I was talking about (my criticism was based on aesthetic and highly localized planning considerations), but I would say these plots could use higher population density too. If nothing else it's a waste to have detached houses occupying land near a heavy rail station on a street that's contextually already a built-up commercial strip when there's such a high demand:supply ratio for space in the urban parts of metro Boston.

As for City Hall and MIT - civic and institutional buildings can and should be set off from the street. But more to the point, City Hall's lawn is, additionally, a nice public space, which these lawns are not. And most of MIT's open space isn't damaging the streetwall on Mass Ave.
 
Rain rain go away, here's a pic from early today:

7251696622_f793c09e70_b.jpg
 
Cambridge is statistically dense overall because it doesn't have vast parklands or industrial areas like a lot of other cities do. Same for Somerville.
Click to expand...

The main difference between Cambridge's and Somerville's density numbers is that Cambridge does have 'vast' parklands, at least compared to Somerville: Fresh Pond reservation (which includes a golf course), Danehy Park, Cambridge Cemetery, and a small part of Mount Auburn Cemetery.
 
Okay, yes. There is slightly more density in Cambridge, offsetting the fact that there are slightly more parks, but Cambridge also has relatively little surface area devoted to non-residential use compared to Boston or New York, which is the point.
 
Thanks, Gmack! Just curious, one of the columnists for the Globe wrote a few weeks ago complaining that the Zakim lighting has gone to hell and nothing's being done to improve the situation which should be an embarassment to the city since the Zakim is one of the icons of the city of Boston! Is this true?
 
It's true. I remember the first time I went over the bridge at night and being blown away by the rich blue lighting bathing everything you could see. I was far from sober (coming from a family function up in Beverly) and remember being completely caught off guard that such a thing even existed in Boston.

But now the blue gels have reportedly been stolen by highway employees (there's also an article from a couple years ago that details this) and what you see in Gmack's picture is pretty much what you get these days.
 
Why would they steal these "blue gels"? Are they made with gold or platinum or something?
 
I remember those blue lights! Added some really dramatic effects to enhance the aesthetics of the bridge even further.
 
BostonUrbEx said:
Why would they steal these "blue gels"? Are they made with gold or platinum or something?
Click to expand...

I've always wondered that as well. I know they are hella expensive, but it would be an odd thing to sell on the black market. The only other applications I know of besides this would be theater lighting. Who the middleman could be between the highway construction guys and theater folks, I have no idea.
 
It's all a matter of civic pride! You have to wonder who the guys are in charge of the Zakim and what they're thinking! Some damn hack who doesn't even give a damn...I'm sure the attitude is..."we're gonna spend money on some damn blue lights? Forget about it!" The Zakim is a symbol of 21st century Boston, found on postcards and used as a background on news programs that originate from the city! For fuck sakes, where's the mayor? The governor? Seriously, it's really a shame that it's not ablaze in light every night!
 
statler said:
I've always wondered that as well. I know they are hella expensive, but it would be an odd thing to sell on the black market. The only other applications I know of besides this would be theater lighting. Who the middleman could be between the highway construction guys and theater folks, I have no idea.
Click to expand...

As a "Theater Folk" i can tell you that we would have no use for the Zakim gels. Completley different stuff. Theater gels are very thin sheets of colored plastic that get cut down to fit in each individual lightign instrument. With a color as dark as the Zakim was lit, a theatrical gel would burn through in a few weeks in a theater light and probably less than a hour in the lights on the bridge. The Zakim gels were probably chromatic glass gel, aka colored glass, which has all sorts of uses in the real world. The reason they were probably "stolen" was that the color was dark so they wattage of the lamps had to be turned up to flood the bridge in light. By removing the gel you get a brighter light on the bridge with less wattage in the lamp, and because of the lower wattage the lamps will burn out less frequently saving quite a bit of money, but destroying the look of the bridge in the process.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top