Why is Boston So Ugly?

Want to see stunning architecture? Check out Boise, Idaho, then you will LOVE Boston's skyline.
 
Well, as long as we can beat out than Boise, I guess we're all set. No need to do any better than that.
 
In a similar vein: http://www.wbur.org/2015/07/15/architecture-boston-buildings, "Casting A Critical Architectural Eye On Boston’s Building Boom"

My favorite quote:

And this is part of the issue in Boston in general, we seem to have this knack for creating relentlessly B- architecture. Everything is sort of OK, but nothing is exciting. Also we should note that of these buildings some of these are actual office buildings, others are residential, and you can barely differentiate between the two.
 
Adding balconies on residential mid or high rises would solve that problem and add more usable space for the occupants as well. A win, win!
 
In a similar vein: http://www.wbur.org/2015/07/15/architecture-boston-buildings, "Casting A Critical Architectural Eye On Boston’s Building Boom"

There are some positives in there. I think the formula for building tall successfully is pretty well understood by now. For the first 3 to 5 stories (or a bit more) you make a traditionally intimate city street scape in the model of our more vibrant and successful downtown areas. For everything above that you make something with nice views from the inside and something nice and interesting to look at from vantage points further away. And you tie it altogether with the best architecturally thematic and functional elements of the surrounding neighborhood as best you can.

Where new developments fall short is usually "programming" the ground floor space which is more than just architecture. You have to have the use and potential tenants in mind otherwise you just end up filling in by default with the types of tenants you plan for the upper levels.

And also it seems that some architecture over emphasizes "interesting" (odd looking) over aesthetically pleasing and interesting. I'd call this "bad mood architecture" which values a negative emotional response as much as a positive one.

And then that article very well highlights the failure to mesh with the surrounding neighborhood which is often the fault of the City not taking responsibility for the overall design of the neighborhood, but also it seems that with all the money being spent on some of these projects that a few tens of thousands of dollars here and there (from either the city or the developers) would help spruce up the neighborhood in a shorter term than just waiting another decade for the next big development to "finish" the neighborhood and displace whatever it is that is detracting from the architecture and look and feel of the area.
 
wtU5tTn.png

5763428843_ce57f1f3a9.jpg
 
^I love Fenway and hope it is never replaced, but have to admit I think the press box is pretty terrible looking. When was that built in its current form?
 
^The Clarendon made the list? Really? I feel like that building was regarded pretty well here. At worst, it's "meh." I can think of many buildings more deserving than The Clarendon on that list.
 
The Revere Hotel doesn't make it? Also agree that its a joke with Fenway on it.
 
Tremont on the Common should be a Top 3 building here.
 
that list is almost as stupid as the article in the original post
 
If you're going to have a list of the ugliest Boston buildings One Boston Place has to be on it.
 
true. but the top can be fixed with a 60 foot tall ringed fence [around the perimeter] and lights.......
 
If you're going to have a list of the ugliest Boston buildings One Boston Place has to be on it.

One Boston Place is one of my favorite buildings in town. It's Boston's version of Chicago's John Hancock Building. Tall/vertical, brooding, neo-gothic... I love it! It really just needs a fresh coat of black paint.
 
I thought the list was piss poor, too; only a few were listed that i would bother to mention on any list of the buildings i hate.

Putting Fenway in there was especially absurd. Anyway, i figured i'd bounce it off you all and wait to hear any response.

I hate the McCormack cube, State Service Center, City Hall, Christ Scientist Tower, 133 Federal Street, JFK low-rise offices, Harbor Garage, IMAX, Aquarium, 888 Boylston, Sheraton North Tower, Revere Hotel. Mass Dept of Transportation, 65 Martha Rd, 101 Huntington, and Center Plaza.
 
Last edited:
One Boston Place is one of my favorite buildings in town. It's Boston's version of Chicago's John Hancock Building. Tall/vertical, brooding, neo-gothic... I love it! It really just needs a fresh coat of black paint.

I guess it wouldn't be awful (in my opinion) if it weren't for the ugly box on the top of it. The box on the top ruins its look in my opinion.

Though admittedly I could see how it looks pretty cool from ground level. On the skyline it's horrid looking but from the ground level it actually looks impressive.

Anyway i'm not a big fan of Devonshire Place. I find that building to be pretty ugly.

Though I have to say architecture is very subjective. On another thread someone called International Place ugly, and it's one of my favorite Boston buildings.

And unlike some people on here, I don't hate the Harbor towers. Of course I hate the ground level treatment, but not necessarily the towers themselves. I honestly find the Longfellow Place towers to be worse, though it isn't in as prominent of a spot.

I could also point out that the entire West End is an example of bad urban planning, but that would probably be beating a dead horse.
 
I would love to see the horrible aging concrete on the Longfellow and Harbor Towers painted in a mix of pastel blue, red, navy, or winter green, maybe even on alternating walls. Anything to reduce their dead soulless look.

I like the cladding on 1 Boston Place. I would like to see it redone in a high gloss, though.

The boxy Downtown towers would have been saved by either of Accordia's renders, MT, 1 Congress, high a/r at 1 Bromfield, and the Harbor Garage.
 

Back
Top