[HN Gopher] How Boston City Hall was born
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       How Boston City Hall was born
        
       Author : goles
       Score  : 57 points
       Date   : 2024-12-18 13:19 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.bostonglobe.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.bostonglobe.com)
        
       | Eumenes wrote:
       | Its truly hideous. Old City Hall is beautiful. Why can't we build
       | nice things anymore?
        
         | Spooky23 wrote:
         | We don't have skilled immigrant labor and the post WW2 boom
         | made it difficult to win contracts with high quality building
         | materials and artisans. The Hudson valley of New York had
         | hundreds of brickyards until the 1950s and 60s. Bricks suck
         | because they're made in like two places, because construction
         | is scaled and needs cheap materials.
         | 
         | There's no good wood because wood < brick and we cut all of the
         | trees down. So now the cheapest path is pumped concrete, so we
         | build giant reinforced concrete and glass structures that will
         | literally crumble in 70-100 years.
        
         | nilptr wrote:
         | > Why can't we build nice things anymore?
         | 
         | Well.. first start by defining "beautiful", we're waiting.
         | Also, it's a 50 year old structure.. we stopped building "nice"
         | things after WW2 mostly because costs were astronomical and new
         | materials and engineering opened up all kinds of avenues for
         | more modern construction.
         | 
         | I've spent decent amount of time in and around Boston City
         | Hall, the biggest problem with the building are:
         | 
         | 1. The plaza in front of it is a damn wasteland. So much could
         | be improved by building over the plaza and reestablishing the
         | street grid here properly.
         | 
         | 2. The Congress Street side facing Faneuil Hall is a concrete
         | wall and a garage entrance. You probably can't fix the garage
         | problem easily but the concrete wall with a proper structural
         | engineer could probably reopened up.. of course, it would be
         | expensive.
         | 
         | 3. The interior while very interesting architecturally is
         | really quite... I dunno, soul sucking. I kind of love the
         | aesthetic inside but only from a "wow this looks cool"
         | perspective.
        
           | eber wrote:
           | 1. They remodeled City Hall Plaza in 2022 [1], unfortunately
           | not a street grid, but less of a cold wasteland than before.
           | 
           | 2. Agreed regarding the Congress St side, though the added
           | playground from [1] adds some interest to that side (before
           | the solid brick wall part).
           | 
           | 3. Agreed with the interior. Something like just changing the
           | flooring or interesting lighting would make it feel less
           | cold. The floor is either brick (I assume an homage to
           | Boston's brick) or terracotta tile. As a very rare visitor
           | inside, it's kinda fun to see how the
           | decor/lighting/infrastructure works with all concrete
           | (hanging things from the ceiling instead of nailing to a
           | wall, for example)
           | 
           | [1] https://www.sasaki.com/projects/boston-city-hall-plaza-
           | renov...
        
             | voidfunc wrote:
             | Aware of the remodel and it is indeed an improvement in
             | nice weather months but it's still pretty lacking and
             | absolutely awful Nov to April which is.. close to half a
             | year.
        
               | ghaff wrote:
               | I sort of agree. On the other hand, the outside on a
               | waterfront in a northern US city is probably not going to
               | be great for a good chunk of the year in any case.
               | 
               | There are nice parks in the area but they're not exactly
               | delightful in the cold weather months either.
        
           | lucidguppy wrote:
           | Older structures cost more because they lasted longer and
           | were more maintainable. Growth was given priority over
           | tradition - and we've had to deal with the tradeoffs.
        
             | Spooky23 wrote:
             | There's more to it than that. People were rejecting
             | tradition. How many millions were slaughtered in WW1 and 2?
             | 
             | There was a feeling that it was time to discard the old and
             | do something different.
        
           | deeg wrote:
           | > The interior while very interesting architecturally is
           | really quite... I dunno, soul sucking. I kind of love the
           | aesthetic inside but only from a "wow this looks cool"
           | perspective.
           | 
           | Totally agree with this. I enjoy walking through the interior
           | and I like the building overall but I would hate working
           | there.
        
             | pivo wrote:
             | A friend worked there for years, she said different offices
             | would either be far too hot or else freezing on the same
             | day. There was never a comfortable room.
             | 
             | If the interior offices were kept clean and tidy, I can see
             | how it could be kind of interesting in a retro-futuristic
             | way. But given that these are government offices, they're
             | often full of stacked cardboard boxes of files and other
             | mess that ruins the look. At least the building doesn't
             | have drop ceilings (at least as far as I recall.)
        
           | oceanplexian wrote:
           | > Also, it's a 50 year old structure..
           | 
           | I don't personally see this a good reason at all.
           | 
           | The US had a good run building neoclassical government
           | buildings in the spitting image of the Romans and Greeks, and
           | we already know that when properly done the aesthetic will
           | stand the test of time for thousands of years.
           | 
           | As far as the improved materials argument that's up for
           | debate too. Will Boston City Hall be standing in 2,000 years?
           | If I could put money on it I'd say it's more likely to end up
           | in a landfill.
        
             | ocschwar wrote:
             | It will not. I guarantee it. The vehicle emissions worming
             | into the bare concrete are acidic. The water from rain and
             | from the humid air slowly degrades it. The salt air doesn't
             | help. At some point, sooner than you think, the corrosion
             | will reach the rebars inside the concrete.
             | 
             | All this could be prevented with sacrificial applications
             | of stucco, but brutalist architects insist on keeping the
             | concrete bare. It takes a lot of work to keep a building
             | like that from crumbling under these conditions, and city
             | hall is not loved enough to get the work done.
        
               | ghaff wrote:
               | I don't love Brutalism in general but it also just ages
               | pretty poorly. Some of it is about the updating of really
               | crappy interior decor but the renovation of the Boston
               | Public Library brutalist addition really helped a lot--
               | though still, nothing like the original structure.
        
               | rayiner wrote:
               | I work in the Watergate, and it's in terrible condition
               | after just 60 years. The 1950s post-war mass produced
               | house I grew up in is in better condition. Meanwhile, the
               | Farley Post Office in Manhattan is so gorgeous 110 years
               | later that they built the new Penn Station in it.
        
           | ghaff wrote:
           | I mostly agree. The backside is just hideous and the
           | brickyard is unnecessarily a wasteland for most of the year.
           | Boston's climate doesn't help but, certainly at least in the
           | warmer months, there could be more of a welcoming commercial
           | presence there like there is outdoors on the other side of
           | City Hall around Quincy Market.
           | 
           | The renovation does help somewhat; I agree with other
           | comments. Rarely down that way any longer. Used to work a few
           | blocks from there.
        
           | lambdaphagy wrote:
           | If architectural beauty is subjective, that's an even
           | stronger argument for building stuff that broad majorities
           | find pleasing instead of stuff designed by architects who
           | write manifestos about how much they hate beauty.
        
           | rayiner wrote:
           | > Well.. first start by defining "beautiful", we're waiting.
           | 
           | https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f7/No.
           | ..
           | 
           | https://wmf.imgix.net/images/70_hero_image.jpg?auto=format,c.
           | ..
           | 
           | Hundreds of years later, most people from completely
           | disparate cultures find these buildings beautiful.
        
             | tptacek wrote:
             | Yes, those are two buildings people find beautiful. You can
             | find lots more like it if you keep turning the dial all the
             | way to "form" and away from "function".
        
             | astrange wrote:
             | It seems difficult to fit a city hall in either of them.
        
           | tacticalturtle wrote:
           | The one nice part of the wasteland plaza is that it can hold
           | large outdoor exhibitions in a way that no other space in
           | downtown area can.
           | 
           | Inside the NBA was held live there recently, Boston Calling
           | (the only largish music festival in the area) started there.
           | 
           | There's obviously no massive outdoor parking lot in downtown
           | Boston, and it would be a shame to have packed crowds trample
           | over the common.
        
         | Symmetry wrote:
         | Samuel Hughes at Works in Progress has been writing a bunch on
         | this general topic recently.
         | 
         | Most relevant: https://worksinprogress.co/issue/making-
         | architecture-easy/
         | 
         | The big idea is that some art styles are easy to appreciate
         | without training and some aren't, and we probably shouldn't be
         | making public architecture that's hard for members of the
         | public to appreciate. Similarly atonal music isn't objectively
         | bad, I often like it, but I recognize that it isn't appropriate
         | to use in civic functions.
        
         | rayiner wrote:
         | Because architects went from building monuments to God and
         | creation to building monuments to their own narcissism. Notre
         | Dame (https://www.britannica.com/topic/Notre-Dame-de-Paris) was
         | meant to be pleasing to God. And by implication, to man,
         | because man was created in the image of God. Boston City Hall
         | wasn't meant to be pleasing to anyone. It's more important to
         | "make a statement" than to make something that is beautiful and
         | uplifting.
        
           | tptacek wrote:
           | The point of Notre Dame is to be a monument to God. That's
           | not the point of most buildings.
           | 
           | Ironically, the other example of a good building you've
           | provided in this thread, the Taj Mahal, is in fact a monument
           | to narcissism.
        
             | rayiner wrote:
             | The Taj Mahal is covered in arabic inscriptions from the
             | Quran: https://www.wonders-of-the-world.net/Taj-
             | Mahal/Scriptures-on...
             | 
             | Public buildings historically had a religious significance,
             | and architecture as a field was intertwined with religion.
             | The current british parliament building, for example, is
             | built in gothic revival style, which arises from religious
             | architecture:
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gothic_Revival_architecture
        
               | tptacek wrote:
               | As you obviously know, the Taj Mahal is a memorial to the
               | empress consort to the Mughal emperor.
        
         | m0llusk wrote:
         | The old city hall had a decorated cake look, but was a
         | dysfunctional structure. There was nowhere to gather outside
         | except the sidewalk. Entry was primarily through a large set of
         | stairs that limited access. Once inside there was nowhere to
         | gather, only a maze of narrow corridors servicing cramped
         | offices with limited access to light and air.
         | 
         | The new city hall makes people angry and generates comments
         | about totalitarianism, but it offers a range of places to
         | gather inside and out and is extremely easy to navigate with
         | internal spaces that have plenty of light and air. Brutalism
         | may be an unpopular style, but the form itself has quite
         | significant benefits.
        
       | Finnucane wrote:
       | When you walk across the plaza in front of the building, you do
       | get the sense that this is a building with a message. And that
       | message is: We will crush you.
        
         | jrmg wrote:
         | It's truly a building (and plaza) that has to be experienced in
         | person to appreciate it. It certainly provokes emotion. An
         | amazing place I'm glad to have experienced. But I'm also glad
         | that most of the world is not like it.
        
           | ocschwar wrote:
           | The one nice thing about the plaza is that when protesters
           | show up there is no questioning their sincerity. You know
           | they're not there for the fun of it.
        
           | fatnoah wrote:
           | Speaking as a resident of Boston and the neighborhoods near
           | city hall, that plaza is such a contrast from the rest of the
           | area. Everywhere around it has shops, alleys, and interesting
           | things to see, whereas that plaza was an endless sea of
           | bricks. They've dressed it up better now, but it still feels
           | more like a missed opportunity than a useful civic space.
        
         | ghaff wrote:
         | I read a humor column once that had something to the effect of
         | it was designed to be even more intimidating than Soviet
         | architecture.
        
         | ravenstine wrote:
         | I actually like the building, but it does have that "Borg cube"
         | feeling about it.
        
         | paultopia wrote:
         | Yeah I've always thought that the point of much of the design
         | was to have obvious places to put machine guns to mow down
         | protesters.
        
         | hax0ron3 wrote:
         | I've only seen it in photos, but to me it looks like the kind
         | of place where a dystopian military dictatorship tortures its
         | political prisoners. Or maybe like one of the army base levels
         | from the original Quake, with its blocky polygons. I do see a
         | certain charm in its architecture if I let myself enjoy the
         | absurdity of it, but it does not seem fun to walk through all
         | the useless empty space in front of it on a windy day with this
         | thing looming over you.
        
       | mazugrin2 wrote:
       | And at least there's this there now:
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cop_slide
        
         | securingsincity wrote:
         | Anytime i've brought my kids to that playground since that
         | incident there is always someone either recreating or showing
         | someone that video. The best exposure for a park really.
        
       | don-code wrote:
       | Architecturally, the city of Boston has changed many times. You
       | can more or less pinpoint when a building was built by its
       | appearance. City Hall's architecture is mirrored in most of the
       | transit stops from the 1970s-era expansion. Some of them (e.g.
       | Wollaston, Harvard) have since been rebuilt; others (e.g. Quincy
       | Adams, Malden Center) are still concrete behemoths like City
       | Hall.
       | 
       | Anything built within the last ten years is, of course, LEED-chic
       | - the building is a glass box.
        
         | Finnucane wrote:
         | The glass box thing started here too: IM Pei's Hancock tower
         | was one of the first, from the 1970s. And like many
         | architectural wonders, the construction was crap. I can still
         | remember going by and seeing all the boarded-up windows,
         | because the glass kept falling out.
        
           | ghaff wrote:
           | Though none of the Brutalist IM Pei buildings at MIT were as
           | bad, my understanding that they had to retrofit a revolving
           | door in one of them because the wind tunnel effect could make
           | it really hard to open the doors.
           | 
           | https://nowiknow.com/the-curious-problem-with-mits-
           | tallest-b...
        
         | FrontierProject wrote:
         | Funny thing about the glass box. If you look down Tremont
         | Street towards the bay you used to get a beautifully framed
         | view of Old North Church. The sightline was considered a
         | historical landmark (there's even a plaque for it in front of
         | the Omni Parker House hotel). The Government Center station
         | completely obstructed the view to Old North. Allegedly this is
         | one of the main reasons that Government center is a glass box,
         | it was the only way the construction was approved.
        
       | katamaster818 wrote:
       | non paywalled link: https://archive.is/mPF37
        
       | light_hue_1 wrote:
       | > In the 50 years since, architects worldwide have declared
       | Kallmann and McKinnell's City Hall one of the greatest buildings
       | of the 20th century
       | 
       | I despise architecture as a field. This is widely reviled
       | building. I work in a similar building that is extremely user
       | hostile but beloved by architects; every single day, multiple
       | times per day, we run into stupid limitations of the building.
       | And it's particularly nasty for people with disabilities.
       | 
       | In engineering we care so much about the end user experience. In
       | everything from building fridges, to roads, to HVAC systems, etc.
       | 
       | That these two people see this as a work of art, instead of a
       | practical thing that humans need to interface with, and that the
       | artistic nature of the building is more important than the
       | people, is incredibly selfish.
       | 
       | Selfish and shameful.
        
         | bombcar wrote:
         | Architects design what their clients want, and their clients
         | want "a bold statement" because that looks good on the planning
         | documents and photographs.
         | 
         | If you want a well-designed building that works for the users,
         | you can find architects to design that. It just won't be as
         | well known because it'll work and do what it needs to do
         | without pissing people off.
        
         | fatnoah wrote:
         | > That these two people see this as a work of art, instead of a
         | practical thing that humans need to interface with
         | 
         | As a Boston resident that has had to conduct business at City
         | Hall many times, I couldn't agree with this more. The lower
         | level interior spaces are dark and somehow cavernous and
         | confining at the same time, while the upstairs spaces are more
         | of a warren of rooms and hallways. Nothing about walking in the
         | front door makes you feel welcomed into the space. Either the
         | actual use of the building was totally disregarded in its
         | design, our our standards for how we expect to interact with
         | buildings have dramatically changed since its construction.
        
       | 7e wrote:
       | This is the worst building that exists in Boston at present.
        
       | otras wrote:
       | > It was in this context that the city decided to demolish the
       | neighborhood known as Scollay Square and build in its place what
       | would come to be called Government Center.
       | 
       | It's interesting (and sad) to imagine what Boston could have been
       | like without the damage of urban renewal. These neighborhoods
       | could have easily become the quaint North Ends people love today.
       | 
       | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_End,_Boston
       | 
       | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scollay_Square
       | 
       | It's also eye opening to realize the extent of their plans that
       | _didn't_ get done:
       | 
       | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_695_(Massachusett...
        
         | ghaff wrote:
         | There's a WGBH podcast about the Big Dig and the first episode
         | I think helps you appreciate why some of the interstate
         | connections and routings around Boston are so weird.
         | https://www.wgbh.org/podcasts/the-big-dig
        
         | nineplay wrote:
         | People who opposed demolishing the neighborhoods would be
         | called NIMBYs today and would be blamed for the housing crisis.
         | I'm not saying this to be snarky, just that there is a real
         | push and pull there that I don't think is appreciated. There
         | are some beautiful old neighborhoods near me which are at risk
         | of being torn down and replaced with multi-unit dwellings. The
         | residents say 'save our neighborhoods' and the activists cry
         | 'greedy homeowners' and in the meantime the developers are
         | rubbing their hands in anticipation of mountains of cash.
        
           | ghaff wrote:
           | That particular urban renewal didn't create a lot of new
           | housing. On the other hand, that whole general area of Boston
           | was pretty crappy back in the day. (Not just what's now
           | Government Center but all along Washington Street.) It mostly
           | didn't result in more housing; I'm guessing less. But burying
           | the central artery was almost certainly a lot more positive
           | overall.
        
             | fatnoah wrote:
             | According to the West End Museum site, the project created
             | more housing units, but also led to a population decrease,
             | most likely due to the decrease in the number of people
             | living in each unit.
             | 
             | This document is a fascinating read: https://archive.org/de
             | tails/westendprojectre00bost/page/n79/...
             | 
             | Comparing what they proposed vs what resulted is very
             | interesting.
        
               | ghaff wrote:
               | Thanks. I can believe that easily. I assume a lot of
               | what, if not exactly tenement housing at least adjacent,
               | was torn down while generally high-end often waterfront
               | condos were built.
        
               | kitten_mittens_ wrote:
               | Some of parcels in the doc on page 58 (K) in particular
               | are interesting. The city ended up widening the road
               | there pretty significantly. When they built
               | https://maps.app.goo.gl/7yVzp4vm72Js3w618 back in '22,
               | there was just one tower. The original plan had two
               | towers instead of one (https://bpda.app.box.com/s/lsw68tz
               | gu4g788h9dr4zvorlc6ohy0oy). The resulting sub area is
               | only two buildings now, where there were tenements
               | before.
        
           | Texasian wrote:
           | Oh please. Take a look at the pictures of "redevelopment"
           | back then and tell me it mirrors modern practices. We're
           | talking wholesale bulldozing of entire neighborhoods. Not a
           | block or two, the entire damned thing.
        
           | hax0ron3 wrote:
           | Why would people be called NIMBYs today for being against
           | replacing a heavily residential neighborhood with a bunch of
           | government buildings? It would be different if the discussion
           | was about keeping the neighborhood residential and just
           | making it more dense in terms of housing.
        
         | fsckboy wrote:
         | > _It was in this context that the city decided to demolish the
         | neighborhood known as Scollay Square_
         | 
         | Leonard Nimoy (Mr. Spock) grew up in that neighborhood
        
       | mazugrin2 wrote:
       | There used to be a neighborhood around it that had architecture
       | similar to what the neighboring North End still has, which is
       | very distinct among the entirety of the Americas. The lack of
       | imagination that existed back then that led to it all being razed
       | to build this and the rest of the garbage of the current West End
       | is stunning.
        
       | jcstauffer wrote:
       | I always think of the building (and brutalist architecture in
       | general) as absurdist architecture, and I find City Hall to be
       | quite humorous in that light.
       | 
       | The general shape lifts up and is trying to appear as if it's
       | floating, in contrast to the material selection. Think of an
       | Elephant ballerina, or Douglas Adams "It hung in the air in
       | exactly the way bricks don't".
       | 
       | Another example is the Holman government building a few blocks
       | away - with these ridiculous stairways through a massive open
       | space underneath an imposing bridge of offices.
       | 
       | Pure absurdist humor.
       | 
       | https://maps.app.goo.gl/KUFh9jFkERjhp7MK9
        
         | unyttigfjelltol wrote:
         | City Hall is absurd in both it's appearance outside _and_ the
         | impracticality of the design and interior. Rooms with giant
         | concrete columns that cut off sight lines, rampant maintenance
         | problems from elevating form over function , and the comfort of
         | a supraterrestrial civil defense shelter.
        
           | lo_zamoyski wrote:
           | It seems to be intentionally designed to confuse and to
           | disorient; misanthropic, as if designed by a demon.
        
         | sdwr wrote:
         | Yeah, it's friendly ugly. I'd be happy going to work there
         | everyday.
        
         | psunavy03 wrote:
         | More totalitarian than absurdist. The whole idea seems to be
         | elevating the vision of "The Genius Architect" over the needs
         | and wishes of the people who would actually use the space, with
         | a borderline contempt for what non-architects and even non-
         | Brutalist architects think.
         | 
         | I'm reminded of the time I ended up crossing the Empire State
         | Plaza in Albany once in the dead of winter. Such a horrid
         | experience. Surrounded by soulless impersonal concrete with
         | wind and snow blowing and howling. I felt like a freaking ant.
         | It's not the type of architecture that inspires and uplifts in
         | person. It psychologically oppresses and beats down.
         | 
         | Compare that to a place like Saint Peter's, which even as a
         | non-Catholic almost took my breath away to experience in
         | person.
        
       | botswana99 wrote:
       | I like brutalist architecture. And I am not the only strange one:
       | r/brutalist has 174K members and the original fuckyeahbrutalism
       | on tumbler.
       | 
       | Think of it like being a fan of 486 PCs or pixel art.
       | 
       | I do hate this architecture, though:
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowellism
        
         | genter wrote:
         | I like to think of it like a car wreck: no one actually enjoys
         | looking at one, but you still have to look.
        
         | munk-a wrote:
         | I really appreciate how functional the building is. It's
         | extremely visually distinct while having really engaging
         | vertical elements (I've always thought it evoked waterfalls)
         | and lacking the functional flaws I've seen with other highly
         | visible architecture (I'm especially thinking of the Gehry
         | Building at MIT - that's whimsical in appearance but an
         | absolute nightmare of usability with awkward unusable interior
         | spaces and a long legacy of mold and maintenance issues).
         | 
         | It's especially amusing that Boston City Hall is within a
         | stone's throw of the only block that survived the fire of 1872
         | and throws a shadow over Faneuil Hall.
        
           | ghaff wrote:
           | Stata at MIT has sort of grown on me from an abstract
           | architectural perspective. But it cost a _lot_ and I 've
           | never really heard good things about it from people who
           | actually use the building though I've never been in it myself
           | aside from the ground floor. It was also sort of justified as
           | a landmark northeast entrance to campus but was soon pretty
           | much literally overshadowed by a lot of newer construction in
           | the area.
        
             | lo_zamoyski wrote:
             | It looks like something that has survived an earthquake,
             | but not left unscathed.
        
       | rayiner wrote:
       | How Boston City Hall was born:
       | https://www.britannica.com/topic/Frankenstein-film-by-Whale
        
       | MiddleEndian wrote:
       | I like Boston City Hall.
       | 
       | Compare it to 28 State St, right next to it:
       | https://maps.app.goo.gl/jjHpGGuPkxgjXiPT7
       | 
       | 28 State St is kinda ugly, but bland and forgettable.
       | 
       | Boston City Hall is so hideous and frightening that people
       | outside of Boston know about it. Its appearance is a recurring
       | topic in the news. That is impressive.
        
         | mlinhares wrote:
         | Yeah, if you're going to make it ugly, make it newsworthy ugly.
         | That thing is such an eyesore.
        
           | MiddleEndian wrote:
           | In the same vein, I am jealous of Maryland's flag. Some state
           | flags have some nice patterns, but most state flags are
           | forgettable with seals. But the Maryland flag is so garish
           | that it's recognized by pretty much everyone.
        
       | jcalabro wrote:
       | [2012] it took me a second when they said "Mayor Thomas M.
       | Menino" rather than "former Mayor Thomas M. Menino"
        
       | BugsJustFindMe wrote:
       | Boston City Hall is objectively beautiful and photos of it are
       | all universally awesome (though it could stand a good
       | powerwashing). The problem that locals experience and cannot
       | escape is that it happens to be located on a giant ugly swath of
       | absolutely not a goddamn thing called City Hall Plaza. So the
       | building itself is grand, but the experience of looking at it in
       | person is pretty bad and ominous purely because of the
       | surrounding environment.
        
         | 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
         | I love it. It's an underdog of expression surrounded by bland
         | forgettable towers. Maybe that says more about the neighbors
         | but the contrast is striking.
        
           | lo_zamoyski wrote:
           | There is a third way between bland boxes and horror show.
        
         | chrisdalke wrote:
         | The whole plaza should be grass and trees, agree it would
         | change the entire look.
        
         | lo_zamoyski wrote:
         | > Boston City Hall is objectively beautiful
         | 
         | This opinion puts you in a very small minority, to put it very
         | kindly.
         | 
         | It is a poster child for the dystopian, a cubist insult to
         | anyone who has the misfortune of laying eyes on it. "Abandon
         | hope all ye who enter here".
        
         | ramzyo wrote:
         | Hmm, lived there for a long time and walked by Boston City Hall
         | almost every day. I'm not quite sure how to differentiate
         | objective beauty and subjective beauty, but at least
         | subjectively, in my opinion, it's an eyesore.
         | 
         | Agreed on all fronts that City Hall Plaza is a disaster,
         | though. I thought there were plans to revamp it with the
         | Government Center station green line revamp a few years ago,
         | but not sure if that improved anything.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-12-20 23:00 UTC)