An Architectural and Urban Analysis of a Paul Rudolph Landmark in Boston

Government Service Center

Wentworth Institute of TechnologyNortheastern University

32

04 Overview

14 Historic and Site Context 36 Architectural Analysis

56 Appendix

Contents

Project Team

DCAMM Organizers: Ellen Whittemore, Charles DeknatelWentworth Researchers: Teresa Le, Ciro Podany, Nicholas TorresWentworth Faculty: Carol Burns, Mark Pasnik

Prepared For

The Commonwealth of MassachusettsCarole Cornelison, CommissionerDivision of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance

54

Overview

#�EQPVTQXGTUKCN�CPF�WPƂPKUJGF�RKGEG�QH�EQPETGVG�CTEJKVGEVWTG��VJG�)QXGTPOGPV�5GTXKEG�%GPVGT�PQY�PGCTU�CP�CIG�YJGP�KVU�ƂTUV�RJCUG�QH�WUGHWN�NKHG�PGGFU�reconsideration. The complex presents an instance of enormous potential to demonstrate responsible urban and architectural reinvestment in downtown $QUVQP��&GUKIPGF�YKVJ�2CWN�4WFQNRJ�CU�KVU�NGCF�CTEJKVGEV��VJG�)QXGTPOGPV�Service Center is an assemblage of his signature elements: dramatic structural expression, bush-hammered concrete, baroque-like curvilinear forms, heightening and diminishing of scale, and interlocking of spaces. Intended to be composed of three buildings surrounding a shared plaza, only the Hurley and Lindemann buildings were completed, along with portions of the plaza. The high-rise tower, designed as the conceptual focal point, was canceled due to cost overruns and political interference.

%QORNGVGF�KP�������VJG�)QXGTPOGPV�5GTXKEG�%GPVGT�KU�entering its fourth decade, a crucial point in determining its future. Due to its architectural uniqueness and UKIPKƂECPEGtCPF�DCUGF�QP�MPQYNGFIG�ICKPGF�HTQO�successful adaptation projects in the intervening FGECFGUtKV�RTQXKFGU�CP�GZEGNNGPV�QRRQTVWPKV[�VQ�showcase the Commonwealth’s goals for responsible development, improvements to existing buildings, and leadership in sustainability.

Prepared in a collaboration between Wentworth Institute of Technology and DCAMM, this publication describes physical, historical, and architectural aspects of the complex. Compiled and digitized in a four-month period, this collection includes articles, critiques, construction

information, photos, and drawings. This broad set of reference material is meant to help guide future decisions and thinking on the building itself, attempting to coherently set out intentions, parameters, challenges, and possibilities for future action.

Rather than seeking to proscribe directions for the future, this document frames a set of questions about the building’s history and its current state. The goal is to help unleash the creativity of many others in considering ways to adapt the Hurley and Lindemann buildings to make them better participants in the urban fabric of Boston and for the citizens of Massachusetts.

© M

ark

Pasn

ik

76

98

1110

.KPFGOCPP�)TCPF�5VCKTECUG������

© Y

ukio

Fut

agaw

a

Lindemann Plaza Entrance,1973

© Y

ukio

Fut

agaw

a

Lindemann Plaza Entrance (Now Conference Room), 1973

© Y

ukio

Fut

agaw

a

Hurley Plaza Facade

© Y

ukio

Fut

agaw

a

1312

Plaza With Play Terrace Below, 1973 Hurley Plaza Facade, 1973

© Y

ukio

Fut

agaw

a

© Y

ukio

Fut

agaw

a

© Y

ukio

Fut

agaw

a

Arcade Outside Lindemann Library, 1973Chapel Interior Chapel Interior

© Y

ukio

Fut

agaw

a

© Y

ukio

Fut

agaw

a

© Y

ukio

Fut

agaw

a

Plaza Looking Toward Lindemann Entrance, 1973

1514

Historical andSite Context

We need sequences of space which arouse one’s curiosity, give a sense of anticipation, which beckon CPF�KORGN�WU�VQ�TWUJ�HQTYCTF�VQ�ƂPF�VJCV�TGNGCUKPI�space which dominates, which climaxes and acts as a magnet, and gives direction..

t�2CWN�4WFQNRJ������Paul Rudolph, “The Changing Philosophy of Architecture,” Architectural Forum (July 1954), 120.

1716

Site Progression

19621955 1969Demolition of the site started after the separate urban renewal demolition of the West End. The demolition work on the )QXGTPOGPV�5GTXKEG�%GPVGT�UKVG�YCU�VKGF�VQ�+�/��2GKoU�WTDCP�FGUKIP�HQT�)QXGTPOGPV�Center. Many residential buildings were removed from the area to make room for the new urban plan.

Additional structures were torn down in the )QXGTPOGPV�%GPVGT�CTGC��%QPUVTWEVKQP�QH�the Hurley and Lindemann Buildings started in 1969 and was completed in 1971.

The area was once predominantly a residential neighborhood.

1960 1970 1980

Population through the years

1991 2014A large sector of development was completed between 1969 and 1991. Density increased greatly, with construction of commercial, institutional, and high-rise residential buildings on newly-consolidated sites, including new residential towers in the West End.

Little about the urban structure has changed QT�DGGP�OQFKƂGF�VQ�VJG�CTGC��6JGTG�JCU�been urban landscaping done to enhance VJG�0QTVJ�'PF�CPF�)QXGTPOGPV�%GPVGT�borders, particularly with the new North End 2CTMU�QP�VJG�4QUG�-GPPGF[�)TGGPYC[�

1990 2000

2005By 2005 major work was completed for VJG�$KI�&KI��EJCPIKPI�VTCHƂE�TQWVGU�CPF�making general improvements to the area. Completed in 1999, the Edward W. Brooke Courthouse was built on the plot of land that was once designated for the Health, Welfare, and Education Tower.

1918

Site History Located to the east of the West End and as the westernmost edge of the Scollay Square Urban Redevelopment Projects, the site of the )QXGTPOGPV�5GTXKEG�%GPVGT�JCU�IQPG�VJTQWIJ�OCLQT�EJCPIGU�KP�VJG�past half century. The area has been continuously inhabited since at least the middle of the eighteenth century, with the southern part of the site’s footprint located on solid land (the northern slope of $GCEQP�*KNN���YJKNG�VJG�UKVGoU�PQTVJGTP�RCTV�KU�QP�VJG�NCPFƂNN�QH�VJG�QNF�/KNN�2QPF�ƂNNGF�KP��������6JG�PGKIJDQTJQQF�DGICP�VQ�DG�FGXGNQRGF�when the North End and Waterfront became overcrowded in the late eighteenth century. It mainly housed residents who could not afford to live on Beacon Hill, but could afford to be outside the crowded FQYPVQYP��1PG�QH�VJG�TGOCKPKPI�OCPUKQPU�KU�VJG�*CTTKUQP�)TC[�1VKU�House, located on Cambridge Street, slightly west of the site, along with the Old West Church.

The neighborhood became a center of the abolitionist movement in the early nineteenth century. As a result, a large African-American population moved into the West End over the century. In the twentieth century, many of the wealthier residents departed for Roxbury, Brookline, and Newton, leaving the West End open for KOOKITCPV�ITQWRU��6JG�ƂTUV�JCNH�QH�VJG�EGPVWT[�UCY�KV�DGEQOG�QPG�QH�Boston’s most diverse neighborhoods, hosting Irish, Italian, Jewish, 2QNKUJ��)TGGM��.GDCPGUG��4WUUKCP��CPF�OCP[�QVJGT�KOOKITCPV�ITQWRU��It was a vibrant, working-poor neighborhood.

On the other side of the site stood Scollay Square, an economic center of Boston and home to many entertainment options, some less reputable than others. By World War II it became known as an area of vice, Boston’s own “red-light district.” The push for renewal of these neighborhoods began as early as the National Housing Act of 1934, when many wealthy Bostonians viewed the West End and Scollay Square as slums. However the strong working-class connections to Boston mayor James Curley kept the neighborhoods alive until Curley fell from power in the late 1940s.

Aerial of Scollay Square in the mid-1950s

)QXGTPOGPV�%GPVGT�EQPUVTWEVKQP�KP�VJG�GCTN[�����U

© B

ost

on

Pub

lic L

ibra

ry©

Bo

sto

n Pu

blic

Lib

rary

Property Line Plan, Old Versus New, 1962

© B

ost

on

Red

evel

op

men

t Aut

horit

y

1938 Bromley Map Overlayed With Current Buildings

2120

1TKIKPCN�)QXGTPOGPV�%GPVGT�OCUVGT�RNCP������

(KPCN�)QXGTPOGPV�%GPVGT�OCUVGT�RNCP������

��#FCO

U��*QYNG[����)TGGNG[

© B

ost

on

Red

evel

op

men

t Aut

horit

y

By 1950 John Hynes had risen to become mayor and was determined VQ�ƂZ�UVCIPCVKQP�D[�ETGCVKPI�C�p0GY�$QUVQP�q�CP�GHHQTV�VQ�OQFGTPK\G�the city. With his “Workable Proposal For Urban Renewal” and authority from the federal government created under the Housing Act of 1949, clearance and rebuilding of the West End began in 1953. The plan called for the leveling of below-code residences and narrow streets, to be replaced with a superblock of towers in a park in the style of Le Corbusier. The project displaced 2,700 families. Residents received their eviction notices in 1958.

In Scollay Square the new plan called for a complex of government DWKNFKPI�VQ�EQPVCKP�EKV[��UVCVG��CPF�HGFGTCN�QHƂEGU�VJCV�YQWNF�TGSWKTG�VJG�demolition of the entire neighborhood. In 1956, the area was declared blighted by the city; the newly formed Boston Redevelopment Authority was put in charge of land purchasing and redevelopment. I.M. Pei created an overall master plan and envisioned the large civic space outside a new city hall, but each building was designed by a separate architect. By 1961, eviction notices were put out and demolition began, displacing 20,000 residents. Within the plan, an 8.4 acre site labeled “Parcel 1” was set aside for the development of the State Service Center including the demolishing of more than one-JWPFTGF�VJKTV[�DWKNFKPIU�CPF�ƂXG�UVTGGVU�

Overview of planned urban renewal in the 1960s

West End after demolition

© B

ost

on

Pub

lic L

ibra

ry

© B

ost

on

Pub

lic L

ibra

ry

West End before demolition

© B

ost

on

Pub

lic L

ibra

ry

2322

1967 1970 1971

February:Construction of the Hurley Building started

March:Vappi & Co. entered the contract for the Mental Health Building

Construction of the Lindemann Building started

Commission denied bids for the Welfare, Health and Education Building which resulted in the contract with Desmond and Lord to be terminated

Hurley Building Completed

Lindemann Building Completed

Hurley and Lindemann Building Open

2014

Wentworth researchand charrette

Project Timeline

1960

I.M. Pei hired to design the overall master plan of )QXGTPOGPV�%GPVGT

1961

Demolition of Scollay Square Begins

1962

Agreement papers were signed for proposals of the Boston )QXGTPOGPV�5GTXKEG�%GPVGT��Paul Rudolph appointed as coordinating architect.

1966

5WDEQPVTCEVQT�CPF�IGPGTCN�ƂNG�bids were received

HYNES COLLINS WHITE FLYNN MENINO WALSH

FURLOCO VOLPE PEABODY VOLPE 5#4)'06 &7-#-+5��-+0)��9'.&

CELLUCI, SWIFT, ROMNEY

PATRICK

Boston Mayors

Massachusetts

Governors

2524

Public Transportation T Stations by Line Color and Bus Stops

1/4 Mile Radius (5-10 Min. Walk

Transit

The building is located at 19 Staniford Street, Boston, bounded by Merrimac (North), Staniford (West), New Chardon (East), and Cambridge Streets (South).

Current site plan overlayed with original Rudolph plan

New Chardon Street

Cambridge at New Chardon

Merrimack at Staniford

Cambridge at Staniford

2726

Surrounding Context )QXGTPOGPV

Considerably different than its burlesque and residential past, the site is surrounded by large-scale government buildings for the city, state, and federal levels to the east along with the medical and research DWKNFKPIU�QH�/CUUCEJWUGVVU�)GPGTCN�*QURKVCN�VQ�VJG�YGUV��6Q�VJG�UQWVJ�are the quaint brownstones of Beacon Hill. To the north is the bustling low-rise entertainment district of the Blackstone Triangle, home to the 6&�)CTFGP��6JG�9GUV�'PFoU�TGUKFGPVKCN�VQYGTU�KP�ITGGP�URCEG�ECP�DG�found to the northwest.

Healthcare Higher Education Cultural

2928

Zoning

Zoning Requirements

1. New Chardon Street Medium Density Area PDA2. Pemberton Square Protection Area���5WFDWT[�5VTGGV�4GUVTKEVGF�)TQYVJ�#TGC4. Saltonstall Protection Area5. City Hall Medium Density Area6. Sears Crescent Protection Area7. Congress/State Street Medium Density Area8. Markets Protection Area9. Blackstone Block Protection Area10. Central Artery Parcels 7/9����*C[OCTMGV�)CTCIG�2NCP�&GXGNQROGPV�#TGC����$WNNƂPEJ�6TKCPING�)GPGTCN�#TGC����$WNNƂPEJ�6TKCPING�%GPVTCN�#TVGT[�#TGC����0QTVJ�5VCVKQP�'EQPQOKE�)GPGTCN�&GXGNQROGPV�#TGC����0GY�$QUVQP�)CTFGP�&GXGNQROGPV�#TGC16. Cambridge Street North Side Protection Area����$NQUUQO�5VTGGV�4GUVTKEVGF�)TQYVJ�#TGC����0QTVJ�)TQXG�5VTGGV�4GUVTKEVGF�)TQYVJ�#TGC19. Charles Street Jail South Protection Area20. Charles Street Jail North Medium Density Area����/CUU��)GPGTCN�*QURKVCN�+PUVKVWVKQPCN�/CUVGT�2NCP�#TGC22. H-3 Area23. L-2 Area24. L-2-65 Area25. H-2-65 Area

Max. FAR

8/1086/788/1048/10437/4Per PDA6/7/888/10114/56/74/755Per IMP32

3

Max. Height

125’/155’/400’125’80’/100’55’125’/155’65’125’/155’65’As Noted80’/55’Per PDA80’/100’80’/100’125’/155’400’65’80’/100’65’/100’125’125’/155’Per IMPNoneNone

65’

3130

The area chosen for the demographic study includes the West End, Beacon Hill, the northern parts of the Financial District, and the YGUVGTP�RCTVU�QH�VJG�0QTVJ�'PFtCNN�VQNF�C�JCNH�OKNG�TCFKWU�HTQO�VJG�site. The study area is home to 22,394 residents and the average household income is $70,119. The median rent is $1,622. Each neighborhood provides its own cultural groups: Beacon Hill is mostly white professional adults in their late thirties and older, the North End is similar but with a lower median income, and the West End is still home to many professionals, around 34 percent of whom are foreign-born.

Source: U.S. Census 2010

Ethnicities Gender Distribution Ages

Household Type Owner/Renter

White 85%

Black 5%

Asian 7%

Other 1%

Multiple 2%

Male 50% Female 50%

20-34 50%

35-54 21%

55-64 9%

65+ 12%

0-9 4%

10-19 4%

Non-Family Household 58%

Family Household 33%

Group 9%

RenterOccupied 75%

OwnerOccupied 25%

© B

ost

on

Red

evel

op

men

t A

utho

rity

Demographics

3332

Building Heights

400’

400’

110’

112’

131’

146’

62’

87’

78’

250’

275’

560’

294’

350’

185’

113’

600’

508’

145’

70’

Average Height

48’

172’

172’

115’

172’

234’

100’

92’

82’20’

60’

Average Height

48’

6JG�)QXGTPOGPV�5GTXKEG�%GPVGT�EQORNGZ�KU�C�TGNCVKXG�QWVNKGT�KP�VGTOU�of height when compared to its surrounding context. The tallest part of the complex is around 90 feet, while buildings surrounding it range between 150 feet and 400 feet. The height is much more contextually EQPUKUVGPV�YKVJ�VJG�DWKNFKPIU�QH�$GCEQP�*KNN�CPF�VJG�$WNNƂPEJ�6TKCPING��where the average height is approximately 48 feet. Newer buildings UWEJ�CU�VJG�*C[OCTMGV�)CTCIG�4GFGXGNQROGPV�CPF�6&�)CTFGP�6QYGTU�are expected to be up to 500 feet tall.

400+ Feet 200–400 Feet 100–200 Feet 0–100 Feet

125’

3534

New Developments

Approved

���*C[OCTMGV�)CTCIG�4GFGXGNQROGPV2. The Forecaster Building3. Nashua Street Residences���6JG�$QUVQP�)CTFGP5. The Merano6. Parcel 9���)CTFGP�)CTCIG�4GFGXGNQROGPV

Under Construction

8. Boston Public Market9. One Canal10. 20 Somerset Street

Recently Completed

11. The Victor12. Lunder Building13. Yawkey Center14. Museum of Medical History and Innovation15. The Liberty Hotel16. Charles River Plaza17. Saltonstall Building Redevelopment18. Archstone Avenir

Use

����4GUKFGPVKCN�7PKVU������*QVGN�4QQOU������/KNNKQP�5(�1HƂEG�Space, 82,000 SF Retail81 Residential Units, 2 Commercial Units503 Residential Units����4GUKFGPVKCN�7PKVU������*QVGN�4QQOU����������5(�1HƂEG230 Residential Units, 210 Hotel Rooms)TQWPF�(NQQT�/CTMGV������*QVGN�4QQOU300 Residential Units

92 Rental Market Stalls, 3 Anchor Tenants320 Residential Units, 21,000 SF Retail including SupermarketSuffolk University Academic Building

284 Residential Units, 15,000 SF Retail/)*�+P�2CVKGPV��2TQEGFWTGU��4CFKCVKQP�1PEQNQI[/)*�1WV�2CVKGPV�%CTG�%GPVGT/)*�/WUGWO298 Hotel Rooms, Conference Facility, Restaurants1HƂEG��/GFKECN�4GUGCTEJ��4GVCKN��������5(�1HƂEG�����4GUKFGPVKCN�7PKVU���������5(�4GVCKN241 Residential Units, 30,000 SF Retail

Square Footage

2,400,000

100,000636,0001,870,000444,000135,000551,000

29,460438,000156,000

377,000530,000640,000132,000

640,000600,000

Approved Under Construction Recently Completed

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

37

The generating ideas of most traditional cities are pedestrian and vehicular circulation, streets, squares, terminuses, with their space ENGCTN[�FGƂPGF�D[�DWKNFKPIU��6JKU�OGCPU�NKPMGF�DWKNFKPIU�WPKVGF�VQ�HQTO�EQORTGJGPUKDNG�GZVGTKQT�URCEGU��6JG�$QUVQP�)QXGTPOGPV�Service Center is the opposite of Le Corbusier’s dictum “down with the street.” It started with three separate buildings, their ENKGPVU��CTEJKVGEVU�CPF�OGVJQFU�QH�ƂPCPEKPI��9G�FKFPoV�DWKNF�VJTGG�separate buildings, as others had proposed, but one continuous DWKNFKPI�YJKEJ�FGƂPGF�VJG�UVTGGV��HQTOGF�C�RGFGUVTKCP�RNC\C��CPF�utilized a multi-storied building (not yet built) to announce the development from a great distance. The scale of the lower buildings was heightened at the exterior perimeter (street) so that it read in EQPLWPEVKQP�YKVJ�CWVQOQDKNG�VTCHƂE�EQNWOPU���s���HGGV�JKIJ�RNWU�toilet and stair cores at the corners were used). The scale at the plaza YCU�OWEJ�OQTG�KPVKOCVG�WUKPI�UVGRRGF�ƃQQTU�YJKEJ�TGXGCNGF�GCEJ�ƃQQT�NGXGN��OCMKPI�C�DQYN�QH�URCEG��#U�QPG�CRRTQCEJGU�VJG�UVGRRGF�six-story-high building it reduces itself to only one story. Since the high-rise building is an integral part of the whole, it calls for a particular kind of high-rise building.

t2CWN�4WFQNRJ�������Davern, Jeanne M. “A Conversation with Paul Rudolph.” Architectural Record 170 (March 1982): 90-97.

Architectural Analysis

Health, Welfare and Education Building

(Unbuilt Tower)

Thirty-three story proposed and approved tower Designed M.A.Dyer, Desmond and Lord With the construction and opening of the other two buildings the tower was underfunded by $22 million

Hurley Employment Security Building

The Hurley building was named after ����� � %JCTNGU�(��*WTNG[��)QXGTPQT�QH��� Massachusetts from 1937 to 1939� &GUKIPGF�D[�5JGRNG[�$WNƂPEJ�4KEJCTFUQP� & Abbot Completed in 1970 Opened in 1971

Eric Lindemann Mental Health Center

Named after Eric Lindemann who was a Boston Psychiatrist and Professor at Harvard in the 1960s Designed by Desmond and Lord and Paul Rudolph Completed and opened in 1971

Landscaping and Garage

Designed by Paul Rudolph Structural Engineer: Souza & True� /GEJCPKECN�CPF�'NGEVTKECN�'PIKPGGT��)TGGPNGCH�#UUQEKCVGU

Complex OverviewFacts

Design Team[Coordinating and Plaza Architect] Paul Rudolph[Associate Architects]� *WTNG[��5JGRNG[��$WNNƂPEJ��4KEJCTFUQP��#DDQVV Lindemann: Desmond and Lord Tower: M.A. Dyer, Pederson & Tilney[Contractor] Vappi and Company[Electrical Engineers] Lindemann: McCarron & Hufnagle Associates Hurley: Thompson Engineering Company[Mechanical Engineers] Lindemann: Francis J. Linehan, Jr. & Associates Hurley: Buerkel & Company, Inc.� 2NC\C��)TGGPNGCH�#UUQEKCVGU[Structural Engineers] Hurley/Lindemann: Wm. J. LeMessurier Plaza: Souza & True[Space Planning] Becker & Becker Associates[Sanitary & Fire Protection] Robert W. Sullivan, Inc.

Construction Information[Commissioned By] %QOOQPYGCNVJ�QH�/CUUCEJWUGVVU��)QXGTPOGPV�%GPVGT�%QOOKUUKQP[Construction] 1967-1971[Material] Concrete[Square Footage]� .KPFGOCPP����������)5(� *WTNG[����������)5(� 6QVCN�$WKNFKPI�5SWCTG�(QQVCIG����������)5( Site Square Footage: 282,965 SF FAR: 1.95[Construction Cost] $32 Million (1970); $186.6 Million (2012)[Cost Per Square Foot] Hurley: $52.40/sf (1970); $305.61/sf (2012) Lindemann: $84.76/sf (1970); $494.34/sf (2012) * 2012 Costs Estimated by U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

Program[Original Program] House Department of Health, Welfare, & Education, Department of Employment, Department of Mental Health[Current Program] Hurley: Department of Unemployment Assistance,Workforce Development, Labor Relations, Revenue, Career Services, � )TQWR�+PUWTCPEG�%QOOKUUKQP��*WOCP�4GUQWTEGU��� � Commission on the Status of Women Lindemann: Department of Mental HealthPopulation: Approximately 2,500 State Employees

40 41

Desmond and LordLindemann Building Architect

M.A. DyerTower Architect

Shepley Bulfinch Richardson & Abbot

Hurley Building Architect

5JGRNG[�$WNƂPEJ�4KEJCTFUQP���#DDQV�KU�C�ƂTO�VJCV�YCU�RCUUGF�HTQO�IGPGTCVKQP�to generation, including such luminaries CU�*�*��4KEJCTFUQP�CPF�%JCTNGU�$WNƂPEJ��In 1973, SBRA was awarded with the AIA Firm award for their historic works over VJG�����RNWU�[GCTU�UKPEG�ƂTUV�QRGPKPI��Hugh Shepley was the last descendant HTQO�*�*��4KEJCTFUQP�CPF�)GQTIG�5JGRNG[�VQ�LQKP�VJG�ƂTO��*G�TGVKTGF�KP������YJKEJ�VTCPUKVKQPGF�VJG�ƂTO�HTQO�C�HCOKN[�TWP�ƂTO�VQ�C�EQTRQTCVG�management.

6JG�ƂTO�YQTMGF�QP�VJG�ETGCVKQP�QH�VJG�Hurley Building with Paul Rudolph at the )QXGTPOGPV�5GTXKEG�%GPVGT��

p+�IQV�ƂTGF�DGHQTG�VJG�nURKTCNo�YCU�ƂPKUJGF��DWV�HQTVWPCVGN[�+�JCF�UQOG�HTKGPFU�KP�QVJGT�CTEJKVGEVWTCN�QHƂEGU�who saw it through.”

q&GUOQPF�CPF�.QTF��[GUtVJG[�believed in the scheme and carried out OQUV�QH�VJG�DWKNFKPIU�YJKEJ�FGƂPG�VJG�central space.”t2��4WFQNRJ

Desmond and Lord were the co-designers of the Eric Lindemann Mental Health Center along with Paul Rudolph. After Rudolph was released from the project, the Desmond and Lord team carried on their original RTQRQUGF�FGUKIP��6JG�ƂTO�CNUQ�YQTMGF�on the Health, Welfare and Education building, although it was never realized.

“On September 28, 1966 the EQOOKUUKQP�CEVKPI�WRQP�PQVKƂECVKQP�VJCV�VJG�CTEJKVGEVWTCN�ƂTO�/�#��&[GT��designers of the Health, Welfare and Education Building had been declared bankrupt, accepted a proposal by the ƂTO�QH�&GUOQPF�CPF�.QTF��FGUKIPGTU�of the Mental health Center, to act as substitute supervisory architects for the Health, Welfare and Education Building. Contract for said services were entered into on October 5, 1966.”

M.A Dyer along with Desmond and Lord were the designers of the proposed Health, Welfare and Education Building that was approved, but never built.

Pedersen & Tilney

The Architects

Paul RudolphCoordinating Architect

Inset photograph of Paul Rudolph in front of his signature concrete pattern.

Project Architects

Paul Rudolph was the coordinating architect for all three buildings of the )QXGTPOGPV�5GTXKEG�%GPVGT��CNVJQWIJ�he was let go from the position later.

Rudolph started his architectural education at the Alabama Polytechnic Institute, where he would receive his bachelors degree. He then enrolled to the graduate program at Harvard University where he studied under 9CNVGT�)TQRKWU��#U�JG�YCU�NCWPEJGF�into the architectural world, he designed many noted buildings, especially at Yale University. Impressed with his work, Yale offered him a job CU�VJG�*GCF�QH�#TEJKVGEVWTG�KP�����tRudolph accepted.

Rudolph’s many designs focused on aesthetics and visual satisfaction. They were a fusion of industry and architecture. He would incorporate modern materials with structures, high-quality craftsmanship with mass production techniques. And although JG�FGƂPGF�UV[NGU�CU�UWRGTƂEKCN��JG�YCU�often seen using in-situ concrete with VGZVWTGF�ƂPKUJGU�DGECWUG�VJG[�JCF�VJG�potential to create powerful, dynamic sculptural forms.

© M

ark

Pasn

ik

4342

Street-Level Activation

A

B

C

D

E

F

The current street level is not pedestrian friendly, in part becuase the building is surrounded by multi-lane roads. While the average column bay has a human-scaled spacing at twenty-four feet (similar to the separation of the bay windows of Beacon Hill) the height to the overhangs are much larger than the nearby neighborhood’s typical street frontage, as much as sixty feet in some places. This height contrasts to the lower-scaled plaza with its stepping levels. Along the sidewalks, the scale is large and imposing, with little of the frontage activated by retail or seating. There is also disparity in the sidewalks. New Chardon and Merrimack are relatively narrow while Cambridge and Staniford are wide.

There is a tremendous amount of potential in these UVTGGV�HTQPVCIGU�FWG�VQ�VJG�COQWPV�QH�HQQV�VTCHƂE�along Cambridge, New Chardon, Merrimack, and Staniford Streets. The site acts as a hinge point DGVYGGP�VJG�9GUV�'PF��$GCEQP�*KNN��VJG�$WNƂPEJ�6TKCPING��CPF�)QXGTPOGPV�%GPVGT�

6JG�KPVGTKQT�ITQWPF�ƃQQTU�CNQPI�/GTTKOCEM�CPF�Cambridge are level with the exterior streets, providing an opportunity for retail at these points. 6JG�OCLQT�EQPUVTCKPVU�GHHGEVKPI�UWEJ�OQFKƂECVKQPU�will be the approximately twenty-eight-foot grade change along the Staniford and New Chardon Street elevations, with Cambridge at the high point and Merrimack at the low. Accessibility requirements and level changes will be necessary at these locations. The plaza level in the Hurley building is slightly below ground on Cambridge, while the ground level of .KPFGOCPP�KU�ƃWUJ�YKVJ�VJG�UVTGGV�QP�/GTTKOCEM��The basement in Hurley is mostly below grade along Staniford until the loading docks.

Also of note is the former Capital Police Headquarters along New Chardon, which is under a ramp from %CODTKFIG�VQ�VJG�RNC\C��6JG�GPVTCPEG�VQ�VJKU�KU�ƃWUJ�with the lower plaza and provides opportunity for small retail or other functions, constrained somewhat by thick concrete walls along the street. The plaza at the corner of Merrimack and Staniford is currently occupied by a parking lot, but could offer an opportunity for activation due to its size and location opposite North Station.

A. Hurley Frontage at Cambridge Street Plaza

D. Lindemann Frontage at Merrimack Street Plaza

B. Hurley Frontage at Corner of Staniford and Cambridge

C. Hurley Frontage on Staniford Street

E. Lindemann Frontage on Merrimack Street F. Capital Police Headquarters under Ramp on New Chardon Street

© N

icho

las

Torr

es

© N

icho

las

Torr

es©

Nic

hola

s To

rres

© N

icho

las

Torr

es

© N

icho

las

Torr

es©

Nic

hola

s To

rres

4544

Plaza-Level Activation

A

B

C

D

E

F

Designed to be the common meeting ground for the entire complex, the plaza could become an oasis within the busy streets. The landscaping in its present form does not create a successful urban setting. It can be split into two parts: the upper plaza built with the original building and covering the parking garage, and the lower plaza which was built with the Brooke Courthouse. The lower plaza features a large green oval and seating. It is busy during lunch hours, but lacks activation at other times The upper plaza is rarely occupied north of the Hurley entrance, with little to draw people in. The intended pass-through is now blocked by temporary chain-link fencing used due to code issues with railing heights. Similar fences are used around the plaza edges. For more information on the accessibility and code concerns, see the next section of this document.

Because of the fencing, the plaza has acquired a feeling that it is abandoned, unsafe, and a generally unpleasant area compared to Rudolph’s original intentions. The presence of homeless and mentally impaired people that use the Lindemann facilities likewise give visitors pause. Opportunities for KORTQXGOGPV�CTG�UKIPKƂECPV��GURGEKCNN[�KP�CVVGORVU�to activate the plaza as a whole. Unlike the street frontage, where the slopes make the introduction of program more complex, the upper plaza is aligned FKTGEVN[�YKVJ�VJG�VJKTF�ƃQQT�QH�VJG�DWKNFKPIU�*WTNG[�Level 1 and Lindemann Plaza Level) allowing for good interaction and options for retail or other uses between the buildings and open space. A gap must be bridged in places (about six feet wide) while respecting the need to bring light and ventilation to the parking below.

The lack of attention to the landscape is another problem to be addressed. Many of the planters that CTG�KPVGITCVGF�YKVJ�VJG�FGUKIP�JCXG�NCPIWKUJGF��ƂNNKPI�with debris, trash, and dead plants. The openness of the upper parking level is on grade with the lower plaza, allowing for a direct interface between these VYQ�GNGOGPVU��6JG�RNC\CU�JQNF�C�UKIPKƂECPV�RQVGPVKCN�to host a variety of events while serving as a common gathering place.

A. Hurley Frontage on the Upper Plaza B. Staniford Street Stairs

C. Former Play Terrace D. Merrimack Street Stairs

E. Lindemann Frontage on Upper Plaza F. Lower Plaza Parking Area.

© N

icho

las

Torr

es

© D

CA

MM

© D

CA

MM

© D

CA

MM

© D

CA

MM

© N

icho

las

Torr

es

4746

Key pathways and pedestrian routes intersect the building, creating public cut-throughs that establish a relationship from the contained plaza to the more public street and sidewalks. Due to safety and security issues, several of the building entrances and cut-throughs have been blocked. The main entry to the Lindemann Building has been re-routed to the garage level, rather than the original plaza level, due to accessibility issues with the original entrance.

Current Entrances Closed Entrances Throughways from Street to Plaza

Entrances

4948

Code and Accessibility

Egress Stair Towers Monumental Stairs Plaza Edges Restroom Cores

Designed before implementation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), much of the complex does not comply with modern accessibility requirements. Many parts do not meet current building codes, especially the emergency egress and monumental stairs. As stated in the study done by DHK Architects, it is important to approach accessibility adaptations with respect to the original design intentions and materials, enhancing the building’s design without overwhelming it. The report documents major concerns for the plaza: fall protection (the drop can be as much as ten feet); perimeter security; and accessible entrances.

Many of the railings along the plaza edges are no more than thirty-two inches high, well below the current regulations of forty-two inches. The handrails in the monumental stairs are integrated in the concrete surface. While architecturally interesting, these rails do not meet the code separation requirements of four inches. The stair cores of the Hurley building have pipe railings with non-compliant top guardrails and abrasive strips. The stairs have a non-compliant rise of 7.5 inches and treads of 10.5 inches with a width of 4 feet, 4 inches. There is no extension of the guardrail twelve inches past the stair edge. In Lindemann the treads are 11 inches with a lip of 3 inches, risers are 6.5 inches and the guardrail is concrete with the handrail embedded, similar to the monumental stairs. The monumental stairs typically have a rise of 5.25 inches and tread of 15 inches.

Accessible entrances are a major problem. The only publicly accessible entrance for Lindemann is located in the parking garage on the mezzanine level, compared to the original intended grand entrance from the plaza, which has steps. The path to the current entrance from the street is convoluted, not well marked, and unsafe. There are several ground-level entrances, but they are reserved for staff and ambulances. The Hurley Building’s main entrance is well marked, but not particularly noticeable from either the plaza or Staniford Street. It has a ramp coming from each side of the building, up from Staniford and down from the plaza, without a code-required landing.

Typical Integrated Handrail Condition Typical Emergency Egress Stair Condition

Plaza Planter and Low Wall Plaza Low Wall and Drop to Mezzanine Level

Typical Monumental Stair and Handrail Seating and Low Walls.

©Pa

ul R

udo

lph

�5JGRNG[�$WNNƂPEJ

© D

CA

MM

© D

CA

MM

© D

CA

MM

© D

CA

MM

5150

Program

Typical Upper Level Floor Plan

The buildings are currently owned and house programs operated by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Apart from walk-in centers for unemployment and workforce development, access to the complex is restricted to state employees. The *WTNG[�$WKNFKPI�JQWUGU�QHƂEGU�HQT�VJG�&GRCTVOGPV�QH�Workforce Development, Revenue, Career Services, .CDQT�5VCPFCTFU��*WOCP�4GUQWTEGU��CPF�VJG�)TQWR�Insurance Commission. The Lindemann Building houses a mental health center containing in-patient and clinical facilities, a transitional housing center, and homeless shelter.

6JG�UVCPFCTF�ƃQQT�RNCVG�QH�*WTNG[�KU�CP�QRGP�RNCP�YKVJ�RGTKOGVGT�QHƂEGU�CPF�EWDKENGU�KP�VJG�EGPVGT��The typical interior wall is formed via modular demountable partitions with electrical and telephone/data embedded. These are about three inches wide. Ceilings are a non-standard ACT drop ceilings. Apart from the concrete cores and exterior YCNNU��VJG�KPVGTKQT�QH�*WTNG[�TGUGODNGU�C�TGIWNCT�QHƂEG�building setup of the time, somewhat lacking in PCVWTCN�NKIJV�FWG�VQ�FGGR�ƃQQT�RNCVGU��+V�TGOCKPU�SWKVG�ƃGZKDNG�CPF�CFCRVCDNG�

The Lindemann Building follows a different typology because of its use as a health facility. When not concrete, interior walls are plaster on metal wire mesh CPF�ƂXG�KPEJGU�YKFG��%NKPKECN�CPF�RCVKGPV�TQQOU�CTG�URTGCF�CNQPI�VJG�KPVGTKQT�QH�VJG�ƃQQT�RNCVG��NGCFKPI�VQ�an often disorienting layout.

Vin Cirigliano, Deputy Director of Facilities Management and Design at DCAMM and long time maintenance director of the complex has expressed that the main problem with the complex is its lack of people friendliness. The concrete color is not inviting, and both buildings are very hard to navigate. Concerns about comfort are prevalent, according Cirigliano, because the obsolete climate control system and single-pane windows. As a result, many occupants deal with uncomfortable interiors.

6[RKECN�1HƂEG�(NQQT�KP�VJG�*WTNG[�$WKNFKPI )[O�KP�.KPFGOCPP�$WKNFKPI

Hurley Building Sixth Floor Common Space Typical Lindemann Building Corridor

View Down into the Former Lindemann Plaza Entrance Lindemann Building Common Space

© D

HK

Arc

hite

cts

© M

ark

Pasn

ik

© N

icho

las

Torr

es

© N

icho

las

Torr

es

© N

icho

las

Torr

es

© N

icho

las

Torr

es

Core Elements

5352

Central Critique Space Exhibit Space

© P

eter

Aar

on/

Est

o

© P

eter

Aar

on/

Est

o

Rudolph Hall Renovation

Art and Architecture Building

[Yale University]

[Architect] Paul Rudolph Department chair at the time[Year Built] 1963[Year Renovated] 2007-2008=4GPQXCVKQP�#TEJKVGEV?�)YCVJOG[�5KGIGN�Kaufman Architects [Renovation Contractor] Turner Construction[Renovation Cost] $126 million

By 2007, the construction for the renovation and extension of the Art and Architecture Building at Yale was under way. An 85,800 square foot addition was created adjacent to the existing 122,150 square foot Rudolph Hall. The renovations of the building included details such as replacing windows, with insulated glass, cleaning of the exterior skin, and replacing patches of damaged or weathered hammered ribbed concrete. The opening of previously concealed spaces revealed additional natural lighting.

The 2007-2008 renovation and addition earned the DWKNFKPI�.''&�EGTVKƂECVKQP�HQT�GNGOGPVU�UWEJ�CU�NQY�ƃQY�DCVJTQQOU�CPF�MKVEJGP�ƂZVWTGU��FWCN�ƃWUJ�toilets, waterless urinals, a gray water capture and reuse system, natural daylight introduced though NCTIG�YKPFQYU�CPF�UM[NKIJVU��UWUVCKPCDNG�EGTVKƂGF�wood, use of low volatile organic compounds DWKNFKPI�CPF�ƂPKUJKPI�OCVGTKCNU�CPF����RGTEGPV�reduction of construction debris.

Southeast facade of the original Rudolph Hall and the new expansion

© P

eter

Aar

on/

Esto

© P

aul R

udo

lph

Foun

dat

ion

��)YCVJO

G[�5KGIGN�-CWHOCP

Case Studies

5554

Claire T. Carney Library

[UMass Dartmouth]

Before and after renovation photographs of The Claire T. Carney Library at the University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth

[Architect] Paul Rudolph With Desmond & Lord[Year Built] 1971[Year Renovated] 2011-2012[Renovation Architect] DesignLAB Architects With Austin Architects[Renovation Contractors] Consigli[Renovation Cost] $40 million

The renovation of the Claire T. Carney library offered an opportunity to give the library a “face lift,” to create an addition and upgrade the older system within the building. The new addition enabled the library to stay relevant well into the HWVWTG�D[�ETGCVKPI�OWNVK�WUG�CPF�ƃGZKDNG�URCEGU��The renovation’s objective was to cater to various types of learning and studying techniques.

A new facade was created, however it did not replace nor cover Paul Rudolph’s original design. Because this new facade consisted of a series QH�ƂHV[�HQQV�VCNN�ENGTGUVQTKGU��4WFQNRJoU�EQPETGVG�design is still clearly visible. The glass skin also brings ample light into the building while enclosing an underutilized and under-maintained exterior space. Throughout the renovation process, the building remained assessable.

The interior design of the building was updated as well. The addition of vibrant colors and suitable learning spaces of various learning strategies captured the interest of students, making the library the heart of the campus once again.

Learning Commons Fifth Floor Breakout Space

© N

icho

las

Torr

es

© N

icho

las

Torr

es

© D

CA

MM

© D

esig

nLA

B A

rchi

tect

s

5756

Appendix6JG�$QUVQP�)QXGTPOGPV�%GPVGT�FGCNU�YKVJ�C�JGKIJVGPKPI�QH�VJG�scale around the perimeter and a diminishing of scale at the courtyard. The perimeter at the street is large; the pedestrian and interior courtyard terraces are scaled down. The use detemines the scale as well as its place in the cityscape.

t�2CWN�4WFQNRJ������

Cook, John Wesley. Conversations with Architects : Philip Johnson, Kevin Roche, Paul Rudolph, Bertrand Goldberg, Morris Lapidus, Louis Kahn, Charles Moore, Robert Venturi & Denise Scott Brown. New York: Praeger, 1973

5958

Neighborhood Site Plan Mezzanine Floor

6160

Plaza Floor Second Floor

6362

Plaza Elevation

Staniford Street Elevation

Merrimack Street Elevation

Elevations

6564

A Vision of Human Space

Carl John Black, Architectural Record, July 1973

6766

6968

7170

72

Acknowledgments

Wentworth Institute of Technology

� <QTKEC�2CPVKä President

Russell Pinizzotto Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs & Provost

Charles Hotchkiss Associate Provost and Dean College of Architecture, Design, and Construction Management

Michael MacPhail Chair, Department of Architecture Keeran Hariprasad Assistant to the Dean College of Architecture, Design, and Construction Management Harvard Graduate School of Design

Eric Höweler Assistant Professor in Architecture

Juan Yactayo, )CXKP�4QDD� )TCFWCVG�5VWFGPVU

Massachusetts Division of Capital Asset Management and

Maintenance

Carole Cornelison Commissioner Dana Harrell Deputy Commissioner of Real Estate Management Vin Cirigliano Deputy Director of Facilities Management & Design Elizabeth Minnis Deputy Commissioner for Planning Design and Construction � 5JKTKP�-CTCPƂNQINW Director of Programming Melvin Klayman Knowledge Center Manager

Boston Public Library

DHK Architects

GSD Frances Loeb Library

MIT Rotch Library

over,under

Taylor & Burns Architects

Wentworth Alumni Library