View Full Version : If Logan Airport were moved....
An interesting (speculative, obviously will never happen but still food for thought) proposal for what might replace Logan Airport in about 80 years....
By the way, this guy will lecture next Wednesday at the BPL as part of the BSA Design Lecture series. I will be there, anyone else want to come, maybe meet up and have a mini forum night out afterwards?
Anyways interesting proposal...
http://www.dimambro.com/city_planning/boston_2088.htm
vanshnookenraggen
10-12-2006, 09:10 PM
Thats a really cool idea, even if it looks like Miami. There was an idea like this a while back before North Point which had the train yards turned into a Back Bay like neighborhood.
Logan will never be moved though, it is in too perfect a place to not have an airport there.
And before Ron says it, too much open space!
TheBostonian
10-12-2006, 09:26 PM
I've wondered what great things could be done with Logan if a technological advance made the airport obsolete.
chumbolly
10-13-2006, 08:12 AM
In 80 years, they're going to need a lot more fill to keep those flats above the waves....
They are in the process of revitalizing Hong Kong's old Kowloon Airport but the process has been stymied by government regulation and environmental concerns. If Hong Kong is having problems, imagine how long it would take in Boston. I believe that they (Hong Kong) want to include a sporting stadium so it would be cool if the Patriots would move to the old Logan Airport site. The plan is also very low rise; with the airport moved, they could increase the height and density to fit a lot more than 120,000 people. Overall, the plan looks too green and I despise the checkerboard layout.
I went to this lecture tonight. I had other plans but they changed at the last minute and I was in the area so I decided to check it out. Very interesting.
Have to say that I came away with a new respect for Dallas/Fort Worth. People in cities such as Boston like to scoff at the mention of cities like Dallas/Fort Worth. Theyre not "real" cities, afterall, with their depopulated, uncultured cores and sprawling suburban perimeters. But the thing is, it appears Dallas actually sees its inadequacies. It has that ability. There's an awareness there and theyre taking major steps toward rectifying their situation.
Some things make sense to me now. For example, I stumbled across the Dallas/Fort Worth development forum a while back and was astounded at how active that forum was. I mean, it had thousands of members and hundreds of thousands of posts. Evidently, the area seems to have a hyper-awareness concerning its built environment and its leading to some some very good development, IMO. Ive posted about some of their developments before (http://architecturalboston.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=279) and how I felt they had the right idea. It seems this isnt an aberration as I originally thought, but just a small part of a far reaching comprehensive plan for their region's future development. Hats off to Dallas/Fort Worth. Boston should pay attention to whats going on there.
JS38, I wouldve liked to meet up with you, but it was a last minute decision to attend. Definitely next time.
I agree, it was interesting...
The Venice part was also interesting to me as I spent a semester studying
in Italy while in school and got a chance to spend a few days in Venice seeing some of the things he talked about first hand...
I think the point that came across was the need for comprehensive, regional, long-term, multi-faceted planning in our new global age....
I got there just as it began and had to rush off to another appointment right after, but maybe we can arrange a larger forum meet soon...
The next talk about China on December 13th should also be very interesting, I recommend for people to try and come...
palindrome
10-26-2006, 08:54 AM
Where is the talk?
kz1000ps
10-26-2006, 02:27 PM
It's held in the Rabb Hall in the concourse (basement) level of the Johnson building at the Public Library.
I was there too, and I can only echo the sentiments above. Hearing that Dallas had a down-and-out area was news to me, although it wasn't terribly surprising to hear so. And I too have a newfound respect for D-FW. It will be quite interesting to see what the city will look like some 50 years from now without all those parking lots and wasted space.
But while the material was interesting, I want to say that, as a speaker, Antonio Di Mambro was pretty darn dull. I realize that English isn't his first language, but boy did that guy speak slowwwwwwwlyyyyy and with a rather monotonous tone.
kennedy
04-25-2007, 06:34 PM
Briv, I lived in the Dallas area when I was a kid (don't worry-I was born in a room looking over Fenway Park during a Yankees game). The city is great, I love to visit. It is so neat and clean! But so hey, I was thinking about this, and I have some time on my hands and am going to do a side-project. I'm going to GoogleMaps, and get my hands on a blank map of Boston (a few different types). I'll city-plan a "New Boston." And I was thinking, since I have no clue how to do this, maybe someone like vanshnookenraggen...could let me send my images to them and have them upload them to their website.
kennedy
04-25-2007, 06:40 PM
And whoever they are over at DiMambro are pretty cool.
vanshnookenraggen
04-25-2007, 11:26 PM
Wait, what?
kennedy
04-26-2007, 08:04 PM
nevermind then.
And whoever they are over at DiMambro are pretty cool.
If you really like what the guy is saying you can hear more on May 4 @ 6pm in Gund Hall, Harvard University at his public lecture.
cool36
11-22-2008, 12:49 AM
This site will be good to built a Olympic site in the near future.
kennedy
11-22-2008, 06:19 PM
Too bad it would be nigh impossible for Boston to host an Olympics...we don't have enough hotel rooms, in the first place. Not enough venues. Not enough international recognition. And, if you razed Logan and built a new one, where in the hell would you find money to pay for the Olympics-especially in a market like this. And how would all of the people get here? Logan sure couldn't handle that many people.
But one can dream.
buju b
11-22-2008, 06:32 PM
bitchlanta did not (and does not) have any appreciable international recognition.
I am not convinced Logan could not handle the air traffic associated with an Olympics. Not everyone would arrive via air (domestically and from Canada, in particular), and those traveling by air would not all arrive/depart at once.
kennedy
11-22-2008, 07:26 PM
bitchlanta did not (and does not) have any appreciable international recognition.
I am not convinced Logan could not handle the air traffic associated with an Olympics. Not everyone would arrive via air (domestically and from Canada, in particular), and those traveling by air would not all arrive/depart at once.
Whether or not Atlanta was qualified...do you really believe Boston could host an Olympics right now?
Lurker
11-22-2008, 07:54 PM
Olympic Checklist :
Finish the needed runway addition at Logan.
Build the proposed island in the middle of the Charles for the Olympic village and several venues.
Add a stadium to South Boston.
Blue Line extension from MGH, to the island, then onward to Kenmore, perhaps points beyond replacing the D line.
Add a few more hotels throughout the city.
Lurker competes in Judo, for the first time since he was in the service, and wins the gold in an upset.
Lurker distributes 'complimentary' boxes of Wheaties to forum members...
Likelyhood of any of this happening < ZERO
kennedy
11-23-2008, 11:48 AM
thank you.
palindrome
11-23-2008, 06:17 PM
Whether or not Atlanta was qualified...do you really believe Boston could host an Olympics right now?
right now is irrelevant as they decide the Olympics well in advanced. The summer 2016 (go Chicago!) Olympics is to be decided by October of next year leaving roughly 6 years for construction.
With that said, it would take maybe double that time for Boston to be ready.
Houston put in a bid for 2016 btw....
kennedy
11-23-2008, 07:01 PM
Go Chicago!
But no matter, unless they choose 30 years in advance, Boston could never handle the Olympics.
Houston!?! I can't decide if Atlanta or Houston is worse.
PaulC
11-23-2008, 08:13 PM
About 11 years ago there was a group pushing for a Boston Olympics. Their web site has been dead for years. I remember little of the plan but it included using all the empty(summer) dorms along the Charles as an athletes village connected by water. The main Olympic stadium would be a temporary structure.
With all the colleges in New England there might even be enough stadiums to host all the soccer games here. In the 1984 LA Olympic games Harvard Stadium was used for some early soccer matches.
buju b
11-23-2008, 08:29 PM
Both suck.
I did time in bitchlanta from 1992-1996 (was temporarily released during the Olympics and got the hell out of dodge for about 3 months spanning the games themselves and equal time on either side--but was there for the vast majority of the time leading up to the Summer Games in '96).
I do not know what everyone's working definition of 'qualified' is, but if it has anything to do with having the requisite venues, hotels, and infrastructure in place prior to receiving apporval to host a Summer Olympics--the current arguement(s) against Boston being able to host, then that nubbins town of bitchlanta was not qualified when they were awarded the games, several years prior to 1996.
They became marginally-so through a massive construction drive for most of the venues--the Olympic stadium, the swimming center, the athlete's village, the equestrian park, the rowing pool, etc. did not exist when the the bid was awarded (I am sure there are several others that likewise were created for the games, but I am just going off of memory).
When they received the bid, there was a concurrent uptick in the construction of hotels and other such tourist/visitor establishments. The joint was already somewhat of a convention destination, so there was a reasonable amount of this crap already in place.
The news of the Olympics coming to town in 4-5 years or so proved very energizing and uniting and a fairly impressive amount of work towards this was accomplished. THAT would probably be why Boston will likely never host an Olympics because of the dipshits that are presently (and have been and probably will be) in positions of power and authority could not effectively orchestrate the preparation.
All that said, my fingers will be crossed for Chicago.
Why are we all cheering on Chicago? Our new "global president" is set to deprive South America of its first Olympics ever (the Rio bid was heavily favored before his intervention).
mass88
11-24-2008, 12:20 PM
What does it matter if Boston never holds the Olympics. The games are overrated for a city anyways. Atlanta was way too commercialized. Sydney is mired in debt to this day, as is Montreal.
On the original topic, what if Logan were to move? Would the South Boston waterfront see tall building about 700 feet? I personally think that is Logan moved to a western suburb a top notch facility could be built.
stellarfun
11-24-2008, 04:25 PM
What does it matter if Boston never holds the Olympics. The games are overrated for a city anyways. Atlanta was way too commercialized. Sydney is mired in debt to this day, as is Montreal.
On the original topic, what if Logan were to move? Would the South Boston waterfront see tall building about 700 feet? I personally think that is Logan moved to a western suburb a top notch facility could be built.
Why engage in fantasy? Logan is not going to move. Where would it move to: Pittsfield? A top notch facility probably requires 4,000 acres. Dulles is about 12,000 acres, about 5,000 acres being used for the airport itself. The remainder is buffer. JFK is over 5,000 acres, with no buffer. Logan is 2,400 acres, including 700 acres of water.
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.