Photo of the Day, Boston Style - Part Deux

[kz1000ps]

More Harvard:

http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/9863/img2491harv.jpg

http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/6098/img2446h.jpg

http://img190.imageshack.us/img190/1391/img2445r.jpg

[czsz]

The colorful chairs have added some new life to the Yard. Too bad they'll be taken away at the end of the month.

[kz1000ps]

Are they expected to return next season?

[jass]

Are they expected to return next season?

Unfortunately, the way the weathers been shifting it's expected that when they migrate in the spring they may decide to settle around Connecticut.

[Ron Newman]

I really like this experiment and hope to see it return in March or April.

[DZH22]

Few from the uglier side of Cambridge

http://i424.photobucket.com/albums/pp322/DZH22/Cambridge%20and%20Boston%20Oct%2024%20Crappy%20Dre ary/IMG_3114.jpg

http://i424.photobucket.com/albums/pp322/DZH22/Cambridge%20and%20Boston%20Oct%2024%20Crappy%20Dre ary/IMG_3154.jpg

http://i424.photobucket.com/albums/pp322/DZH22/Cambridge%20and%20Boston%20Oct%2024%20Crappy%20Dre ary/IMG_3155.jpg

http://i424.photobucket.com/albums/pp322/DZH22/Cambridge%20and%20Boston%20Oct%2024%20Crappy%20Dre ary/IMG_3138.jpg

[czsz]

That's what the Seaport will look like in 30 years.

Minus the heavy rail, of course.

[Corey]

That's what the Seaport will look like in 30 years.

Minus the heavy rail, of course.

:(

[DZH22]

Oooh don't hate, who wouldn't want a city to resemble Kendall? (sarcasm)

http://i424.photobucket.com/albums/pp322/DZH22/Cambridge%20and%20Boston%20Oct%2024%20Crappy%20Dre ary/IMG_3150.jpg

http://i424.photobucket.com/albums/pp322/DZH22/Cambridge%20and%20Boston%20Oct%2024%20Crappy%20Dre ary/IMG_3145.jpg

http://i424.photobucket.com/albums/pp322/DZH22/Cambridge%20and%20Boston%20Oct%2024%20Crappy%20Dre ary/IMG_3136.jpg

[KentXie]

Kendall reminds me of Providence.

[Ron Newman]

Which part of Providence? Certainly not of Brown University, or Federal Hill, or Wickenden Street.

[KentXie]

I'm not sure. I went to Providence for clubbing and I remember a few low-rise buildings that have concrete facade with no windows facing the streets, surface parking lots, and somewhat dull buildings.

[vanshnookenraggen]

No new posts here people. All new images go in the New Thread (http://www.archboston.org/community/showthread.php?p=86745).

[Lrfox]

Which part of Providence? Certainly not of Brown University, or Federal Hill, or Wickenden Street.

First off, Van, I'm continuing the discussion, but feel free to move this as you see fit.

Now, I would assume that kentxie is referring to the Jewelery District area (Near Elements, Level II, Ultra, etc) which, unfortunately, has lots of gaps and surface lots.

I think Kendall reminds me more of the newer construction in Providence up near the Amtrak station... not so oriented to the streets, unfortunately.

Much of downtown Providence and the areas you mentioned are very urban... the area where the clubs are, is a bit gap-toothed and run down. Pine Street is the dividing line (check it out on google maps) heading East from there, it's a mess of surface lots and crappy buildings... West of that it's great.

[vanshnookenraggen]

I'll let the discussion continue but I'll move any new pics. I didn't want to close the thread since it is such a treasure trove of great pictures and thoughts.

[Ron Newman]

I believe the district referred to above is largely severed from the rest of Providence by the elevated I-195 ... but also that the city is in the process of moving that highway away from the district. Construction seemed to be well along when I visited a few weeks ago.

[Lrfox]

I-195 East and West both flow along the new section of highway. The old section is due to come down soon. The plan calls for significant development as well as some new parkland and public space. It really seems like they are doing their best to avoid a Greenway repeat. JWU, RISD and Brown have already made a big push to get some of the newly available land.

My go to source on this project is the 195 section of Greater City Providence: http://www.gcpvd.org/more/195-streetgrid/

[czsz]

Great. Once again Providence bests Boston in planning.

[JohnAKeith]

http://thelifeofacity.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/prude.jpg

http://thelifeofacity.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/prude2.jpg

[JohnAKeith]

Prudential of the day:

http://thelifeofacity.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/prudential_tower.jpg

[KentXie]

The Prudential Tower's lights are wild tonight. Flickering red, white, blue, and turning back to a steady purple.

[Bos77]

Pics:
http://www.archboston.org/community/showthread.php?t=2604&page=2

[JohnAKeith]

http://thelifeofacity.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/pru.jpg

[armpitsOFmight]

http://i491.photobucket.com/albums/rr279/jrlevi01/DSC00559.jpg

[czsz]

Hard to believe that ridiculously wide offramp gently curving through bucolic but pointless "green space" is actually right next to Beacon Hill.

[Charlie_mta]

This surface freeway through the park is absurd, but that's what the car culture has wrought. I'd scale down the main roadway to two lanes (one in each direction), as well as reduce the off-ramp width.

I know, I know, it would increase congestion, but the car culture is a doomed anyway in the long term.

[ablarc]

...the car culture is a doomed anyway in the long term.
...and it will go down fighting to the bitter end.

[armpitsOFmight]

but the car culture is a doomed anyway in the long term.

I don't agree with you since people in China and India will be buying more cars in the next 50 years. They'll probably have to expand their highways to meet the extra congestion.

[Charlie_mta]

That is one reason it's doomed. The resources of the planet simply aren't enough to support the largest nations on earth locked in traffic gridlock. More highways only makes it worse. Los Angeles has one of the most extensive freeway networks, yet has one of the highest congestion rates.

[KentXie]

^^But what will be the solution for transportation then? Just public transportation and bikes? No, thanks. I want to be able to use a personal vehicle to go wherever I want, whenever I want and do not wish to have to spend an extra hour because someone wants to narrow down a heavily use highway.

Oh and Van can you move this page onto the part three. I accidentally restarted this thread because I mixed up part 2 and 3.

[armpitsOFmight]

That is one reason it's doomed. The resources of the planet simply aren't enough to support the largest nations on earth locked in traffic gridlock.

Don't let the propaganda from Greenpeace fool you; we aren't going to run out of raw materials within the next few centuries. You'll be long dead by the time any of this happens and by then the countries on this planet will be taken over by an oligopoly of Corporations that will be fighting each other for the left-overs. Yes, the Earth is doomed, but we can't predict when we will be destroyed. Hopefully we will discover light-speed travel by then and have a few colonies throughout the universe.

[ablarc]

^ Or maybe the Jehovah's Witnesses (http://www.watchtower.org/e/200804/article_01.htm) will be proved right.

[kennedy]

Don't let the propaganda from Greenpeace fool you; we aren't going to run out of raw materials within the next few centuries. You'll be long dead by the time any of this happens and by then the countries on this planet will be taken over by an oligopoly of Corporations that will be fighting each other for the left-overs. Yes, the Earth is doomed, but we can't predict when we will be destroyed. Hopefully we will discover light-speed travel by then and have a few colonies throughout the universe.

The Earth will probably be alright, during my lifetime. Does that mean I shouldn't give a shit about future generations if there's something I can do about it?

[Charlie_mta]

I want to be able to use a personal vehicle to go wherever I want, whenever I want....

With all due respect, that is not sustainable on a global scale. Nor is it desirable unless we want to have paved over parks, automobile dependant suburban sprawl eating up what's left of the countryside, and a population beset with obesity and diabetes.

[kennedy]

Well, Charlie, that would be the case if everyone had a personal vehicle. Unfortunately, the wide majority of people can't afford them.

Not to say that we should keep using them to such an absurd extent, but the total elimination of a personal transportation unit will probably never happen. There are alternatives though, and we're making the right steps-smaller, more fuel efficient cars are being built by almost every auto maker, and car sharing programs are gaining popularity.

[Lrfox]

Well, Charlie, that would be the case if everyone had a personal vehicle. Unfortunately, the wide majority of people can't afford them.

Not to say that we should keep using them to such an absurd extent, but the total elimination of a personal transportation unit will probably never happen. There are alternatives though, and we're making the right steps-smaller, more fuel efficient cars are being built by almost every auto maker, and car sharing programs are gaining popularity.

The scary thing is that with growing middle classes in the world's largest countries like China and India, more and more people can afford cars. If those countries even approach automobile usage to the degree that we use them here, we're all in trouble.

[kennedy]

Good point. From an environmental point of view, we'll have to hope they adopt fuel efficient, electric, and other alternative energy sources for the time being. Americans need to set an example for these developing countries, though. Buicks are some of the most popular luxury cars in China, because the connotation they hold has to do with western prosperity. If the new image of western prosperity becomes small, environmentally responsible vehicles, the people and industry of developing countries will emulate this precedent.

Hopefully, we see some new standards come out of Copenhagen. On the news, some guy with a European name said that one of the most important things is to make Americans realize the Chinese are making progress, and make the Chinese realize the Americans are making progress. He's got a very good point.

[czsz]

Buicks are some of the most popular luxury cars in China, because the connotation they hold has to do with western prosperity.

I noticed the prevalence of Buicks in China! Whoever gave them the idea that Buicks connote prosperity, though? To me they only connote old people.

Hopefully, we see some new standards come out of Copenhagen.

The EPA announcement yesterday that it was going over Congress' head to impose really strict new emissions standards will completely trump any agreement that manages to come out of Copenhagen. There's already grumbling that the agency stole the thunder of the diplomats at the conference (not that the climate activists are complaining).

[kennedy]

I noticed the prevalence of Buicks in China! Whoever gave them the idea that Buicks connote prosperity, though? To me they only connote old people.

I agree, but it was on an episode of 60 Minutes (I think) back at the start of the recession, talking about how US automakers are actually popular in other countries. Maybe just the fact that it is American?

The EPA announcement yesterday that it was going over Congress' head to impose really strict new emissions standards will completely trump any agreement that manages to come out of Copenhagen. There's already grumbling that the agency stole the thunder of the diplomats at the conference (not that the climate activists are complaining).

I hope so, but that really only affects us. I'd like to see broader restrictions, standards that every country has to adhere to. That way, multinationals don't just up and leave what little manufacturing they have here and go to another country that is more lenient.

[kz1000ps]

I noticed the prevalence of Buicks in China! Whoever gave them the idea that Buicks connote prosperity, though? To me they only connote old people.

And it's because of Buick's popularity in China that GM's keeping the brand alive here as they dump almost everything else, which leaves Buick to play the completely superfluous middleman between Chevy and Cadillac.

[czsz]

That explains it. I was wondering why it didn't get killed instead of Pontiac, which actually had potential to be cool.

At least the Chinese weren't into Oldsmobile. Worst. Brand name. Ever.

[kennedy]

And it's because of Buick's popularity in China that GM's keeping the brand alive here as they dump almost everything else, which leaves Buick to play the completely superfluous middleman between Chevy and Cadillac.

If you want to talk about complete superfluity, talk about GMC and Chevrolet.

[kz1000ps]

^ GMC I understand, but why Chevy? What brand would you have compete with Ford, Toyota, ect.?

And yes, I'm with czsz in preferring Pontiac staying alive (over Buick, that is). As it is, Chevy takes on both the value and performance roles (the latter coulda gone to Pontiac), while Buick is going through an identity crisis as it tries to lower its average customer age and simultaneously take aim at Lexus (derrrrrrrr). Mind you Caddy is more than able to take on both the Japanese and German luxury mobiles.

Meanwhile, GMC survives for that discerning individual who demands a fancier grille.

[kennedy]

GMC and Chevrolet are superfluous because they are the EXACT same cars from the same company. Different badges, extremely slight changes in body shapes, but that's about it. So GM should choose which brand they want competing against Toyota and Ford - GMC or Chevy?

The GMC grille isn't even that cool, I actually prefer Chevy's.

[kz1000ps]

You know GMC only makes trucks, right?

Chevy would never be "replaced" by GMC because they're the ones with the Malibu, Cobalt, Camaro, Impala, ect. GMC has only retrimmed Chevy trucks and SUVs.... Sierra, Acadia, Denali...

GMC could've been given a reason to live had GM decided to keep their medium duty trucks in production, but the whole program was killed off earlier this year.

[kennedy]

I'm saying GMC should be killed off, or kept in a purely commercial niche. Chevy has the same trucks that GMC makes. Suburban = Yukon, Silverado = Sierra, Traverse = Acadia, etc. GM doesn't need any more redundancy.

[KentXie]

With all due respect, that is not sustainable on a global scale. Nor is it desirable unless we want to have paved over parks, automobile dependant suburban sprawl eating up what's left of the countryside, and a population beset with obesity and diabetes.

Oil is not the only source of energy that a car can use so we do not know if it is sustainable or not. And even so, narrowing a heavily used highway and eliminating personal vehicles are not the solutions. How else can some people from the suburb get to major cities? It's most likely not feasible to have buses and trains run to every town.

[statler]

One solution is to use existing tools (zoning, infrastructure spending, etc) to entice developers to build more pedestrian-oriented communities or try to retro-fit older communities (by allowing more infill and higher densities) into more pedestrian friendly area (obviously this isn't possible in a lot of modern suburbs).

If enough of these areas get developed they become cost-competitive with auto-oriented areas and with a little bit of savy marketing from developers and landlords they become as desirable as their auto-centric cousins. No banning of cars required.

Its really the same thing that is happening today:
Legislature sets the guidelines, developers & landlords follow the guidelines, the market does rest.
The only thing that needs to change are the guidelines in step one.

[Justin7]

Kent, no one is saying you should have a personal vehicle, but why is your convenience more important than the convenience, health, and quality of life of the people who actually live in the city?


I'm saying GMC should be killed off, or kept in a purely commercial niche. Chevy has the same trucks that GMC makes. Suburban = Yukon, Silverado = Sierra, Traverse = Acadia, etc. GM doesn't need any more redundancy.

Chevy has the worst model names possible.

"Check out my new Malibu!"

[Shepard]

My mother drives a Malibu and I'm always surprised at how such a fuddly-duddly car can have a name like Malibu.

Now as for my Dodge Neon, a more apt name would be "Dodge Golfcart" ... or based on the noise every single joint in the car makes, "Dodge Rattlesqueak."

[kz1000ps]

I'm saying GMC should be killed off, or kept in a purely commercial niche.

I figured that's what you meant, but when you wrote:

GMC and Chevrolet are superfluous because they are the EXACT same cars from the same company.

It sounded like you thought both were superfluous.