Photo, Print, Drawing Boston Government Service Center, 19 and 25 Staniford Street, Boston, Suffolk County, MA Charles F. Hurley and Erich Lindemann Buildings
About this Item
Title
- Boston Government Service Center, 19 and 25 Staniford Street, Boston, Suffolk County, MA
Other Title
- Charles F. Hurley and Erich Lindemann Buildings
Names
- Historic American Buildings Survey, creator
- Boston Redevelopment Authority
- I. M. Pei & Associates
- Rudolph, Paul
- Desmond and Lord
- Dyer, M. A.
- Pedersen and Tilney Company
- Shepley Bulfinch
- Jackson, Carter
- Jackson, Carter C., historian
- Lavoie, Catherine C., project manager
- McPartland, Mary, transmitter
- Stranieri, Marcella, transmitter
- Abramson, Daniel, field team
Created / Published
- Documentation compiled after 1933
Headings
- - municipal government
- - government facilities
- - state government
- - institutional grounds and government buildings
- - mental institutions
- - public housing
- - public service
- - Brutalist architectural elements
- - welfare facilities
- - social welfare
- - precast concrete construction
- - bush-hammered concrete
- - concrete
- - skylights
- - chapels
- - residential facilities
- - Massachusetts--Suffolk County--Boston
Latitude / Longitude
- 42.362962,-71.063521
Notes
- - Significance: The Boston Government Service Center (BGSC) is a Brutalist concrete, low-rise complex made of two buildings designed in unison and joined by a large central plaza. It was commissioned by the Boston Redevelopment Authority (BRA) in 1962 to consolidate expanding state welfare facilities that were spread throughout the city. The complex was intended to address systemic inequalities in the welfare system, and it became an early example of the nation’s deinstitutionalized, community-based approach to mental healthcare. The project was conceived as a component of the sixty-acre redevelopment for Boston Government Center, designed by I.M. Pei & Associates in 1961-62, which resulted in the demolition of a dense, mixed-use area that was home to nearly 500 working class families and their businesses, known as Scollay Square. In an effort to promote architectural diversity commensurate with the site’s past and the adjacent historic buildings, the BRA originally stipulated that the BGSC be comprised of three buildings designed by separate architects. The Hurley Building for Employment and Social Security was designed by Shepley, Bulfinch, Richardson, and Abbott (SBRA); an unbuilt twenty-three-story tower intended to house offices for Health, Education, and Welfare was designed by M. A. Dyer with Pedersen and Tilney Company; and the Lindemann Mental Health Building was designed Desmond and Lord, who hired the well-known modernist architect and educator, Paul Rudolph, as a design consultant to attract attention to the firm and the project. After proposing a plan that would help unify the three separate structures, the BRA made Rudolph the coordinating architect of the BGSC, with the authority to supervise the exterior design of the entire complex. The majority of the project—a remarkable feat of cooperation between architects and city planners—would be completed according to Rudolph’s 1962 design. However, financial problems plagued its construction. At the start of the project’s development, it was lauded as one of the most “progressive public programs in the country,” facilitating an economic use of “equipment, facilities, and staff time.” But as the price tag increased from an estimated $34 million in 1960 to over $50 million in 1970, those involved started looking for places to cut costs, and Rudolph’s design came under attack. Specific programmatic elements, such as the swimming pool and gymnasium used in the therapy for residents of the Lindemann Building, were condemned as lavish, and politicians accused Rudolph of a reckless “desire for novelty.” Construction of the BGSC concluded in 1971, but criticism meant that the tower—the sculptural centerpiece of the design, which was essential to architectural logic behind the terraced buildings surrounding the plaza—was never built. Nevertheless, the complex is an urban landmark, and it continues to operate as part of Boston’s welfare apparatus. It also represents a turning point in the design of institutional architecture, as well as the treatment of mental illness in Massachusetts, even in its unfinished state. The complex’s expressive design progressed the ephemeral, ahistorical modernism of contemporary government buildings toward something monumental and imbued with allusions to history. Indeed, Rudolph intended the massive processional staircases to reference the great staircases of Baroque Rome, and he said that the scale and shape of his design for the buildings were designed as a response to Boston’s historic streets. Perhaps most importantly, unlike the rectilinear and strictly standardized mental health facilities of old, the BGSC’s dynamic interplay of protrusions and voids were designed to appear clearly legible and accommodating—a gesture intended to activate subjective psychological responses and recognize the diverse needs of those it serves. However, it is these idiosyncrasies that have led many Bostonians to hold the BGSC in contempt. Before it was completed, concerns were raised regarding the safety of the Lindemann Building’s sculptural stairways, internal bridges, and open terraces. Shortly after it opened, visitors began to comment on their inability to navigate through the labyrinth hallways, and the incomplete state of the complex has made many of Rudolph’s original design intentions illegible. To many, it appears as an unfinished monument to an outdated approach to social services, and the struggle to adapt the buildings to current accessibility codes and changing office needs has led to recent proposals for partial demolition. As Rudolph’s involvement in the design of Hurley Building was limited, this building is most at risk of being lost. A 2020 report for the Commonwealth’s Division of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance called for its partial removal in order to eliminate the current superblock and sell the land for the construction of a more pedestrian friendly development. Even amid calls for its preservation among architecture enthusiasts, the future of the BGSC, like many of Rudolph’s large public buildings and housing complexes, remains uncertain.
- - Survey number: HABS MA-1356
- - Building/structure dates: 1967-1971 Initial Construction
Medium
- Data Page(s): 74
Call Number/Physical Location
- HABS MA-1356
Source Collection
- Historic American Buildings Survey (Library of Congress)
Repository
- Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C. 20540 USA http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/pp.print
Control Number
- ma1865
Rights Advisory
- No known restrictions on images made by the U.S. Government; images copied from other sources may be restricted. https://www.loc.gov/rr/print/res/114_habs.html
Online Format
Part of
Format
Contributor
- Abramson, Daniel
- Boston Redevelopment Authority
- Desmond and Lord
- Dyer, M. A.
- Historic American Buildings Survey
- I. M. Pei & Associates
- Jackson, Carter
- Jackson, Carter C.
- Lavoie, Catherine C.
- McPartland, Mary
- Pedersen and Tilney Company
- Rudolph, Paul
- Shepley Bulfinch
- Stranieri, Marcella
Location
Language
Subject
- Brutalist Architectural Elements
- Bush-Hammered Concrete
- Chapels
- Concrete
- Government Facilities
- Institutional Grounds and Government Buildings
- Mental Institutions
- Municipal Government
- Precast Concrete Construction
- Public Housing
- Public Service
- Residential Facilities
- Skylights
- Social Welfare
- State Government
- Welfare Facilities