Down Dudley: Designing the Resurrection of an Inner City Neighborhood
Dutch Architect Francine Houben of Mecanoo Architecten seduced a standing-room-only audience at the Boston Architectural College this September, as she presented the new Dudley Square Municipal Building (designed by Mecanoo in collaboration with local firm Sasaki Associates.) The building is only scheduled to open in January 2015, but this is already one of the most talked about structures in town.
The six-storey building is bold though sleek, refreshingly transparent yet also adorned with well detailed brick work. It is a mature piece of architectural design suitable for a modern art museum in a global city. But it is in fact located in one of the poorest neighborhoods of Boston.
Built and owned by the City of Boston, it will house the Boston Public School department (relocated from downtown), and provide additional leasable office space and ground floor retail.
The development is a dramatic mixture of old and new. Several century-old building facades were preserved on site, while the new edifice rises within and around them.
Remedy for Neighborhood Ills?
The current buzz in Dudley is that things are going to finally change. This neighborhood, in the shadow of downtown and the affluent Back Bay, is expected to join the success of other up and coming Boston sub-centers. The Mecanoo/Sasaki building may be the most iconic (and visible) example of this change, but a growing number of nearby mixed-use developments are also now under construction or in final permitting stages.
For many, if not most in Boston, it is hard to imagine that Dudley Square will reemerge as an urban center; few know that it once even was. And even today, with the Municipal Building halfway through construction, the neighborhood still suffers from high retail and office vacancy, empty lots and abandoned buildings. It is also home to high poverty and unemployment rates that are consistently well above average.
The Center of the Inner City
Dudley is the hub of Boston’s inner city; a poor, mostly African-American neighborhood sidelined by decades of errant planning directives and disinvestment typical to most US cities in the 20th century. It harbors an array of low socioeconomic metrics, is largely bereft of mid- and large-scale business, and has suffered severe damage to its urban form. Once a high density, transit-oriented, business and social mecca, by 1970 Dudley Square was left a shell of its former self.
Dudley is at the ‘lower’ end of the larger Roxbury neighborhood, and is often promoted as “the center of Boston” – geographically speaking at least. For most residents of the greater Boston area, however, Dudley is simply not on their map. Images (real or perceived) generated from a history of blight, poverty, and crime continue to permeate general perceptions of the neighborhood.
Dudley was once the “second downtown” of Boston – a convergence of subway and streetcar lines, and a major retail hub; as well as the heart of African-American culture in the city.
In Roxbury, a shopping expedition, or an evening out was once poetically referred to as going “Down Dudley” (Boston slang for “going to Dudley.”) The streets were full of shoppers, families, and strolling couples accompanied by the enticing smells of bakeries and soul food, and the sounds of music flowing out of jazz clubs and record stores.
Neighborhood in Decline
With the large-scale suburbanization of the white population, and the growth of the black community (mostly from the latter part of the Great Migration) the demographic landscape of Roxbury quickly changed.
At first it thrived. The African-American community concentrated around Dudley Square – absorbing the beauty of its historic buildings and rich urban character. But then, just as in so many cities across the nation, a series of ill-fated planning efforts, combined with social and racial upheaval led to the demise of Dudley.
The black community expanded to Upper Roxbury and then neighboring Dorchester and Mattapan, as the white population (mostly Jewish) moved to the suburbs. In this internal migration, the poorest were left behind at Dudley.
In the late 1950s and throughout the 1960s, Boston joined (and to some degree led) the nation in a campaign of urban renewal. In Dudley, this led to the physical destruction of the neighborhood.
Blocks of mundane public housing buildings replaced historic rowhouses, abandoned or condemned buildings were demolished by the hundreds and a huge swath of land to the north and west of Dudley Square was clear-cut for new freeways. Bostonians revolted and stopped the construction of I-95 and the “inner belt” highway, but the demolition of hundreds of acres of former cityscape around Dudley was already complete.
Roxbury was essentially cut off from the rest of Boston by what looked like the cold war division of Berlin – just without the wall. Hundreds of empty garbage-strewn lots filled the landscape where classic Victorian apartment houses and businesses once stood.
In the 1970s the abandonment of Roxbury continued as a deeply divided city essentially put Dudley off the map. Then, to make matters worse (though it was designed to make it better) the only mass transit line in Roxbury, the MBTA Orange Line, was removed. In 1987, the former “el” that roared above the streets of Dudley was relocated half a mile to the west (into the corridor cleared for the un-built I-95 freeway.)
At the time, a promise was made to regenerate Washington Street, the main thoroughfare running below the “el” and directly through Dudley Square. Liberated from decades of darkness and screeching overhead trains, plans for new development were tabled, and a new streetcar line proposed. But nothing came. The brighter streets had even fewer people than before. It would take another 20 years till the city would return to Dudley.
Design and the Inner City
Around the site of the new Municipal Building, dozens of stores and buildings remain vacant. The hope is that with large-scale developments now underway, fortified with investment by the city and the private sector, Dudley Square will come back to life.
The Dudley Square Municipal Building is a catalyst for change, through programming, investment and more importantly, by design. And now other architects, such as Utile and Urbanica are adding their touch to the neighborhood.
Also helping the revival, the city has since reinstated pseudo-rapid transit to Dudley in the form of the Silver Line BRT (yes, it is just a bus…,) and a fair amount of the demolished lots have now been rebuilt with townhouse style affordable housing, schools and community centers. Moreover,the remaining empty parcels are now the focus of large-scale mixed use development, such as the Urbanica project.
Is this ‘21st century urban renewal’ – where forward thinking, community-involved urban planning AND good design come together?! For it is not just the numerical addition of square feet and units that is required in the inner cities, but also the creation and preservation of high quality architecture.
High end design without “South End” Gentrification?
How will avant-garde design located adjacent to the trendy (and well gentrified) South End neighborhood just north of Dudley withstand the forces of gentrification? There are pundits who worry about recent “turnovers” in Brooklyn, or along U Street or Columbia Heights in Washington DC being replicated in Roxbury.
The main difference in Dudley is that the current series of developments are designed for the neighborhood and in some cases built “by” the neighborhood (three CDC-led developments are near groundbreaking including Bartlett Place.) They mostly include affordable housing, community and public services, but with an important inclusion of market-rate units and city-oriented business.
Major architectural and urban design improvements are reinvigorating Dudley Square. The changes will benefit the local community and the entire city. “Going Down Dudley” may soon return to the lexicon of Roxbury, or better yet, to all of Boston.
Leave your comment below, or reply to others.
Please note that this comment section is for thoughtful, on-topic discussions. Admin approval is required for all comments. Your comment may be edited if it contains grammatical errors. Low effort, self-promotional, or impolite comments will be deleted.
Read more from MeetingoftheMinds.org
Spotlighting innovations in urban sustainability and connected technology
Social distancing is becoming the new normal, at least for those of us who are heeding the Center for Disease Control’s warnings and guidelines. But if you don’t have reliable, high-speed broadband, it is impossible to engage in what is now the world’s largest telecommunity. As many schools and universities around the world (including those of my kids) are shut down, these institutions are optimistically converting to online and digital learning. However, with our current broadband layout, this movement will certainly leave many Americans behind.
Accenture analysts recently released a report calling for cities to take the lead in creating coordinated, “orchestrated” mobility ecosystems. Limiting shared services to routes that connect people with mass transit would be one way to deploy human-driven services now and to prepare for driverless service in the future. Services and schedules can be linked at the backend, and operators can, for example, automatically send more shared vehicles to a train station when the train has more passengers than usual, or tell the shared vehicles to wait for a train that is running late.
Managing urban congestion and mobility comes down to the matter of managing space. Cities are characterized by defined and restricted residential, commercial, and transportation spaces. Private autos are the most inefficient use of transportation space, and mass transit represents the most efficient use of transportation space. Getting more people out of private cars, and into shared feeder routes to and from mass transit modes is the most promising way to reduce auto traffic. Computer models show that it can be done, and we don’t need autonomous vehicles to realize the benefits of shared mobility.
The role of government, and the planning community, is perhaps to facilitate these kinds of partnerships and make it easier for serendipity to occur. While many cities mandate a portion of the development budget toward art, this will not necessarily result in an ongoing benefit to the arts community as in most cases the budget is used for public art projects versus creating opportunities for cultural programming.
Rather than relying solely on this mandate, planners might want to consider educating developers with examples and case studies about the myriad ways that artists can participate in the development process. Likewise, outreach and education for the arts community about what role they can play in projects may stimulate a dialogue that can yield great results. In this sense, the planning community can be an invaluable translator in helping all parties to discover a richer, more inspiring, common language.