Boston Arsenal of Exclusion & Inclusion

by Joseph Feldman

BRIDGES

The boundaries of Northeastern are the ends of several other more defined areas. It is perfectly situated in between Roxbury, Mission Hill, Back bay, and the Fenway area. It is also between other areas like brookline and south end. But northeastern has other areas across Boston, their roots are embedded in much more than just its campus. For instance, the Isec bridge was extremely symbolic in that Northeastern stretched into Roxbury. Ever since then, Northeastern has been building more and more buildings. It has been very controversial, and a big debate amongst local residents. I also photographed a bridge in the fens, connecting one side of the fens to the other. But it really connects the back bay area where Northeastern resides, to the entire Fenway neighborhood. Fenway is considered the entertainment area of Boston, easily accessible due to many bridges and routes. It’s an important and historical part of Boston, thus a string of connections is necessary and welcomed by many. Finally, I photographed something that wasn’t a literal bridge, but a sky bridge on a building. In the police station located on the border of Roxbury, there is a sky bridge from one end to the other of the station. I found this bridge compelling in that it represents an ongoing oppression of Roxbury communities and people. This bridge acts as a watch tower over all of Roxbury, almost preventing them from living properly and in peace. Bridges can provide necessary connections, but can also promote ongoing gentrification. Just like a bridge, it works both ways.

ISEC Bridge

Fens Bridge

Sky Bridge at Boston Police Department

ARMRESTS

The one ironic thing I always think about with hostile architecture is that it is always somewhere meant to serve the vast public. Benches are mostly found in or near parks. They serve as a means to relax and break. When you add arm rests to benches you fundamentally deter a certain group of people from accessing that object’s purpose. So why would anyone design benches or allow such a thing to occur? Well that’s just how society is nowadays. The real problem humanity has is that it prioritizes profit over well being. The means in which you obtain wealth is justified no matter who or what is damaged. We have an ongoing epidemic of homelessness, perpetuated by the economic struggles our country and others have. So the decision to have arm rests and skate guards, preventing unwanted groups of people, is to prioritize other people’s wealth. People may not be comfortable walking past homeless people sleeping in public spaces. Hostile architecture was invented to provide a solution for this problem. Instead, homeless people are forced to take to the floor or travel great distances to find any form of shelter or comfort. Now here is the real kicker. We’d rather invent ways to make more people suffer more than to try and prioritize programs that would help these people. Effectively, we could even end the ongoing problem in the future. I really don’t know the answer why people do this. But my best guess is that people just want to live in ignorance as it’s probably easier to swallow. Architecture is and always should be to serve people, provide shelter, and generate comfort. Arm rests just aim to do the opposite.

Bench at Forest Hills

Isabella Stewart Gardner Park Bench

Isabella Stewart Gardner Park Bench

PUBLIC RESTROOMS

The architecture and politics behind bathrooms are extremely interesting. More and more it has become harder to find public bathrooms. Often bathrooms we think are public, are still privately regulated or accessed. For instance, bathrooms in clothing stores or bathrooms located in a Northeastern academic building. True public bathrooms are directly accessible from streets, or public spaces like parks. However, from a lot of research we have done in this class, these “public spaces” are most often not public at all. There are a lot of rules and regulations on places where you need to go to the bathroom. Going to the bathroom is a requirement of life and every person does it everyday. Thus, a lack of public bathrooms takes away the right to a critical human necessity. For someone like me, most experiences I have had with bathrooms are technically private ones. In fact, the ones that are public are often either hard to get to, or not maintained/taken care of. So good quality truly public bathrooms simply do not exist at all, at least anymore. There are many porta potties located and are considered the standard for public bathrooms. They often lack insulation and are extremely uncomfortable, fitting for a publicly regulated place. In a sense, porta potties, or a general lack of public bathrooms, are hostile architecture. They deter many homeless people from allowing themselves to use a restroom, therefore deterring them from the general area. Thinking about restrooms helps us understand spaces we are privileged to access, and hopefully helps us understand why everyone has the right to these spaces.

Apartment Building Bathrooms

Arnold Arboretum Bathrooms

Wentworth Welcome Weekend Bathrooms

“NO LOITERING”

The concept of loitering being a crime is already interesting. To spend time in a public area for a period of time sounds totally normal but it is in fact considered to be loitering. Well, based on who is enforcing that law at that exact time actually. In theory everyone has the right to loiter. In practice, people who are often the audience of such signs are from marginalized groups to begin with. These signs then have the purpose of trying to deter these groups of people from just being around that space. “No Loitering” signs can be seen in a lot of public places such as train stations or outside businesses. However, the signs can be enforced differently. Police officers have the right to assume “suspicious” activity in “No Loitering” locations and to take action. The judicial system in general is already directed towards those marginalized groups. So when I imagine “No Loitering” signs, I imagine a trap being set up. The authorities get to “clean up our streets” and these pristine locations are unsoiled by any outside group or culture. A classic win-win for our current social and political environment. We know these signs are located most of the time in areas where marginalized groups tend to be, but how about where these signs are not? Places like the Boston common park are where loitering IS encouraged. In a sense, Boston has a reputation to maintain and create, as do all cities. There is an ongoing trend to disregard actual issues, in favor of portraying an ideal reality. When people visit Boston, they tend to go to these places seeing people of all different groups and cultures together in harmony. They get the idea that Boston is this all inclusive neighborhood, when in reality like all modern cities, there is an underlying issue of deeply embedded racism. Thus, “No Loitering” signs are extremely effective in achieving Boston’s goal of hurting marginalized groups in favor of its more privileged audience’s and their lifestyles.

Chinatown Sign near Orange Line Stop

Sign at Davis Square T-Sign

AMERICAN DISABILTY ACT

The Americans with Disabilities Act seeks to protect people with disabilities from any discrimination in public domains. What this looks like in practice is mandatory ramps, elevators or access to public transportation, and audio or visual cues. A successful design of this integrates accessibility into the true function of the design. The idea is to not isolate or disregard anyone with a disability rather to comfort. It has become a common misconception to make things just accessible, but not convenient. The concept of designing for disability justice is, and always should be, the approach we have. It is also a concept we need to apply to other aspects for design, such as race and culture. Disability justice seeks to evolve society’s view on disability and inclusion through design. Accessible design may seem common as you walk around major public spaces, but those are among the only places. Simple things like extremely broken and unkept sidewalks can limit accessibility and completely block off any disabled person from moving. Looking deeper into it, these anomalies tend to align with lower income and affected neighborhoods. When looking more at justice, you tend to layer these issues on top of eachother and see the real trends design brings. These trends can manifest in so many different varieties such as broken sound speakers from sidewalk crossings, or even bus drivers trying to not “waste” time and lowering the bus. The ADA act is not just some guideline to follow, rather a reminder to accompany design to everyone no matter the circumstance. It is a chance to reflect on who we are actually trying to design for.

MFA Ramp

MBTA Bus Sign

BIKE LANES

I think the Bike lane initiative is inherently good willed. The idea that we should commit to a more healthy and sustainable form of transportation is important. I also think a good amount of green and planning projects have those same objectives. However, we know that reality is far from the ideal. Bike lanes are pieces of infrastructure. They signify new and progressive construction, thus attracting people to those neighborhoods. In more and more revitalization plans of lower income areas, we start to see these bike lanes. People looking to move into new areas tend to look for things like these bike lanes along with the carbon decrease it brings. Wealthy residents tend to gravitate towards these signs and continue gentrifying areas. Mission Hill and Roxbury are prime examples, and some we tend to see everyday. I think it is more rare to not see a bike lane than it is to see one. In fact, most people I see use bike lanes are students and faculty that live in the nearby areas. Northeastern has taken over and occupied many neighborhoods of Boston. These bike lanes act as avenues from these neighborhoods, directly to school. However, in other areas of Boston Bike Lanes are underutilized and symbolize a waste of infrastructure. They show perhaps ineffective methods of urban planning that need more attention. Regardless I think Bike Lanes from, say Forest Hills to Back Bay, are extremely useful and act as a perfect commuting option. Bike lanes perform extremely well in grand highway conditions, while provoking and interrupting current neighborhoods. Needless to say there is a place and time for all things, Bike Lanes included.

Hemingway Street “Bike” lane Blocked