054 PROJECT / LIBERTY HOTEL, BOSTON, USA
Converting a prison building into a hotel is a difficult task - especially when the rough edged character
of the jail is to be retained. A combination of dramatic, decorative and low level lighting from C.M.
Kling & Associates has helped to achieve a stunning transformation
PRISON BREAK
Completed in 1851, the Liberty Hotel’s was designated the developer of the proj- ence to his creative vision for the cruci-
first incarnation was a prison - a collabora- ect, and entered into a lease agreement form-shaped building. Owing much of its
tion between architect Gridley James Fox with MGH for the land and the jail itself. character to the powerful Romanesque and
Bryant, widely considered Boston’s most ac- Bryant had initially drafted a dramatic cu- Renaissance forms used in its design, the
complished architect of the time, and Rev. pola, designed to bring further light and air building consists of an octagonal central
Louis Dwight, a prominent Yale-educated into the rotunda. Unfortunately, it was a fo- building featuring four circular wood ‘ocu-
penologist whose travels shaped his interest cal point that, at the time of the building’s lar’ windows and four radiating wings, each
in and advocacy for prison reform. Thought construction, was reduced in size to save with large three-story arched windows high-
to be one of the best examples of the “Bos- money. In 1949, it was removed altogether. lighted by articulated wedge-shaped, stone
ton Granite Style” of the mid-19th century, In one of many restoration decisions, the ‘voussoirs’ characteristic of French design.
the building “resonated with a strength cupola was painstakingly rebuilt based on At the time, the windows were thought to
and dignity appropriate for the era and for Bryant’s original design. yield light “four times as great as that in
Bostonians’ sensibilities”, said historians. The transformation of the site into a hotel any prison yet constructed”.
In 1973, after 120 years of housing some of is the work of a team of designers and Apart from this addition, the jail’s granite
Boston’s most notorious criminals, prisoners architects collaborating with historians and exterior and expansive, light-filled interiors
revolted because of poor living conditions conservationists from the Massachusetts His- remain largely unchanged. Soaring 90 feet,
and the jail was declared unfit and in viola- torical Commission, the Boston Landmarks the jail’s central atrium was beautifully
tion of the inmates’ constitutional rights. Commission, the National Park Service preserved and forms the core of the hotel.
On Memorial Day weekend 1990, the last and the Boston Redevelopment Authority It features the building’s trademark win-
prisoners were moved to the new Suffolk to ensure that the end result is a careful dows and historic catwalks. The preserved
County Jail. In 1991, Massachusetts General balance between preservation and dynamic jail cells within the hotel restaurant and
Hospital acquired the obsolete property new use. wrought-iron work on the windows are just
and sought proposals for its reuse, requiring Drawn to the building’s dramatic spatial two examples of preservation. The jail’s
that significant elements of the building be qualities, the team tapped Bryant’s original former exercise yard is now a private,
preserved. In 2001, Carpenter & Company architectural drawings to ensure adher- beautifully landscaped courtyard that is
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140