BCEC expansion | Seaport

JeffDowntown said:
Yes, but this kind of reads like the rules at any public beach or public pool. They are all "over done" for liability reasons.
Click to expand...

I'm just saying that they could have a lot more fun with the wording of the prohibitions while also reducing redundant and surplus text. Saying the same thing twice does not confer extra legal protection.
 
What it says is "we can kick you out of here at any time if we chose to"
 
CSTH said:
17981858629_2afdcc7321_k.jpg
Click to expand...

Absolutely no smoking while shooting a bayonet modded pistol, or lighting matches while injecting heroin into a box carrying round headed man who is riding a bike away from a dog chasing a car... but with all that mayhem going on I am not sure why running away is prohibited.

Yes, it seems whenever discussing signage for a public space it always comes down to posting a bunch of moronic rules on signs. As if every twenty feet along the road we need to post a sign with the entire civil code written in 2 point font just so we are clear that we aren't leaving civilization just because there is a little grass on the ground.

I especially like the first bullet point where "Violations of state or local law" are prohibited... as if the other park down the street without that bullet point is apparently a completely lawless place outside the jurisdiction of mankind.
 
tangent said:
I especially like the first bullet point where "Violations of state or local law" are prohibited... as if the other park down the street without that bullet point is apparently a completely lawless place outside the jurisdiction of mankind.
Click to expand...

When you leave the normal plane of existence and enter "the Massport zone"
 
I like "excessive loitering." Sure, you can stop to tie your shoe or watch a plane passing overhead or enjoy the little sculptures, but do it for too long and you're outta here!

Also, same bullet: it is prohibited to "remain idle about the property." What else does one do in a park but remain idle? Particularly when running is against the rules..
 
timsox6 said:
I like "excessive loitering." Sure, you can stop to tie your shoe or watch a plane passing overhead or enjoy the little sculptures, but do it for too long and you're outta here!

Also, same bullet: it is prohibited to "remain idle about the property." What else does one do in a park but remain idle? Particularly when running is against the rules..
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that's code for "no homeless people"
 
Line about 80 people long to get into the Lawn on D maze right now! (wrong thread)
 
Boston Globe: Popular Lawn on D may be too costly to keep going

The park drew an immediate following from young tech professionals and local families alike after opening in August 2014. An estimated 135,000 people have visited the space in the past 12 months — office workers relaxing on oval swings in a break from the daily grind, millennials throwing back Harpoons on summer evenings, parents and children picnicking in the sun.

[...]

But with costs that far exceed its revenues, the Lawn’s future is unclear.

Johanna Storella, the Massachusetts Convention Center Authority’s chief strategy officer, said she does not know whether the Lawn will continue after the park closes for the season in October. The staff, she said, is drawing up different operating scenarios to present to the agency’s board in the fall.

If board members choose to revive the park next year, Storella said, they may need to decide whether to scale it back to a simpler open space or continue to pay for a heavily programmed venue.
Click to expand...

The Lawn on D has a budget of $2.2 million and expects to generate a bit over $300k in revenue, so it might have to close down.

For comparison, the Greenway has a budget of $4.2 million ($2 million state subsidy, $578k revenue, remainder donations and endowment returns). NY's Bryant Park--the shining example of a privately funded park--has a budget of $12 million ("funded by sources such as corporate sponsorships, concession fees, and payments from nearby property owners"). Massport (a governmental agency similar to the BCCA) expects that "more than $5 million will be spent maintaining and growing the park system Massport operates in East Boston and South Boston" in 2016. Post Office Square is paid for by the garage below, but it had a $2.9 million annual operating budget in 2008 according to this blog. There is all sorts of data on other urban parks here from the Trust for Public Land.
 
JumboBuc said:
Boston Globe: Popular Lawn on D may be too costly to keep going



The Lawn on D has a budget of $2.2 million and expects to generate a bit over $300k in revenue, so it might have to close down.

For comparison, the Greenway has a budget of $4.2 million ($2 million state subsidy, $578k revenue, remainder donations and endowment returns). NY's Bryant Park--the shining example of a privately funded park--has a budget of $12 million ("funded by sources such as corporate sponsorships, concession fees, and payments from nearby property owners"). Massport (a governmental agency similar to the BCCA) expects that "more than $5 million will be spent maintaining and growing the park system Massport operates in East Boston and South Boston" in 2016. Post Office Square is paid for by the garage below, but it had a $2.9 million annual operating budget in 2008 according to this blog. There is all sorts of data on other urban parks here from the Trust for Public Land.
Click to expand...

Maybe BCEC should just turn the space over to DCR or the city park department. Moving forward it looks like BCEC is going to be held to different budget standards where revenue needs to pay for their expenses. Public Parks and commons don't usually generate net revenue for the entity that has oversight, nor are they expected to.
 
tangent, the city of Boston is notoriously cheap when it comes to public parks. Menino didn't want to pay to maintain the Greenway, so left it in the hands of the state and a conservancy. Other non-profits pay for the upkeep of other parks, e.g., the Public Garden.

The department that includes the parks department employs 16 gravediggers and 12 gardeners.
 
tangent said:
Maybe BCEC should just turn the space over to DCR or the city park department. Moving forward it looks like BCEC is going to be held to different budget standards where revenue needs to pay for their expenses. Public Parks and commons don't usually generate net revenue for the entity that has oversight, nor are they expected to.
Click to expand...

I think this misses the mark.

It's not about 'revenue' per se - its about mission, mandate, and accountability.

The budget figures listed for the other parks represents money given by donors (mainly neighboring institutions) for the purposes of maintaining a well above the basic level of trim and programming.

The budget figure for the Lawn on D represent money derived from taxi and hotel surcharges (and bond gurantees, etc.) for the purposes of attracting convention-driven business travel to Boston. I haven't seen any explanation of how Lawn on D contributes to that mandate.

And for the record, I don't think Massport should be in the parks business either, (despite the fact that the parks in Eastie are well maintained and patronized) -
 
stellarfun said:
tangent, the city of Boston is notoriously cheap when it comes to public parks. Menino didn't want to pay to maintain the Greenway, so left it in the hands of the state and a conservancy. Other non-profits pay for the upkeep of other parks, e.g., the Public Garden.

The department that includes the parks department employs 16 gravediggers and 12 gardeners.
Click to expand...

That's so sad. And so true - we have lots of really nice parks in Boston but none are under the care of the city... And the ones that are are in hopeless condition. Is Franklin Park under Boston? I would imagine it is, given the sad condition...
 
This sounds like a public plea for underwriting... which I imagine they'll get from some Seaport company(-ies)...
 
CSTH said:
I think this misses the mark.

It's not about 'revenue' per se - its about mission, mandate, and accountability.

The budget figures listed for the other parks represents money given by donors (mainly neighboring institutions) for the purposes of maintaining a well above the basic level of trim and programming.

The budget figure for the Lawn on D represent money derived from taxi and hotel surcharges (and bond gurantees, etc.) for the purposes of attracting convention-driven business travel to Boston. I haven't seen any explanation of how Lawn on D contributes to that mandate.

And for the record, I don't think Massport should be in the parks business either, (despite the fact that the parks in Eastie are well maintained and patronized) -
Click to expand...

Yes, but the issue is if Lawn on D is a public good outside of BCEC's mandate and they can't justify the expense. Boston Park Department or DCR don't (usually) shut down parks for lack of funding. But BCEC might. I'd rather see a park suffer for lack of funding for a few years than get shut down and redeveloped.
 
Jon Chesto, who wrote about the Lawn on D in the Boston Globe this past week had this to say when I asked about the work being done.

Jon Chesto ‏@jonchesto Aug 14

@MassConvention is still studying whether to go forward w/D &/or E St. garages if there is no expansion.
 
ParkerChris said:
Garage is moving forward without guarantee of a BCEC expansion?
Click to expand...

As parking lots keep getting gobbled up by development, it's probably not bad economics to build a parking garage in the Seaport regardless of BCEC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top