Boston Common Overhaul

I know Toby agrees with me, he would much rather have a large, open space to romp and catch missed frisbees, rather than be confined within the walls and small spaces of a doggie internment camp.
 
Are dogs allowed to run free on the Common now? I thought they had to be on leashes. If they don't than I agree a dog park makes no sense.
 
I don't know what the specific rules are, or if there even are any, but I know that a pretty large group brings their dogs to the parade ground after work and let's them run around off-leash.

Personally, I think the idea of a dedicated dog park on the Common is stupid. The area should be flexible. In the last few years I've gone x-country skiing at Winter Fest, saw Shakespear on the Common a few times, saw Yo Gabba Gabba (no, I don't have kids, I'm just a nerd), saw a few nutty protests, saw a few worth while protests, sat, walked, ate pizza... why are we going to fence off an area and say, "THIS IS FOR DOGS ONLY!!"?
 
There is an area near the statehouse that is being used for off the leash dog use. The current rule is that it is illegal everywhere else.
 
The people who are letting their dogs run "off-leash" are disobeying (i.e., breaking) the law. It is illegal for a dog to be off-leash anywhere in the city, except in designated dog parks. It is not legal to let a dog run off-leash anywhere on the Common. There was a "trial program" at one time; it is now over.

It wouldn't make any sense to let dogs run free on the Common, when there are so many other people using it, including people with young children, the elderly, and others.

Many dogs cannot be controlled; they are animals, not people.

As it is now, I believe the entire park is open to "all people"; to segregate a section for use only by one group of people (dog-owners) goes against what has been the rule, so far.

Am I against a dog park on the Common? Not necessarily, but the behavior of dog-owners on Beacon Hill, as well as elsewhere, leads me to the conclusion that they are selfish people who have wanton disregard for the law.

Even in the dog park in the South End, there are still people who take their dogs off leashes and let them play in the "non-dog" sections, because, in their words, "My dog doesn't play well with other dogs."

Might I suggest you head to New Hampshire, then?

That's about all I have to say about this topic!
 
Im going to go with "no". No to the dog park (god help us) and definitely no to the restaurant. I love restaurants, but Boston has PLENTY. We don't need another one clogging up a public park.

I think the common is fine. I used to skate through there at all hours of the night and generally hang out there and never had a problem. There are certainly some homeless people about and brown baggers, but nothing is going to change that. It's a park in the middle of the city, you're always going to have a bit of that element there. Do they really think a restaurant or a dog park or, for that matter ANYTHING that attracts more families and other uses to the park is going to change that? Definitely not.

The landscaping could probably use a bit of work and I think more non permanent events is a fantastic idea. Food from carts is also fine with me as long as its non permanent. Honestly, to me this sounds like a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. I think the area could be better used, but there's nothing wrong with it now. With all the things in town and in the state demanding money now, this should be the absolute last thing on our list. Sure the restaurant could pay for some of this but...come on...leave the park alone.
 
to segregate a section for use only by one group of people (dog-owners) goes against what has been the rule, so far.
Click to expand...

But don't we already have sections designated for other groups of people -- ice skaters, tennis players, and baseball or softball players?
 
Ron Newman said:
But don't we already have sections designated for other groups of people -- ice skaters, tennis players, and baseball or softball players?
Click to expand...

ice skaters, tennis, baseball and softball players typically don't leave the smell of their urine and feces after they leave
 
endus said:
Im going to go with "no". No to the dog park (god help us) and definitely no to the restaurant. I love restaurants, but Boston has PLENTY. We don't need another one clogging up a public park.

I think the common is fine. I used to skate through there at all hours of the night and generally hang out there and never had a problem. There are certainly some homeless people about and brown baggers, but nothing is going to change that. It's a park in the middle of the city, you're always going to have a bit of that element there. Do they really think a restaurant or a dog park or, for that matter ANYTHING that attracts more families and other uses to the park is going to change that? Definitely not.

The landscaping could probably use a bit of work and I think more non permanent events is a fantastic idea. Food from carts is also fine with me as long as its non permanent. Honestly, to me this sounds like a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. I think the area could be better used, but there's nothing wrong with it now. With all the things in town and in the state demanding money now, this should be the absolute last thing on our list. Sure the restaurant could pay for some of this but...come on...leave the park alone.
Click to expand...
endus, if the folks who redid Bryant Park had thought as you do, they would have passed up the opportunity to create what many people think is the country's finest urban park.

http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/search.php?searchid=3335933
 
Pierce said:
ice skaters, tennis, baseball and softball players typically don't leave the smell of their urine and feces after they leave
Click to expand...

There will be dog feces and urine in the Common with or without a dog park. Drop by the dog park in the south end and see what that is like. I don't think you'll find much feces left behind and the dog area has a plastic membrane under all the pea gravel connected to pipes so that the area can be washed out. Isn't it better to controll where the dogs go. Take a trip to Manhattan sometime in the summer when it hasn't rained for a while. There is a strong noticeable smell of dog urine along the sidewalks.
 
How about we split the difference on this one?

Why not a tensile structure like a miniature version of the Savill Building? This can be done on the cheap -- no glass, and keep it open only three seasons (April-November). Sandwiches, beer, wine. Maybe BBQ. Cocktails after 6PM. Invite the Berkley kids to roll down Boylston and play some Jazz.
 
Ron, several dog owners have proposed taking over an area on the Common and maintaining it, themselves. Pretty much, it becomes like private property. That's what I object to. The rest of the park is open to "everyone".
 
PaulC said:
There will be dog feces and urine in the Common with or without a dog park. Drop by the dog park in the south end and see what that is like. I don't think you'll find much feces left behind and the dog area has a plastic membrane under all the pea gravel connected to pipes so that the area can be washed out. Isn't it better to controll where the dogs go. Take a trip to Manhattan sometime in the summer when it hasn't rained for a while. There is a strong noticeable smell of dog urine along the sidewalks.
Click to expand...

its the concentration in one spot that is the point. I walk by the south end dog park frequently as it is near my office, and it was exactly what i was thinking of when i typed that. Stand 50' downwind from it--not pleasant.
 
ablarc said:
endus, if the folks who redid Bryant Park had thought as you do, they would have passed up the opportunity to create what many people think is the country's finest urban park.

http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/search.php?searchid=3335933
Click to expand...

really? I've never heard much fanfare, I think most would disagree. Off the top of my head I can think of 3, maybe 4 better urban parks within 30 blocks or so.

its the privatization that is the main criticism, and what earned it a spot on the PPS hall of shame

more non-forum criticism:
http://www.wildwilderness.org/content/view/336/64/
http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/0/4/3/8/p104380_index.html
 
Pierce said:
really? I've never heard much fanfare, I think most would disagree. Off the top of my head I can think of 3, maybe 4 better urban parks within 30 blocks or so.

its the privatization that is the main criticism, and what earned it a spot on the PPS hall of shame

more non-forum criticism:
http://www.wildwilderness.org/content/view/336/64/
http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/0/4/3/8/p104380_index.html
Click to expand...

I won't swoop in and try to claim this as complete justification of my comments because I am honestly not familiar enough with the situation to make that kind of judgement, but I can say that this is sort of what I am afraid of.

It's what I am afraid of, and it's also just not necessary. I just don't see a problem with the common that is worth even the risk of that type of criticism. What is wrong with just leaving it the way it is? When I drive by there, making endless circles looking for a parking space so I can grab a Chacarero I see people walking through, sitting and having lunch, skating during the winter, enjoying the frog pond during the summer. I see the ice sculptures on first night, I see the pro-pot demonstrations, I see the concerts. I see people playing frisbee, I see people sledding, I see people relaxing. Is that not good enough for everyone?
 
Don't the Friends of the Public Garden already do lots of advocacy for the Common?? Why create yet another private conservancy?
http://www.friendsofthepublicgarden.org

The best things that could be done is to upgrade the existing benches, fences, and paths so they are less suburban-looking. That horrible ball field with its chain link fence is a huge eyesore, and it could easily be improved. Fix up the directional signage. A few nice signs went in during the Ritz-Carlton sponsored fix-up on Tremont, but those should be extended throughout the park.

There are lots of opportunities for vendor carts at the corner of Tremont & Boylston, but a restaurant sounds like overkill. Put a restaurant in Franklin Park at the golf clubhouse, not on Boston Common.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top