Fenway Center (One Kenmore) | Turnpike Parcel 7, Beacon Street | Fenway
pelhamhall
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2008
- Messages
- 855
- Reaction score
- 0
Re: Fenway Center (One Kenmore, Mass Turnpike PARCEL 7)
I literally cannot fathom how somebody who is so scared of traffic exhaust can stand to live directly next to a gigantic traffic artery.
If I was this unreasonably scared of car traffic exhaust, I would live far, far away from a highway. Especially an urban highway, directly next to diesel train tracks!
It's a great paradox in Ned's life. I love it. I love him. He fascinates me.
I don't read his posts, but I admire them for their visual presence... the bullets, the nested quotes, the carefully crafted headers and sub-headers...
When I don't look at the individual words and I just look at the post in its entirety, I see nothing but the art of a troubled soul. Each post is beautiful not because of the artwork, but because of the mind behind it. It always reminds me of a painting that a gorilla did with his own shit.
I literally cannot fathom how somebody who is so scared of traffic exhaust can stand to live directly next to a gigantic traffic artery.
If I was this unreasonably scared of car traffic exhaust, I would live far, far away from a highway. Especially an urban highway, directly next to diesel train tracks!
It's a great paradox in Ned's life. I love it. I love him. He fascinates me.
I don't read his posts, but I admire them for their visual presence... the bullets, the nested quotes, the carefully crafted headers and sub-headers...
When I don't look at the individual words and I just look at the post in its entirety, I see nothing but the art of a troubled soul. Each post is beautiful not because of the artwork, but because of the mind behind it. It always reminds me of a painting that a gorilla did with his own shit.
Charlie_mta
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2006
- Messages
- 4,334
- Reaction score
- 5,972
Re: Fenway Center (One Kenmore, Mass Turnpike PARCEL 7)
Not true. I recommended demolition of the Prudential Center. I also urge you to file a lawsuit to make that happen, and do it quickly before more people die of those damned poisonous gasses!
Not true. I recommended demolition of the Prudential Center. I also urge you to file a lawsuit to make that happen, and do it quickly before more people die of those damned poisonous gasses!
Re: Fenway Center (One Kenmore, Mass Turnpike PARCEL 7)
Relative junior member here.
I don't know Ned. I don't understand what his issues are. IMHO, capping the Pike (even at some taxpayer expense) and selling the land for development would seam together a scar. It has nothing to do with adding or subtracting emissions.
But what bugs me is that this thread has 42,000 views and (I think) only 400 posts. Lots of people have been reading it (like me) without weighing in. "Ned" deserves the same respect any one of us anonymous posters deserve. Otherwise, the posts will be limited to people on one side of every issue. Which is pretty much where this one is today.
Let's either have the enforced standards of respect lowered for everybody, or nobody.
Relative junior member here.
I don't know Ned. I don't understand what his issues are. IMHO, capping the Pike (even at some taxpayer expense) and selling the land for development would seam together a scar. It has nothing to do with adding or subtracting emissions.
But what bugs me is that this thread has 42,000 views and (I think) only 400 posts. Lots of people have been reading it (like me) without weighing in. "Ned" deserves the same respect any one of us anonymous posters deserve. Otherwise, the posts will be limited to people on one side of every issue. Which is pretty much where this one is today.
Let's either have the enforced standards of respect lowered for everybody, or nobody.
type001
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2006
- Messages
- 1,731
- Reaction score
- 233
Ned Flaherty
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2007
- Messages
- 486
- Reaction score
- 0
Re: Fenway Center (One Kenmore, Mass Turnpike PARCEL 7)
You misunderstand both the problem and the solution. The article you heard of was about how noise barriers can reduce some air pollution by erecting walls several stories high along open-road highways. But development along I-90 in Boston is quite different.
At each I-90 property, tunnels enclose the railways and roadways below, and separate them from the buildings and parks above. In all such configurations so far, the polluted air can?t be kept inside the tunnels, or travelers would lose consciousness, so it?s captured, concentrated, and vented. Fenway Center?s owners hope to replace the solid tunnels they proposed in 2008 with the perforated walls, open-air ceiling cavities, no mechanized vents, and un-filtered (?naturally ventilated?) exhaust that they proposed in 2009.
But it does not matter whether the toxic air is vented from solid tunnels or escapes through holes in perforated tunnels. Regardless of the vent method, the result is the same either way: the toxic air leaves the corridor and enters the lungs of people who work and live above it or alongside it.
If you haven?t noticed my efforts to improve the turnpike environment, then you aren?t making much effort yourself. Otherwise, you?d know that I do not try ?to stop new buildings? as you wrote. Instead, I urge that they be built in ways that are safe, healthy, and fiscally responsible for the Commonwealth.
Also, the proposed Fenway Center buildings would not ?improve the lives of people who live near the highway? as you wrote. As proposed, the Fenway Center buildings would subject the occupants to higher rates of birth defects, heart disease, lung disease, and cancer from the corridor air.
The only responsible options are to build more safely, build elsewhere, or not build. But there?s no excuse for building at sites and in ways that are known to needlessly cause such serious negative health impacts.
You misunderstand both the problem and the solution. The article you heard of was about how noise barriers can reduce some air pollution by erecting walls several stories high along open-road highways. But development along I-90 in Boston is quite different.
At each I-90 property, tunnels enclose the railways and roadways below, and separate them from the buildings and parks above. In all such configurations so far, the polluted air can?t be kept inside the tunnels, or travelers would lose consciousness, so it?s captured, concentrated, and vented. Fenway Center?s owners hope to replace the solid tunnels they proposed in 2008 with the perforated walls, open-air ceiling cavities, no mechanized vents, and un-filtered (?naturally ventilated?) exhaust that they proposed in 2009.
But it does not matter whether the toxic air is vented from solid tunnels or escapes through holes in perforated tunnels. Regardless of the vent method, the result is the same either way: the toxic air leaves the corridor and enters the lungs of people who work and live above it or alongside it.
If you haven?t noticed my efforts to improve the turnpike environment, then you aren?t making much effort yourself. Otherwise, you?d know that I do not try ?to stop new buildings? as you wrote. Instead, I urge that they be built in ways that are safe, healthy, and fiscally responsible for the Commonwealth.
Also, the proposed Fenway Center buildings would not ?improve the lives of people who live near the highway? as you wrote. As proposed, the Fenway Center buildings would subject the occupants to higher rates of birth defects, heart disease, lung disease, and cancer from the corridor air.
The only responsible options are to build more safely, build elsewhere, or not build. But there?s no excuse for building at sites and in ways that are known to needlessly cause such serious negative health impacts.
Ron Newman
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 30, 2006
- Messages
- 8,395
- Reaction score
- 11
Re: Fenway Center (One Kenmore, Mass Turnpike PARCEL 7)
Why is this not a problem at the Prudential Center or along the Big Dig or I-90 waterfront extension?
Why is this not a problem at the Prudential Center or along the Big Dig or I-90 waterfront extension?
Shepard
Senior Member
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2009
- Messages
- 3,518
- Reaction score
- 66
Re: Fenway Center (One Kenmore, Mass Turnpike PARCEL 7)
Ned - I may have missed this at various points but could you expand on your own scientific credentials when advocating for air safety standards? Even better, would you have an updated resume you can post here? Since you consider yourself the voice of reason on this ongoing debate I'd really like to better understand where you're coming from. Thanks!
Ned - I may have missed this at various points but could you expand on your own scientific credentials when advocating for air safety standards? Even better, would you have an updated resume you can post here? Since you consider yourself the voice of reason on this ongoing debate I'd really like to better understand where you're coming from. Thanks!
palindrome
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2006
- Messages
- 2,276
- Reaction score
- 124
Re: Fenway Center (One Kenmore, Mass Turnpike PARCEL 7)
please rename this thread Columbus Center part 2...........
i'm not dealing with another thread like that.
please rename this thread Columbus Center part 2...........
i'm not dealing with another thread like that.
KentXie
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 25, 2006
- Messages
- 4,192
- Reaction score
- 756
Re: Fenway Center (One Kenmore, Mass Turnpike PARCEL 7)
I'm just going to say that what you have done actually didn't improve the turnpike environment. You only prevented it from becoming "worse." The holes are still there and the pollution from the pike is still pouring into the area around it.
I'm just going to say that what you have done actually didn't improve the turnpike environment. You only prevented it from becoming "worse." The holes are still there and the pollution from the pike is still pouring into the area around it.
blade_bltz
Active Member
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2006
- Messages
- 808
- Reaction score
- 0
Re: Fenway Center (One Kenmore, Mass Turnpike PARCEL 7)
And if it is, then why aren't you involved in mitigation efforts?
As we know, you've tried to deflect accusations that your involvement in CC & FC is out of self-interest...
Generally, I'm curious why you don't advocate for environmental justice elsewhere (as in, communities that actually need help)? You say in post #394 that you don't cover "neighborhood-specific" issues, but instead "city-wide" issues. What an idiotic thing to say. I mean, really. It's ironic that your purportedly broad approach is the result of such narrow-minded thinking.
And if it is, then why aren't you involved in mitigation efforts?
As we know, you've tried to deflect accusations that your involvement in CC & FC is out of self-interest...
Generally, I'm curious why you don't advocate for environmental justice elsewhere (as in, communities that actually need help)? You say in post #394 that you don't cover "neighborhood-specific" issues, but instead "city-wide" issues. What an idiotic thing to say. I mean, really. It's ironic that your purportedly broad approach is the result of such narrow-minded thinking.
Re: Fenway Center (One Kenmore, Mass Turnpike PARCEL 7)
The vent buildings along the CA/T project have scrubbers and filters installed in them reducing the amount of toxins released into the air.
The vent buildings along the CA/T project have scrubbers and filters installed in them reducing the amount of toxins released into the air.
Ron Newman
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 30, 2006
- Messages
- 8,395
- Reaction score
- 11
Re: Fenway Center (One Kenmore, Mass Turnpike PARCEL 7)
They do? I thought the Sierra Club had asked for these and the state had said no.
They do? I thought the Sierra Club had asked for these and the state had said no.
Ned Flaherty
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2007
- Messages
- 486
- Reaction score
- 0
Re: Fenway Center (One Kenmore, Mass Turnpike PARCEL 7)
It is a problem. Unhealthy air is un-mechanically exhausted and mechanically vented above the Hynes-Prudential-Copley-Hancock tunnels, the Big Dig I-93 tunnels, and the I-90 waterfront extension tunnels. Air quality is unhealthy along every heavily used urban roadway, regardless of whether the road is elevated, at ground level, sunken, tunneled-without-vents, or tunneled-and-vented. The same dangerously poor air quality that today rises freely above Fenway Center has been captured, concentrated, and vented into the Hynes-Prudential complex since 1963; the resulting public health harm was gradually discovered decades later.
That?s untrue. MA DOT officials confirmed that I-93 tunnels have no scrubbers or filters. In the late 1980s, that was a desirable solution, and it was requested, but it was turned down by Big Dig managers ? the same firm that authored Fenway Center?s July 2008 Tunnel Ventilation Study. Government agencies and citizens requested copies of that Study, but Fenway Center?s owners refused to release or discuss it.
It is a problem. Unhealthy air is un-mechanically exhausted and mechanically vented above the Hynes-Prudential-Copley-Hancock tunnels, the Big Dig I-93 tunnels, and the I-90 waterfront extension tunnels. Air quality is unhealthy along every heavily used urban roadway, regardless of whether the road is elevated, at ground level, sunken, tunneled-without-vents, or tunneled-and-vented. The same dangerously poor air quality that today rises freely above Fenway Center has been captured, concentrated, and vented into the Hynes-Prudential complex since 1963; the resulting public health harm was gradually discovered decades later.
That?s untrue. MA DOT officials confirmed that I-93 tunnels have no scrubbers or filters. In the late 1980s, that was a desirable solution, and it was requested, but it was turned down by Big Dig managers ? the same firm that authored Fenway Center?s July 2008 Tunnel Ventilation Study. Government agencies and citizens requested copies of that Study, but Fenway Center?s owners refused to release or discuss it.
Ned Flaherty
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2007
- Messages
- 486
- Reaction score
- 0
Re: Fenway Center (One Kenmore, Mass Turnpike PARCEL 7)
You don?t need me, or my resume, to learn about air quality. The medical and environmental articles on file at the National Institutes of Health National Library of Medicine include their authors? credentials.
Regarding the dangers of the air at Fenway Center, the Massachusetts Department of Public Health cited 5 references.
Brugge D, Durant JL, Rioux C. 2007. Near-highway pollutants in motor vehicle exhaust: A review of epidemiologic evidence of cardiac and pulmonary health risks. Environmental Health. 6(23).
McConnell R, Berhane K, Yao L, Jerrett M, Lurmann F, Gilliland F, K?nzli N, Gauderman J, Avo1 E, Thomas D, Peters J. 2006. Traffic, susceptibility, and childhood asthma. Environmental Health Perspectives. 114(5): 766-772.
Morgenstern V, Zutavern A, Cyrys J, Brockow I, Koletzko S, Kr?mer U, Behrendt H, Herbarth O, von Berg A, Bauer CP, Wichmann HE, Heinrich, 2008. Atopic diseases, allergic sensitization, and exposure to traffic-related air pollution in children. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. 177:1331-1337.
Nordling E, Berglind N, Melen E, Emenius G, Hallberg J, Nyberg F, Pershagen G, Svartengren M, Wickman M, Bellander T. 2008. Traffic-related air pollution and childhood respiratory symptoms, function and allergies. Epidemiology. 19(3):401-408.
Tonne T, Melly S, Mittleman M, Coull I3, Goldberg R, Schwartz J. 2007. A case-control analysis of exposure to traffic and acute myocardial infarction. Environmental Health Perspectives 115(1):53-57.
You don?t need me, or my resume, to learn about air quality. The medical and environmental articles on file at the National Institutes of Health National Library of Medicine include their authors? credentials.
Regarding the dangers of the air at Fenway Center, the Massachusetts Department of Public Health cited 5 references.
Brugge D, Durant JL, Rioux C. 2007. Near-highway pollutants in motor vehicle exhaust: A review of epidemiologic evidence of cardiac and pulmonary health risks. Environmental Health. 6(23).
McConnell R, Berhane K, Yao L, Jerrett M, Lurmann F, Gilliland F, K?nzli N, Gauderman J, Avo1 E, Thomas D, Peters J. 2006. Traffic, susceptibility, and childhood asthma. Environmental Health Perspectives. 114(5): 766-772.
Morgenstern V, Zutavern A, Cyrys J, Brockow I, Koletzko S, Kr?mer U, Behrendt H, Herbarth O, von Berg A, Bauer CP, Wichmann HE, Heinrich, 2008. Atopic diseases, allergic sensitization, and exposure to traffic-related air pollution in children. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. 177:1331-1337.
Nordling E, Berglind N, Melen E, Emenius G, Hallberg J, Nyberg F, Pershagen G, Svartengren M, Wickman M, Bellander T. 2008. Traffic-related air pollution and childhood respiratory symptoms, function and allergies. Epidemiology. 19(3):401-408.
Tonne T, Melly S, Mittleman M, Coull I3, Goldberg R, Schwartz J. 2007. A case-control analysis of exposure to traffic and acute myocardial infarction. Environmental Health Perspectives 115(1):53-57.
Re: Fenway Center (One Kenmore, Mass Turnpike PARCEL 7)
Isn't it a little like the discovery that cell phones cause brain tumors? How many of us would willingly get rid of our cell phones?
Every time you pump gas you get a lungful of carcinogenic gasoline fumes.
If this is true, then what's the solution? Should they close the Pike, the Big Dig, the tunnels, the interstates and Storrow Drive until they've installed scrubbers?
Isn't it a little like the discovery that cell phones cause brain tumors? How many of us would willingly get rid of our cell phones?
Every time you pump gas you get a lungful of carcinogenic gasoline fumes.
Ron Newman
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 30, 2006
- Messages
- 8,395
- Reaction score
- 11
Re: Fenway Center (One Kenmore, Mass Turnpike PARCEL 7)
Some of us have never found the need to have cell phones.
Some of us have never found the need to have cell phones.
Shepard
Senior Member
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2009
- Messages
- 3,518
- Reaction score
- 66
Re: Fenway Center (One Kenmore, Mass Turnpike PARCEL 7)
Thanks Ned. I'll be sure to check those articles out. But the truth is, though, that anyone powered with Google Scholar can find these.
I wasn't asking for your credentials and resume to fnd out more about air quality. I was asking to find out what qualifies you, as an individual, to be a public advocate for these scientific points of view. I do think this is important: you are clearly a contributing party when it comes to progress along air-rights corridors in Boston, which makes you a de-facto policy player and unelected (not to use that perjoratively) public servant. I'm therefore interested in knowing more about your education, work experience, and publications.
Thanks, Ned. Looking forward to hearing your reply.
Thanks Ned. I'll be sure to check those articles out. But the truth is, though, that anyone powered with Google Scholar can find these.
I wasn't asking for your credentials and resume to fnd out more about air quality. I was asking to find out what qualifies you, as an individual, to be a public advocate for these scientific points of view. I do think this is important: you are clearly a contributing party when it comes to progress along air-rights corridors in Boston, which makes you a de-facto policy player and unelected (not to use that perjoratively) public servant. I'm therefore interested in knowing more about your education, work experience, and publications.
- Where did you go to college?
- What did you major in?
- Do you have further graduate or professional degrees?
- Are you listed as an author on any scientific publications?
- What is your stated profession?
- Can you briefly describe your recent employment history?
Thanks, Ned. Looking forward to hearing your reply.