Yes, but let's please also add two of these. That way we can get the boats up and down from the elevated river. Come on, if you're going to plan this project, you've got to plan it responsibly, considering all stakeholders.The solution is obvious folks. Elevate the river instead and put the cars under it
I don't think that was their most recent objection. They're complaining that the roadways on land are below the flood level.I thought it was settled that the Feds aren't going to allow filling in the river at all.
You know that anything like the Back Bay project would never be approved now.Filling in the river is absolutely inappropriate and would harm the natural ecosystem. The developers should dedicate part of this project to restoring the Charles River to its pre-1857 water levels and conditions.
Even the Mill Dam is a serious intrusion on tidal flows. Need to rewind back to a pre-1800 configuration to get real Boston Proper tidal flows.Filling in the river is absolutely inappropriate and would harm the natural ecosystem. The developers should dedicate part of this project to restoring the Charles River to its pre-1857 water levels and conditions.
View attachment 15540
You joke, but that's exactly what they're doing in Pennsylvania...Even the Mill Dam is a serious intrusion on tidal flows. Need to rewind back to a pre-1800 configuration to get real Boston Proper tidal flows.
Umm . . . how far back do you want to go? The basin is unnatural. It's a total FAKE. Completely man made. So you want to go back to the natural mud flats of the 1800s? Personally I think it looks and smells a lot better now.Even the Mill Dam is a serious intrusion on tidal flows. Need to rewind back to a pre-1800 configuration to get real Boston Proper tidal flows.
I was being sarcastic. I was taking the comment to the reductio ad absurdum.Umm . . . how far back do you want to go? The basin is unnatural. It's a total FAKE. Completely man made. So you want to go back to the natural mud flats of the 1800s? Personally I think it looks and smells a lot better now.
P.S. And since this area is not natural and actually man-made then what's the big objection in taking four feet of it?
I'm pretty sure the comment about 1857 was already meant as such.I was being sarcastic. I was taking the comment to the reductio ad absurdum.![]()
By reducing the highway’s shoulders in certain sections and using a roughly seven-foot-wide stretch of land provided by Boston University, the new design would fit eight lanes of the Pike, four lanes of Soldiers Field Road, and four rail tracks at ground level on land, while cantilevering the Paul Dudley White pedestrian and bike path over the river.
Hopefully restoring/retaining their dignity in this matter was compensation enough.I wonder how much BU is getting for that land.