Reclaim South Bay

Re: Reclaim Fort Point

AmericanFolkLegend said:
When was the last time you heard of a major body of water being filled in in Greater Boston?
Click to expand...

Bird Island Flats -- aka Boston Harbor -- aka Logan Office Center, etc. -- not that long ago by Boston standards -- but quite probably the last unless you count the infilling of Spectacle Island
 
Commuting Boston Student said:
Only okay with this if it means you could commute from Boston to the Cape via 20-foot powerboat.
Click to expand...

Commute -- we ned to dig a canal to allow canal boats -- I'm thinking right next to Rt-3 -- the real question is do we cary the Commuter Canal over the Cape Cod Canal in an aqueduct or cary it under the Cape Cod Canal in a tunnel -- or perhaps just stop
 
Justin7 said:
At one point there was some discussion around here about turning the Seaport (or whatever we call it now) into a "canal district." This would be along the same lines. I think both would be pretty great, but obviously neither will ever happen.
Click to expand...

We should talk about that again. I see the Seaport (Or Innovation District) being transformed into something like Canary Wharf in London and the Melbourne Docklands. Hell, I plan on calling the district the Boston Docklands.
 
bosfill.gif


If only... If 93 had an old steel bridge-queensborough type- over this, with the emergence of the seaport this would have been an incredible inlet with new development and an even more extensive harborwalk than there is now. Kinda wish we could do a do over on this.
 
Looking at the historic aerials it appears that what was left of the South Bay/Fort Point Channel was narrowed significantly during the Big Dig after around 1995. So at least some of the filling in was quite recent.

http://historicaerials.com/map/
 
The entire part south of E. Berkeley Street was filled in the 1950's when the SE Expressway was built.
 
One theory I've always had is that, historically, fire has been the way cities get "do-overs". (I may have read about it somewhere ...)

From London, 400 years ago, to San Francisco, 100 years ago, it's been the indirect way that buildings are replaced.

Thoughts?
 
JohnAKeith said:
One theory I've always had is that, historically, fire has been the way cities get "do-overs". (I may have read about it somewhere ...)

From London, 400 years ago, to San Francisco, 100 years ago, it's been the indirect way that buildings are replaced.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

I'd consider the demolition of the West End as an example of a man-made catastrophe and it's results. Also, Chelsea had a couple great fires that cleared many city blocks ... Not sure that was for the better. Either way, for good or bad, recovery takes decades at best.

I read somewhere about the Great Fire of London that a city planner envisioned creating an entirely new street grid with wide boulevards, but the issue there was property lines would have had to be redrawn and government would have needed to step in.

In such a catastrophe it would be important to make some quick decisions about eminent domain and clearing private property so the area isn't blighted. Maybe some things could be rebuilt better, but too much planning will delay recovery.
 
Another home made render playing around with if they either hadn't completely filled in south bay and left an expanded fort point channel behind, or reclamation. Either way neither happened or are happening but its something I always wonder about. There are no buildings of significance in the area where the channel goes so technically its still possible, but 0% chance this would ever happen. Imagine this along with a soccer stadium at widett, a filled in street grid, and an expanded harbor walk. This area would really be something.

https://postimage.io/
 
Last edited:
That's freaking awesome, man.

Cap it off with a supertall at the NE end of the bridge in that round grassy plot in the Mass Pike interchange.
 
I would bury the expressway and train rails, build small block streets over them and the giant lot, and develop the top into high-rises and mixed income low-rises and parks.
 
If I ever became a billionaire I would donate all my money to this before I died. It would almost be worth burying it along with the train lines because of how much money in available land in a prime location it would open up. Near impossible task to accomplish though without disrupting the trains and 93 beyond anyone could imagine for years. In most cases you would just move the rail lines back further from the city into open land along the tracks but everything there has been developed in Boston. Building over them Hudson Yards style is always possible but the FAA height restrictions make it hard to recoup on.
 
I'm having a hard time seeing the advantages of flooding half of Boston in a redevelopment plan.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top