Rose Kennedy Greenway

^^ Wow, yea I'm all for the FAA playing it safe, but that is a crock of shit, for reasons you already mentioned.
 
Is it a wind thing, for why planes often take off towards Downtown Boston?
 
Wind is a major factor in determining runway use. Much changed over the past 10 years with completion of Runway 14/32, which (as I remember) freed up Runway 27 for more commercial traffic by offloading smaller planes onto the new runway. Planes on Runway 27 take off directly towards Fan Pier. Accordingly, Fan Pier heights were restricted by the FAA to 300 feet, with slightly higher heights allowable at Seaport Square. My understanding is the preferred flight pattern is to have the planes fly over Fort Point Channel, but depending on wind I've seen planes running the length of A Street, probably at around 500 feet. From what I can tell, planes off Runway 27 are also able to turn toward downtown, taking on height rapidly.
 
The full text of the Herald article can be found here, which basically says the FAA was asked to re-look at its approval of the height of Columbus Center.

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?p=7221056

I don't think the FAA, after a re-review, ever ruled that Columbus Center was too high. Else I am sure we would have heard from NF.
_______________________________

As has been discussed before, the issue with the Harbor Garage height at more than 400 feet is apparently that it would block the radar signal from an elevation standpoint at certain azimuth headings. IIRC, where a proposed building at another airport would have had a similar effect, the developer built a second radar facility for the FAA and was then allowed to build higher. (I can't recall the city or the airport.)

The FAA has similarly told Arlington VA no more tall towers in Rosslyn because they hinder line of sight visibility from the tower at National Airport.
 
Today:

5285779011_c7bfe428ff_b.jpg
 
So that's where the old Kenmore Square bus shelter went!
 
Greenway Conservancy under fire
By Me

Downtown Boston State Representative Aaron Michlewitz is proposing a cut to the Rose Kennedy Greenway Conservancy?s multi-million budget. That?s good news.

Thomas Grillo of the Boston Herald broke the news yesterday.

State Rep. Aaron Michlewitz, a North End Democrat whose district includes the 15-acre Greenway, has introduced legislation that would shave $1.5 million from the state?s $5.5 million annual commitment to the nonprofit and give veto power to the Greenway Leadership Council, a nine-member advisory panel. The bill would also open the Conservancy?s board meetings to the public.

Representative Michlewitz is proposing a reduction in the state?s contribution but don?t think for a minute that this is the total budget of the Conservancy. The city of Boston also contributes a fair amount. The Conservancy had a budget of $13.2 million in 2008. (Approximately $3.7 million of this was for completion of the parks, the rest for maintenance, education programs, and administration.)

The Greenway Conservancy holds responsibility for horticulture, maintenance, and security in the parks. It has an estimated 26-person staff. The completed, 27-acre Greenway project had a budget of approximately $100 million. It has an estimated $20-million endowment, of which $7-million came from the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority.

The annual budget for the park comes out to approximately $5 per square foot.

Cutting the budget seems logical, mainly because, from what I?ve read and heard, there?s been too much money being spent for too little results, with some estimating the Greenway Conservancy has been spending more money per square mile than just about any other urban park. And, the word is, those at the high levels of management are pulling down hefty, six-figure salaries, but no one really knows.

The bottom line is that people feel that the Conservancy is acting without any oversight, without having to tell anyone what its doing.

YouTube: How the Rose Kennedy Greenway was supposed to turn out

P.S. To the mouth-breathers on the Herald?s message board: Even though the land is called the ?Rose Kennedy? Greenway, it has nothing more to do with the land than the Tobin Bridge has to do with John Tobin or Storrow Drive has to do with the Storrow family, so stop saying the Kennedys should have to pay for its upkeep.

P.P.S. To read more about the development of the Rose Kennedy Greenway and its failures during the past half-decade, grab a box of tissues and check out the ArchBoston.org forum.
Click to expand...

http://www.bostonherald.com/blogs/news/getting_real/
 
I had never seen that YouTube video before. I remember the Libeskind and Safdie proposals, but that's it. It's really too bad none of this happened, but I wasn't really a fan of the Libeskind museum being directly in front of the Harbor Hotel. Having buildings in the middle of the Greenway in general just seems awkward, but somewhat necessary to make it a destination (?).

Also, are people REALLY saying that the Kennedys should be funding this? That takes crazy to a new level.
 
datadyne007 said:
Also, are people REALLY saying that the Kennedys should be funding this? That takes crazy to a new level.
Click to expand...

The family pulled strings to get the notorious bitch's name on it. Now they, including the late Ted, don't have the slightest interest to fund anything on it. At least Tip O'Neal was responsible for the funding for the CAT, so its nomenclature makes sense.

The greenway should have been named in honor of Fitzgerald given that the former elevated was named to honor him. The honor should have been transfered in the dedication ceremony of the greenway.
 
The entire design and planning for the Greenway has been a total cluster fuck.

The Greenway Conversancy should just be dismantle because they have not a done one thing positive for the Greenway. At this point the city needs money to maintain the Greenway yearly costs. I would subcontract the entire Greenway to a private company. If Chiofaro got the Green light to build his project and was able to make it happen that would probably solve 50% of the problems with the Greenway. Another 20 or 25% would be getting Congress Garage going.

The city should actually selloff the Greenway Parcels to either the private sector to escape the maintaince costs. That would solve most of the problems.
 
^ Those were some of the biggest snowflakes I'd ever seen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top