Rose Kennedy Greenway

[czsz]

^ Mentality that levelled the West End. And who lives there for anything other than the convenience of being near more interesting parts of the city ("if you lived here you'd be home now").

Depending on one's POV, the area is either too wide, too narrow, or simply requires reconception on a scale that would be impermissable in Boston. It's too wide to be a proper urban gathering space, like a square or even a grand boulevard like Comm Ave. It's too narrow to be a true escape from the city, in the mould of an Olmsteadian Back Bay Fens. The design so far reflects the awkwardness of the compromise between these notions of public space. Some places one finds mulligans and winding paths - evidence of Olmsteadian influence. Other areas include fountains and plazas - attempts at public space formation. The fact that none are truly in the "right" place (why is there no fountain plaza directly, symmetrically abutting the Rowes Wharf dome?) is a result of either the hideous error of giving over much of the primary and deterministic planning of the Greenway to the highway commission or of gross incompetence. In any case, even if these flaws were corrected, the theoretical issues I outlined above would remain.

The solution? The Greenway can't be widened to make for a proper Olmsteadian park. It can, of course, be narrowed, but the practicality of that occurring within the next few decades - if ever - is unlikely. The only remaining idea would be to give total power to a visionary landscape designer or urban planner who can mold such an awkwardly shaped space into a new urban paradigm - something that transcends the tension between escapist pasture and windswept plaza. Granting untrammelled power to individuals, however, is not the way Boston works. And even if it did, no one has stepped forward with a vision for such a new public space paradigm.

And so we wait the fifty years for the Big Dig-up.

 

[justin]

^ One might argue that the elevated artery and the sort of construction chosen for the new West End were deliberate and appropriate responses to the new and hugely disruptive phenomenon that suburbanization was at the time. The design of the Greenway reflects something more insiduous: that suburban tastes have thoroughly taken over the nominal Bostonians who were in charge of designing the Greenway. I don't think that attracting suburbanites was ever even an implicit, let alone an explicit goal. The people who brought us the park, mostly the environmentalist lot and their threatened lawsuits, seem to take it as self-evident that open space is a Good Thing in and of itself. That's what's really sad.

On the other hand, let's face it: the last building project in Boston that was both bold and good was the Hancock. Given that the city has neither a public constituency nor political leadership dedicated to good urban design, and, baring mass immigration from Western Europe or at least Chicago, will not acquire either any time soon, perhaps it is better to leave the Greenway as a blank slate for some hoped-for future coming-to. That's why I'm not too sad that none of the half-baked museum proposals seems to be a go: the more desolate the parks seem, the easier will it be for the public perception to get over the open space sacrament and build some city.

justin

 

[ablarc]

On the other hand, let's face it: the last building project in Boston that was both bold and good was the Hancock. Given that the city has neither a public constituency nor political leadership dedicated to good urban design, and, baring mass immigration from Western Europe or at least Chicago, will not acquire either any time soon, perhaps it is better to leave the Greenway as a blank slate for some hoped-for future coming-to. That's why I'm not too sad that none of the half-baked museum proposals seems to be a go: the more desolate the parks seem, the easier will it be for the public perception to get over the open space sacrament and build some city.

An optimistic scenario. Let's hope for it to come true.

 

[jass]

^ Mentality that levelled the West End. And who lives there for anything other than the convenience of being near more interesting parts of the city ("if you lived here you'd be home now").

Depending on one's POV, the area is either too wide, too narrow, or simply requires reconception on a scale that would be impermissable in Boston. It's too wide to be a proper urban gathering space, like a square or even a grand boulevard like Comm Ave. It's too narrow to be a true escape from the city, in the mould of an Olmsteadian Back Bay Fens. The design so far reflects the awkwardness of the compromise between these notions of public space. Some places one finds mulligans and winding paths - evidence of Olmsteadian influence. Other areas include fountains and plazas - attempts at public space formation. The fact that none are truly in the "right" place (why is there no fountain plaza directly, symmetrically abutting the Rowes Wharf dome?) is a result of either the hideous error of giving over much of the primary and deterministic planning of the Greenway to the highway commission or of gross incompetence. In any case, even if these flaws were corrected, the theoretical issues I outlined above would remain.

The solution? The Greenway can't be widened to make for a proper Olmsteadian park. It can, of course, be narrowed, but the practicality of that occurring within the next few decades - if ever - is unlikely. The only remaining idea would be to give total power to a visionary landscape designer or urban planner who can mold such an awkwardly shaped space into a new urban paradigm - something that transcends the tension between escapist pasture and windswept plaza. Granting untrammelled power to individuals, however, is not the way Boston works. And even if it did, no one has stepped forward with a vision for such a new public space paradigm.

And so we wait the fifty years for the Big Dig-up.

Comm Ave is an urban gathering place? Since when? The only people in the middle are homeless (excluding marathon day).

On the other hand, the greenway seems to be much more welcoming and walkable.

My only complaints is the lack of pine trees.

 

[ablarc]

My only complaints is the lack of pine trees.

They could build some parking lots and use the pine trees to screen them. :Rolling Eyes:

 

[vanshnookenraggen]

perhaps a suburban park is exactly what Boston needed to make it more attractive

Are you high or being sarcastic because you can't be serious. And if you are then the only thing I could possibly post in response is something that I would then have to delete as a moderator.

 

[atlantaden]

Most people on here don't remember the early days of the Big Dig; the planning and public hearings back in the late 80's, early 90's; the many promises to the neighborhoods and businesses that because of all the upheaval and mess over the years, the majority of the land would be devoted to parks and open spaces for the neighbors. These promises were made to placate the abutters; any suggestion that the majority of the land would be used for residential/retain/commercial (think the Bulfinch redevelopment) would probably have been met with howls of protest. The Greenway that we have, and I've walked it several times now (don't get me started about the landscaping in the North End parks!) seems to have no purpose but to just be there, open spaces, walkways, grassy areas, etc. I've been to Barcelona; the Ramblas and other similar boulevards in that city that are basically wide median strips with roads 2 lanes wide on either side...and cars can park in one of those lanes which means easy to cross. Restaurants and shops line both sides at street level with 6 stories of residential above (we're talking tightly packed unlike what lines the Greenway) and outdoor seating is set up in the center; the servers bring out the food from the restaurants by crossing the street! It's AWESOME!! Restaurant after restaurant lines the street, one after another and the places are packed! But again, thousands of people live and work right there! Think Comm Ave but with a Newbury St. atmosphere where outdoor seating is found in the center of the promenade.
If anything, the Greenway now needs lots of pushcarts selling fruit/burgers/sausages/bagels/coffee/whatever, so people at least have a reason to linger and lots more seating. I would even suggest allowing some small eateries to be built on the greenway itself (like those glass enclosed places in Fanueil Hall Marketplace, just a foundation...no excavation) with both indoor and outdoor seating but that will never happen...the city would never allow one foot of the promised public/park space to be taken up; imagine the North End and Harbor Towers residents thinking that they would loose even one square foot of their own private parkland! Too many promises were made to too many people along with having too many chef's in the kitchen!! I like the Greenway but it could have been so much better IMO.

 

[Equilibria]

I agree with those who point out that the current Greenway is temporary. Clearly no one has any real idea of what to do with the space, and the conceptual plan had low-rise development, museums, and such taking up many of the plots. Those were killed off, and replaced by, well, nothing until someone comes up with the money and clout to build there.

The fact of the matter is that a park is not a skyscraper... you can fix it, enhance it, tear it down, or build it up. Perhaps in 50 years the land will have been sold and redeveloped or otherwise improved to some standard stated on this board, but the great thing about keeping it as open space is that we have the flexibility to have this thing evolve.

Think about it. City Hall Plaza and Government Center are failures and rather ugly in the opinions of many. The plaza can be torn up and developed, but most plans involve selling City Hall, simply because once you build a building it is rather difficult to destroy or enhance it. Same with the Freedom Tower, same with the elevated highway.

By leaving the Greenway as no-man's land, we've shielded it from fads and trends of development that we'll be sorry about 50 years down the road. It isn't perfect, but with a park, it doesn't have to be.

 

[Padre Mike]

I agree with the last two posts. IMO we have to remember what the area was like with the central artery. Compared to that rusting green monstrosity and the no-man's land under it, the promise of ANY kind of greenway seemed like nirvana. Boston Common has been evolving slowly for nearly 400 years. The Public Garden went through several design phases and it too has changed over the past 150 years (e.g. the island in the lagoon used to be connected with a little isthmus and there was a gazebo and seating there). Even Commonwealth Ave has changed with the growth/death of trees, the removal of it's wrought iron fencing, the advent of auto traffic and the statues/memorials installed over time. The greenway will likely have a similar history...the trouble is most of us won't be alive to see it all happen....it will take decades, provided that the overseers are vigilant about quality-control. I too would like to see food kiosks, small commercial buildings, etc. placed in appropriate spots, but for now I'll settle for the proper maintenance of the trees/bushes/flowers/grass, fountains and structures so that we can build on them for the future.

 

[czsz]

In other words, we should have left it a hole.

Anything our imaginations could fill it with would be better than any reality.

Face it, the longer the Greenway sits there, the more it becomes semi-sacred open space that the Grass is Good Martyr's Brigade would take up arms for. Building atop it will become as fanciful an idea as the "let's narrow Charles Street between the Public Garden and the Common" idea proposed on here not long ago. Government Center can be revised because it's paved in bricks; Bostonians will take less kindly to the destruction of anything "green". Whoever said that open space is taken by the activists who shape public space in Boston as a "good in itself" is spot on.

The Greenway...seems to have no purpose but to just be there

Exactly. It neither engages the city nor hides from it. It exists in total disregard and oblivion toward it. An alien in our midst.

 

[Meadowhawk]

Evergreens on Rose Kennedy Greenway

This is my first post as I'm new to this board, which I have enjoyed reading for awhile now so I thought I would join and put my two cents in. Here goes: I know it's still early in the planting stages of the Greenway, but I've noticed a lack of evergreen trees thus far. I find this rather strange and am concerned that with our long gray winters here, that the Greenway is going to look rather bleak during the winter months. I'm hoping that some pine and spruce trees will be planted.

 

[vanshnookenraggen]

Welcome! Are their any other parks with evergreens? (I don't mean that sarcastically, I would really like to know)

 

[singbat]

Re: Evergreens on Rose Kennedy Greenway

This is my first post as I'm new to this board, which I have enjoyed reading for awhile now so I thought I would join and put my two cents in. Here goes: I know it's still early in the planting stages of the Greenway, but I've noticed a lack of evergreen trees thus far. I find this rather strange and am concerned that with our long gray winters here, that the Greenway is going to look rather bleak during the winter months. I'm hoping that some pine and spruce trees will be planted.

that's a very interesting question. never thought to ask...

doesn't the public garden have a variety of species with labels? or am i mis-remembering...

would be nice to have a flavor of arboretum on the greenway -- the Arboretum is out of the way for downtown residents to visit (for me, when i lived downtown, anyway). but if we have to have so much space -- and there is a LOT of space down there -- i could get behind that kind of programming. especially if it made the greenway feel less like a tornado path.

one of the things i love about boston is that you can virtually never see more than about a block in any direction. (parts of backbay aside). NY makes me uncomfortable at times because i can stand between midtown and downtown and see all the way to NJ and the statue of liberty without even a tree or overpass to block the view... very bad for a bostoner, imho. the greenway does that to me. it is very unboston.

 

[czsz]

one of the things i love about boston is that you can virtually never see more than about a block in any direction. (parts of backbay aside). NY makes me uncomfortable at times because i can stand between midtown and downtown and see all the way to NJ and the statue of liberty without even a tree or overpass to block the view... very bad for a bostoner, imho. the greenway does that to me. it is very unboston.

I don't know about that. True, views from crowded streets in New York toward single-family homes on the Jersey cliffs can be disconcerting. But looking up and down the avenues between downtown and midtown and seeing the clusters of towers at either end, there's a sense of grandiose enclosure that imbues one with a sense of just how large the city is. Boston could use some of this; it has it only in small doses, mostly along waterways or down major straightaways like Mass. Ave. through Central Square in Cambridge.

None of this is an apologia for the Greenway, however. If Boston needs more grandiose vistas, they shouldn't be carved out of the medieval tangle in the center of the Shawmut Peninsula, they should work to locate a coherent such tangle within the greater metropolitan consciousness.

 

[singbat]

But looking up and down the avenues between downtown and midtown and seeing the clusters of towers at either end, there's a sense of grandiose enclosure that imbues one with a sense of just how large the city is. Boston could use some of this;

yes, i get that. but me personally, i thrive on the smallness and density of boston, and the energy and pace of life that comes out of that.

'grandiose' can be one hell of a ponderous thing.

i lived at the lower edge of mid-town for some months a few years back. it was fun to walk down a narrow street and look up at the empire state building. but as soon as i came back to earth and started walking down towards the flatiron it felt like the energy just dissipated down the canyons. Just like it does when you step out of your generic hotel room and look down a long corridor past a hundred other beige doors set into muted pink walls. at point you know its time to head home.

NY never gave me that pressure cooker sense you expect from the legend of NY. not like dodging traffic and doing business in boston does. its not that i'm not a fan of NY, i just wouldn't want to live there when i can live here.

 

[stellarfun]

Re: Evergreens on Rose Kennedy Greenway

This is my first post as I'm new to this board, which I have enjoyed reading for awhile now so I thought I would join and put my two cents in. Here goes: I know it's still early in the planting stages of the Greenway, but I've noticed a lack of evergreen trees thus far. I find this rather strange and am concerned that with our long gray winters here, that the Greenway is going to look rather bleak during the winter months. I'm hoping that some pine and spruce trees will be planted.

There may be few if any conifers.

The Greenway will have fewer trees due to soil depth on top of the Central Artery tunnels, according to a Boston Globe report. Some designated planting areas only have 9 inches of soil due to underground conduits for electric, gas steam, and other utility cable lines. Most trees generally require a soil depth of at least 20 inches. One block of linden trees that have already been planted may have to be relocated because of the problem, and future plantings may have to be moved when the planners install curb cuts, parking areas and other features.

?We are going to try to keep the continuity and intent of the design and take care of these trees,? said Toni Pollack, Boston?s parks commissioner. Valerie Burns, president of the Boston Natural Areas Network, said that people would be surprised by the difference between the actual number of plantings and the artists? renderings of tree-lined boulevards. Currently, plans call for 636 trees in the new park.

Above story originally in Boston Globe in 2006

Boston Globe May 2007, excerpted from a story by Thomas Palmer

All along, where once there was asphalt and shadow from the elevated Central Artery, there are now linden trees, and elm, maple, sophora, pin oak, and a few imports, like ginkgo in Chinatown. Along the smaller cross streets, there are flowering trees coming into bloom, like dogwood and pear.

The other problem may be how well conifers would fare in this street setting next to the ocean The hemlocks in the Arnold Arboretum are under attack by woolly adelgid and Harvard is trying mightily to control and abate the disease. Several of the traditionally favored conifers for seaside plantings like the Japanese black pine and the Austrian pine are now being attacked by beetles and/or fungus.

 

[jass]

I think we should start a lobby group for evergreens in Boston. No street must be left without a pine tree.

 

[nico]

Jass wrote:
"Comm Ave is an urban gathering place? Since when? The only people in the middle are homeless (excluding marathon day)...On the other hand, the greenway seems to be much more welcoming and walkable...My only complaints is the lack of pine trees."

I agree about the evergreens, but your other statements have me completely baffled. Have you been to either? There's a steady flow of people on the Comm Ave Mall because it's peaceful, functional and picturesque. Even the demeanor of the few homeless you find is noticeably more sedate (not drugged) than those on the Common. As for the greenway, you can try to walk it...but you realize you're doing it as a task/experiment. Either you just want to see what's there, or it's like an expensive gift you've given yourself...you've invested the money and you're going to use it whether you like it or not.
With the Greenway you have to make a point of going there; it's not functional. If you need to get between the North End and Chinatown, it's usually much faster/direct to go through downtown.
As a refuge, it's no place to be...you're surrounded by high-speed lanes of traffic, and highway on and off ramps. When coming upon the greenway you have to make the decision whether you want to continue down the completely sufficient sidewalk you're on, to wait for a light, or play frogger to get out onto the greenway. Once you get out on the greenway, you realize that if you wanted quiet you should have gone to the Public Garden, a neighborhood like Bay Village, or along the endless waterfront walk we've created just 30 seconds away. If you wanted action, the wide sidewalks opposite the greenway are at least marginally more interesting, and actually have things like restaurants, shops, etc.
The main difference between the greenway and the Comm Ave Mall is that the Mall provides a peaceful alternative to working your way through Back Bay via Boylston or Newbury. It's even a good place to jog because of its abundant space and shade, which also makes it a favorite spot for dog walkers. On the mall you're not alone, you?re actually in a tightly knit neighborhood, but there's definitely an intimate feel.
On the Greenway, while there's decidedly fewer people, the feeling you get isn't intimacy...it's lost, or stranded. You're trapped on the world's largest median strip. When I've walked it, it was just to walk it...to see what was there. I go back once and a while like I do this blog when there's a lull...I'm hoping to see that something's changed.

 

[jass]

Jass wrote:
"Comm Ave is an urban gathering place? Since when? The only people in the middle are homeless (excluding marathon day)...On the other hand, the greenway seems to be much more welcoming and walkable...My only complaints is the lack of pine trees."

I agree about the evergreens, but your other statements have me completely baffled. Have you been to either? There's a steady flow of people on the Comm Ave Mall because it's peaceful, functional and picturesque. Even the demeanor of the few homeless you find is noticeably more sedate (not drugged) than those on the Common. As for the greenway, you can try to walk it...but you realize you're doing it as a task/experiment. Either you just want to see what's there, or it's like an expensive gift you've given yourself...you've invested the money and you're going to use it whether you like it or not.
With the Greenway you have to make a point of going there; it's not functional. If you need to get between the North End and Chinatown, it's usually much faster/direct to go through downtown.
As a refuge, it's no place to be...you're surrounded by high-speed lanes of traffic, and highway on and off ramps. When coming upon the greenway you have to make the decision whether you want to continue down the completely sufficient sidewalk you're on, to wait for a light, or play frogger to get out onto the greenway. Once you get out on the greenway, you realize that if you wanted quiet you should have gone to the Public Garden, a neighborhood like Bay Village, or along the endless waterfront walk we've created just 30 seconds away. If you wanted action, the wide sidewalks opposite the greenway are at least marginally more interesting, and actually have things like restaurants, shops, etc.
The main difference between the greenway and the Comm Ave Mall is that the Mall provides a peaceful alternative to working your way through Back Bay via Boylston or Newbury. It's even a good place to jog because of its abundant space and shade, which also makes it a favorite spot for dog walkers. On the mall you're not alone, you?re actually in a tightly knit neighborhood, but there's definitely an intimate feel.
On the Greenway, while there's decidedly fewer people, the feeling you get isn't intimacy...it's lost, or stranded. You're trapped on the world's largest median strip. When I've walked it, it was just to walk it...to see what was there. I go back once and a while like I do this blog when there's a lull...I'm hoping to see that something's changed.

I live in Kenmore Square, and have walked down Comm Ave to downtown (or at least as far as the Pru) many times, and its always better to walk on the sidewalk. The middle is always empty, and provides an interrupted walk. Ive seen the occasional dog walker, but no more than someone walking their dog down Boylston.

And no, Ive never walked down the middle of the greenway, its not done yet afterall. I have however walked its route, from the North End to the South End. More than once too. An example would be walking from the ICA to the Improv Asylum, or from Quincy Market to No Name Restaurant. Each time, I felt the walk was plain, and look forward to doing it in the greenway.

Im also a fan of walks with no destination. Ive walked from Kenmore to the common, down comm ave, and have walked the esplanade many time, as well as along memorial drive. Im excited to have a new green destination to walk to.

And before you direct me to a mountain, I do urban walks as well (boylston, comm ave towards brighton, beacon street etc).

The greenway is not comm ave, nor is it the esplanade, but this excites me, because I want something different. Since when did variety hurt a city?

 

[Meadowhawk]

Thanks Stellarfun. I didn't think about soil depth. There is after all a tunnel under the Greenway, which I suppose limits certain types of trees that have deep root systems. I'll have to research the root system of pine. As someone else pointed out, the proximity to the ocean may be a factor. I know that at Crane Beach in Ipswich that pine trees are abundant at the sands edge beyond the dunes. I thought that pine trees were indigenous to this region and that there should be more of them in the city. The conifers on the Public Garden look healthy even with all the exhaust from the traffic that surrounds them. I'm a tree hugger, of course, and very fond of pine, spruce and fir trees, and think they would add some color to a potentially barren looking landscape during the winter months.