Rose Kennedy Greenway

datadyne007 said:
Anti-homeless furniture/features are a huge pet peeve of mine & becoming increasingly popular in US cities. I have to disagree.


QUOTE]

I agree - seriously, if someone is sleeping outside let them sleep on the fucking bench... it's the most assholish thing to deliberately design benches that way. Moreover, sometime I MYSELF want to enjoy some sun on a random bench, and cant because of said design. Everybody loses. Objects shouldnt be designed with hositlity toward comfort in mind.
Click to expand...
 
I agree - seriously, if someone is sleeping outside let them sleep on the fucking bench... it's the most assholish thing to deliberately design benches that way. Moreover, sometime I MYSELF want to enjoy some sun on a random bench, and cant because of said design. Everybody loses. Objects shouldnt be designed with hositlity toward comfort in mind.[/QUOTE]

Thank you ^! I agree entirely. Besides homeless people are sleeping on benches when they're empty, usually at night. During the day the just move on and the benches are available for everyone else. What's the big deal? And what's the choice? Growing up the only "homeless" I would see would be a few indigent alcoholics usually in a seedy part of town. Everyone else was warehoused in state facilities. After a lot of helpful drugs came on the market the hospitals shut down...only trouble is mentally ill people forget about their prescriptions and....homelessness. The other factor has been the steep rise in addictive drug use by young and old alike...too huge an issue for the Greenway, Boston or this forum.
 
Seems that after I leave the goodhearted people actually arrive. Thank you for actually having a basic level of human kindness.
 
I agree that this particular conversation with this particular set of interlocutors needn't be continued here, but I wonder if it makes sense to exclude the topic of homelessness to discussion of the Greenway (or any parkland/area where homeless congregate) and its uses.
 
Tombstoner said:
I agree that this particular conversation with this particular set of interlocutors needn't be continued here, but I wonder if it makes sense to exclude the topic of homelessness to discussion of the Greenway (or any parkland/area where homeless congregate) and its uses.
Click to expand...

I agree Tombstoner...it's part of the reality/development of the place. Besides, nothing much else is happening on the greenway until spring/summer.
 
The newspaper story is inaccurate in so far as it says Article 97 places an open space restriction "in perpetuity". All it means is that it takes a 2/3rds quantum of vote in both houses (and approval of the Governor) to change the use. That being said, I'd be disappointed if what is being presented here had Article 97 protection. It might be better than what is there now, but it isn't so good that it should be treated as "special". Reminded me a bit of some of the highway camouflage around Penn's Landing in Philadelphia.
 
I hope the price paid for accessibility and camouflage is not a new set of walls that remind me of the old expressway?! I know these are just schematics....but they send a chill down my spine!
 
Padre Mike said:
I hope the price paid for accessibility and camouflage is not a new set of walls that remind me of the old expressway?! I know these are just schematics....but they send a chill down my spine!
Click to expand...

if the walls are adorned with street art I really wont mind
 
Padre Mike said:
I hope the price paid for accessibility and camouflage is not a new set of walls that remind me of the old expressway?! I know these are just schematics....but they send a chill down my spine!
Click to expand...

I'm on your side here. Those are some dumb, ugly walls. Nothing on those parcels should be taller than a car unless it's a building.
 
Guess I'm in the minority but I like walls, or rather platforms you can walk on. Different vantage points, breaks up the monotony of flat topography. I'm assuming it's going to look a lot better than those lousy pixelated renderings. Of course I'm one of those people who thought the Greenway should of just been built on rather than left as more vague "green space", but this is an excellent way to do it.
 
the only way id be ok with obstruction is if they masked all of it with a grasscovered hill... with plantings and easy access for people to hang out... otherwise it's a bad idea.
 
I would rather get buildings built over the parcels than this, but if the economics never work out I think this is better than the current situation.
 
I'm I the only one on the AB Forum who would trade almost anything to be built on top of the Boston Municipal Lot at Fulton St for all the rest of the kerfuffle about covers over the ramps

That said -- a nice series of Pedestrian Bridges crossing the parcels -- a la the one recently opened across the Charles from North Station would be a good compromise without adding ugly walls
 
Last edited:
Why the fixation on covering the ramps? The cost benefit doesn't seem worth it. Just work with the areas around the ramps at parcel 12. There is usable green space at parcel 12 or enough room for some structures.

Go with a scaled back Boston history concept and make it into a new visitor center maybe with some small flexible exhibition space. And/or just a bunch of pushcart vendors. Tie parcel 12 in with Quincy Market and the North End with information about the Freedom Trail. Boston is the museum, make parcel 12 a place to tie it together.
 
I have to admit the Greenway does look great rolling into the summer time. This is the strip of the future.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top