Rose Kennedy Greenway

People are in the Greenway whenever I pass through it. One day I saw some sort of martial-arts or exercise group in the park next to Marketplace Center. People sit at the tables and benches of the North End parks.
 
And thus ends this stupid chapter...
Greenway park plaque will mention Armenian genocide
Final wording to be determined by city, Turnpike Authority


By Thomas C. Palmer Jr., Globe Staff | November 17, 2007

A park being donated for the Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy Greenway by the nonprofit Armenian Heritage Foundation will include a plaque that refers to all immigrant groups but also makes an explicit reference to the Armenian genocide of the early 20th century.

Wording suggesting the park commemorates the 1.5 million deaths of Armenians around 1915 at the hands of Turks contradicts the intentions of planners over the last decade, who insisted the Greenway not be politicized or be a place for statues, plaques, or memorials.

Although the wording for a plaque is not final, officials of the Mayor's Central Artery Completion Task Force, an influential advisory group, acknowledged at a meeting this week that the specific historic event would be mentioned.

Nearly 100 years after it occurred, the Armenian genocide remains an intensely emotional issue. Turkey, an ally of the United States in a part of the world where the United States has few friends, rejects the term genocide. The Turkish government has said a proposed congressional resolution recognizing the Armenian genocide would severely damage US relations.

In Boston, the final say on the plaque will be made by the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority and the City of Boston, which both support the proposed wording. The city and the agency are negotiating with the task force and the Armenian Heritage Foundation, a local group that is sponsoring the park, on the project.

The park and plaque are the result of a campaign by the local Armenian community since 2000 to find a Boston location for a commemoration of their ancestors. Because the gift of a park was opposed by some planners and community activists, the plaque's proposed wording has been broadened to refer to the diverse set of immigrant groups that, like the Armenians, sought refuge in the Boston area.

One objection has been that the Armenian Heritage Foundation did not follow the specific public process for Greenway proposals approved by the Federal Highway Administration.

"I would like to go on record that this is not acceptable as a process," Anne Fanton, a member of the task force, said Thursday. "We want to be certain that this never happens again."

The proposed park, with a 60-foot-diameter paved labyrinth, a sculpture, and water jet and reflecting pool, has been hailed as inspired in design and supported by many in the North End community.

The issue of the plaque's wording surfaced several times during a Thursday meeting on the park. North End community leader Nancy Caruso said she understood from previous private meetings that the park would be dedicated to all immigrants but not have a specific reference to the genocide.

But, asked specifically whether there would be mention of the words "Armenian genocide," task force cochairman Rob Tuchmann said, "There will be."

James M. Kalustian, representing the Armenian Heritage Foundation, the group sponsoring the park, agreed. "The current wording as being discussed includes a reference to the Armenian genocide," he said.

Yesterday, Erkut Gomulu, president of the Turkish American Cultural Society of New England, who has opposed placement of the park on the Greenway, said any plaque should not reference a specific group's history.

"It's supposed to be inclusive of all communities, right?" he said. "It's claimed it will not be a memorial. On the other hand it will have 'genocide' in the wording."

The board of the conservancy that will assume responsibility for operating the Greenway once it's completed has called for a moratorium of at least five years on any memorials.

"An awful lot of people have worked hard to try to get to a place that works for everyone," said conservancy chairman Peter Meade. "We want the Greenway to become a noncontroversial place where everybody in our community is welcomed."

But Meade's organization does not have an active role in the discussion.

Tuchmann said he did not consider the park or the plaque a memorial. Genie Beal, a member of the task force and chair of the board of the Boston Natural Areas Fund, yesterday agreed.

"It says 'Armenian genocide' in the last line. I think that's a good solution," said Beal. "It's not a memorial, it's a 'thank you' " to the foundation for the gift of a park.

Thomas C. Palmer Jr. can be reached at tpalmer@globe.com.
Link
 
being half armenian and half italian, i am happy this is happening
 
People are in the Greenway whenever I pass through it. One day I saw some sort of martial-arts or exercise group in the park next to Marketplace Center. People sit at the tables and benches of the North End parks.

On a similar note--the unfinished verandas (or whatever they are) that line the North End parks seem as though they've become a natural thru-way, and already appear consistently utilized.
 
I think they are pergolas, which will eventually be covered with vegetation just like their neighbors in Christopher Columbus Park.
 
I checked out the North End parks for the first time yesterday. In the cold, the plots were empty, and the green expanse between the end of Hanover Street and the Haymarket felt like a yawning, pointless divide. The trellises were nice from within, but seemed to close off the parks from the North End itself: why do they turn their back on the neighborhood and toward the Government Center garages? The orientation of the designs didn't seem to reinforce any connection between the North End and the rest of the city whatsoever.
 
I totally agree on the trellises turning their back on the North End. Unfortunately, it reinforces the surface road (whatever it's called there) as being a barrier to entry.
 
it reinforces the surface road (whatever it's called there)

Incredulously, it's actually still called "Surface Road" (on the new signs, in big letters, with a tiny "John F. Kennedy" barely visible on top).
 
What happened to renaming the road The Greenway (as in The Fenway, The Riverway, etc)?
 
The Globe said:
Missing links
Born of the Big Dig, three stunning parks along the Charles have a big flaw: They're not tied together. Where'd the $80 million go?

By Peter DeMarco, Globe Correspondent | November 25, 2007

It all looked so promising 15 years ago, when $80 million seemed like more money than anyone could possibly spend on bike paths and parklands.

The year was 1993, and to make amends for building a massive bridge across the Charles River, state officials in charge of the Central Artery/Tunnel Project pledged the then-unprecedented sum toward revitalizing the river?s ??lost half-mile,?? the stretch between Monsignor O?Brien Highway by the Museum of Science and the Charlestown Bridge that had been an industrial dumping ground for decades.

Best of all, a series of intricate pedestrian bridges would link all the parks together, meaning that, for the first time, walkers, joggers, and bikers would be able to travel from the Esplanade to Boston Harbor without ever leaving the riverbank.

"When $80 million was first proposed, everyone thought we died and went to heaven," said Robert O?Brien, executive director of the Downtown North Association - a business-oriented activist group - and a longtime river advocate. "People were saying let's use some of that money to redo the Longfellow Bridge too. Everyone thought there would be more than enough."

But as with nearly all things Big Dig, the budget, it turned out, wasn't nearly enough to pay for what was envisioned.

The Central Artery had the funds to construct three impressive parks along the New Charles River Basin, two in Boston and one in Cambridge. But little else that was promised - the pedestrian bridges linking the parks together, basketball and tennis courts, additional parklands, improvements to historic dam buildings - ever materialized.

In just five weeks, the Central Artery/Tunnel Project will come to an official end, as the administration that guided one of the world's biggest construction jobs will dissolve Dec. 31 into its overseeing body, the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority. Turnpike officials have often pledged that the state will eventually make good on its outstanding Big Dig commitments, but no one can say who will build the remaining river basin parks and paths, when they?ll be built, or where they?ll find the money to pay for them.

It's a reality that?s left most community activists and local officials disgusted, with people wondering aloud how nearly $15 billion can be spent on the Big Dig, yet somehow the state can?t afford another $10 million to finish the river basin?s most basic remaining needs. (About $30-$40 million would be needed to build everything left on the to-do list.)

"When budgets run over to build the tunnel, they seem to find money for it," said Jeff Rosenblum of the nonprofit group Livable Streets. "Then when it comes to bikes and pedestrians and public transit, when all of a sudden more money is needed, for some reason nobody from the state can find it."

The missing pieces will become even more glaring, community activists and local officials say, once the Rose Kennedy Greenway is complete. The river basin?s paths and pedestrian bridges would also have linked the river?s edge to Portal Park off Causeway Street, the first greenway parcel, connecting downtown Boston to the Charles River like never before.

Without the missing links - among them, lengthy pedestrian bridges on the north and south banks of the river looping over North Station?s railroad tracks, and a pedestrian bridge across the river - some of the paths go nowhere, and the parks that have been built are dead ends.

At best, it appears there is enough money left to pay for just one of the bridges, the north bank bridge, which would link Cambridge?s North Point Park to Charlestown's Paul Revere Park.

"Without those bridges, without those connections, this looks like a boondoggle," said Bob Zimmerman, executive director of the Charles River Watershed Association. "Without access to these last half-mile of parks, which are absolutely stunning, nobody will figure out how to get to them. And once you're there, you?re not really certain how you?re going to get out of there."

It's easy to blame Central Artery officials for the collapse of the master plan. But the Artery has spent (or will have spent, within the next few months) a combined $100 million on the river basin, every penny it promised to in 1993, including an additional $20 million for inflation costs.

Meanwhile, not one person interviewed for this story singled out retiring Big Dig project director Michael Lewis as the person to blame for the current situation. To the contrary, community activists and city officials almost uniformly praised Lewis and his staff for having worked with the community to make the missing links a reality.

The blame game
So, what went wrong?

The most obvious glitch was North Point Park?s mildly contaminated soil. The 8.5-acre park, the largest of all the Big Dig?s parks, was built on an industrial wasteland that turned out to be a brownfield, requiring $14 million to be spent on environmental remediation. The cleanup nearly doubled the park's overall price tag, sucking up money that would have been spent elsewhere.

Logistical and technical issues plagued the river basin?s biggest pedestrian bridges. For example, plans called for Nashua Street Park in Boston and North Point Park in Cambridge to be linked by a footbridge across the river. It was originally thought the bridge could be attached to an old MBTA railroad bridge and built for under a million dollars. But the MBTA wouldn?t allow it, saying such a pedestrian bridge, which would have swung up into the air when boats passed below, wouldn?t be safe.

The alternative was for the Central Artery to build a freestanding footbridge for 12 times the cost - about $12 million - said Fred Yalouris, director of architecture and urban design for the Turnpike Authority?s Central Artery project.

The rebirth of the New Charles River Basin was also hampered, many said, by an awkward division of labor. While the Central Artery built and paid for the basin?s parks and paths, a different agency, the state Department of Conservation and Recreation (formerly the Metropolitan District Commission), was responsible for designing them. At various times, the two agencies disagreed on the scope of the 1993 agreement - which items were necessary, and which extraneous - with Central Artery officials stressing fiscal constraint and their DCR brethren pressing for better and more beautiful parks and bridges.

North Point Park is the crown jewel of the river basin, and as such it was built with some spectacular elements, foremost being a series of kayak canals around small, carved-out islands linked by footbridges. The canals certainly add to the park?s appeal, but as parks were started and finished one at a time, the canals were built ahead of more necessary basin projects, such as the pedestrian footbridges.

Yalouris said the Central Artery spent between $10 to $12 million on "nonmitigation" items in the basin at the DCR?s request.

"It was really a problem [for us] of being responsible for something but not being able to manage the budget," Yalouris said. "A terrific amount of effort was put in on our part to warn people, both the DCR and the advocates, that we had concerns about the budget being able to cover the whole program. I think there was always a feeling that, you know, further dollars could be found."

Dan Wilson, a volunteer member of the Citizens Advisory Committee for the New Charles River Basin since 1995, said it?s been clear for a long time that the budget would run over.

"There's nothing wrong with shooting high and seeing if you can afford it," he said. "But this was a train wreck you could see coming 10 years ago."

Many have come to the DCR?s defense, however, saying it's foolish to criticize the agency for doing its job and fighting for distinctive new parks.

Those defenders also maintain that DCR architects were indeed wary of overspending - a large park house at North Point was axed, and a famously proposed pedestrian bridge that was to resemble whale vertebrae, was, mercifully, not built.

The Central Artery made an implicit agreement - if not a legally binding one - to finish all the basin's parks and pathways, even if there were cost overruns, defenders say.

"Maybe they didn't estimate the costs correctly, but they didn't estimate the cost of the highway correctly, either," said Anne Fanton, former director of the Central Artery Environmental Oversight Committee, noting how the Big Dig was expected to cost just $2 billion - not the current $14.798 billion - when designed in the mid-1980s. "This was the only part of the Artery?s open space projects that had a fixed dollar attached to it."

Last on list, first cut
In the final analysis, the New Charles River Basin is paying the price for being one of the last items on the Central Artery's to-do list, when there just isn't as much money to pay for overruns. Some observers believe there is now pressure to prevent the project?s total price tag from exceeding $15 billion.

Wilson points to the 2006 tunnel collapse, when a Jamaica Plain woman was killed and $54 million spent to repair faulty tunnel ceilings, as a factor. "I think we probably had a good chance of getting some additional money from the Turnpike to finish the basin, but I think that chance evaporated with that accident," he said. "That was a budget-buster."

Even ardent river basin proponents concede that, at this point, compromise is in order to reach some sort of finish line.

In June, leaders of a dozen community groups, including the Charles River Watershed Association, MassBike, the Charles River Conservancy, WalkBoston, and the Conservation Law Foundation, sent a letter to Big Dig officials asking them to agree to a ??priority spending plan?? for the remaining river basin projects. The list included just six items. Notably, the $12 million crossriver footbridge was not among them. The letter did ask officials to "put in place a mechanism to work with future developers and public agencies to fund the completion" of the basin projects.

They got no response.

Nevertheless, there was a moment of hope this summer. The Central Artery had $28 million (of the $100 million) left in the river basin budget to spend. It was enough money, officials believed, to build arguably the most important remaining pedestrian bridge - a complex, 960-foot passing above the railroad tracks between Cambridge and Charlestown, as well as pay for a dozen other items scattered across the basin - everything from additional parkland to tennis and basketball courts to renovating Beverly Street Extension, which connects the Charles River to the Rose Kennedy Greenway.

The lowest bid from a contractor for the pedestrian bridge, though, came in way over budget - at $15 million, about $9 million more than was anticipated, Yalouris said. The Artery now believes it will cost about $24 million to build the footbridge and basic pathways leading to and from it, plus a few million more for a DCR maintenance facility, leaving almost nothing left over for anything else.

Who?ll pick up the pieces?
When Yalouris broke the news to activists at an Oct. 30 public meeting, the disappointment was palpable.

Cara Seiderman, transportation program manager for the city of Cambridge, was shaken as Yalouris announced that the Turnpike Authority would not be building a $400,000 pedestrian path to link Cambridge's enormous new North Point condominium development and North Point Park.

"We could have done something there, but we were specifically directed by the Central Artery not to," Seiderman told Yalouris. "It's a little bit irresponsible just to have it stopped."

Yalouris said a new contract request will be put out to bid for the pedestrian bridge by Jan. 1. With any luck a lower bid will be submitted, he said, and some of the smaller items can be added back in.

As for the basin properties, the Turnpike Authority is committed to building the north bank bridge and whatever else is included in the Jan. 1 bid, Yalouris said. But, he stressed, the agency is under no obligation to do anything beyond that.

The remaining river basin projects will be reviewed by state officials "in the broader context of what is good for the Commonwealth," Yalouris told meeting attendees last month. "I can't tell you whose responsibility they will be," he added.

And that is the great fear of river basin activists. The revitalization of the lost half-mile was a high priority with the Central Artery; it probably won?t be as important to a different state agency already saddled with hundreds of public improvement projects across Massachusetts.

What more can be done if state officials don?t come through? Potentially, a few things.

O'Brien and Joel Bard, chairman of the New Charles River Basin Citizens Advisory Committee, have sent a letter to the Legislature asking for a one-time appropriation of $10 million to restore the cuts announced at the Oct. 30 meeting. But the Legislature would need to act before Dec. 31, O'Brien said, for the Turnpike Authority to administer the funds.

Wilson said it's possible that an interested party - or even state environmental officials - could file a lawsuit against the Central Artery to enforce the 1993 environmental mitigation requirements, which included the missing pedestrian bridges.

Others say it will be up to private developers to eventually build the missing pieces of the New Charles River Basin.

The role model would be Lovejoy Wharf, whose developer, Ajax Management Partners LLC of Lexington, is spending nearly $10 million on a wide pedestrian veranda along the Charles River that will connect to Central Artery-built basin pieces. Massachusetts General Hospital and other North Station developers could also be asked to pitch in money, to a general basin fund, when ordered by the city of Boston to pay construction mitigation fees.

If Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital is sold in the near future, as some expect it will be, its developer will likely be asked to help pay for the missing south bank pedestrian bridge, expected to cost $15 million to $20 million.

None of those solutions, however, appear imminent. Thanks to the Central Artery and the DCR, the New Charles River Basin is vastly improved over the industrial no-man?s land it had been for decades.

But for the foreseeable future, the river basin?s missing links will remain just that. Missing.

"At this point, I am feeling more pessimistic than I have been in a while," said Wendy Landman, executive director of WalkBoston. "It's sort of slipping from our grasp."

Peter DeMarco can be reached at Demarco@globe.com.
Link
 
Once again people take a back seat to cars. Why is it that this state can never find the money for pedestrians and bicyclists, but when it comes to cars and trucks, they always manage to find enough? The parks and walkways are not mere "amenities". They are essential components of the Big Dig.
 
Hi everyone! I've been keeping track of this forum for some time now, and just as a casual observer I have to say that the greenway has come out alright. But it could use one iconic centerpiece to distinguish it and make it original. Some sort of sculpture/statue of a decent size representative of Boston.... but done in a classy way, not something cheesy. Preferably near Rowes Wharf because that seems to be the center more or less of the greenway. That museum seems like something that could accomplish this as well(if it ever gets built) the design seems very interesting(in a good way)
 
Welcome and thanks for posting!

I agree. I always wanted some sort of thing to go with this to distinguish it -- It'll be nice when they start construction on the buildings on top of the on/off ramps. But having been in Boston many times when it was a elevated highway, I am happy with anything
 
A walk in progress
A tour of the (more or less) finished sections of the new Greenway reveals that intentions have been met - and missed
By Robert Campbell
Globe Correspondent / December 2, 2007
There might as well be three Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy Greenways. That's how varied are the segments into which it's divided.

more stories like thisEach was designed by a different landscape architect. The Greenway, as a result, is an instructive little anthology of three different design goals, three different attitudes toward public space in the city.

It wouldn't be fair to make final judgments about the Greenway or how well, eventually, it will turn out. Chunks remain unfinished. There are four sites along its length where buildings are proposed. We don't know yet which of these will be realized, or what they will look like.

But we've been waiting for the Greenway a long time. There's an irresistible urge, before winter sets in, to get out and take a walk on it. I did that on a recent Sunday. I deliberately made a point of not doing any special research. I wanted to be an ordinary stroller, seeing the Greenway freshly, trying to figure it out for myself, rather than approaching it through the minds of its designers.

I started at the Greenway's southern end, in Chinatown. This segment, the smallest of the three, was designed by landscape architect Carol Johnson Associates of Boston. It's not one space. It's three or four, of different sizes and shapes, divided by cross streets.

Johnson's design goal for the Greenway seems to be to recapture a feeling of the coastline of Boston in the days when it was located near here, before landfill projects extended the city farther out into the harbor. Long, loose piles of rugged boulders, like those of a breakwater, line a pedestrian path. The path isn't straight, but wanders as if it were following a natural water line. Plantings feel random, as if they'd grown up spontaneously.

The effect is to take you out of the city altogether and make you feel you're in a natural setting. It's an attitude toward nature in the city that recalls the work of the great 19th-century park designer Frederick Law Olmsted. Olmsted's parks, like Franklin Park in Boston, are a sanitized version of nature, suitable for romantic strolling.

The other feature of the Chinatown Greenway isn't quite in place yet. It consists of big, red, steel, boxlike frames, perhaps 15 feet tall, with bamboo shoots just beginning to climb up inside them. When the shoots fill the frames the effect will be that of a series of bamboo box hedges. That's something quite different from the seafront feeling of other parts of the Chinatown park, but it's very Chinese. And it introduces an element of invention and surprise that's all too lacking in other sections of the Greenway.

When you walk north from Chinatown, you pass through a no man's land dominated by the Federal Reserve tower. Here, at sidewalk level, a hideous array of metal stanchions are deployed to foil truck bombers from approaching the bank. They are about as welcoming as a row of bayonets. They're not part of the Greenway, of course, but they interrupt it.
When the Greenway does pick up again, it's another kind of no man's land. This is the string of sites where there was to have been a glass conservatory, managed by the Massachusetts Horticultural Society. That plan fell through, and the area, today, is occupied by a presumably temporary, rather boring array of green lawns shaped into gentle slopes and hillocks. You feel you're on an abandoned golf course.

more stories like thisOK, fast forward. We're now in what was supposed to be the heart and soul of the Greenway, the so-called wharf district, which runs from Northern Avenue all the way almost to the North End. By far the longest of the three Greenway segments, it was designed by EDAW, a giant firm of planners and landscape architects with 34 offices worldwide.

For this observer, this key part of the Greenway is a perplexing mess. Its two focal points are a circular plaza in front of the great arch of Rowes Wharf, and a rectangular area, which I'll call Lantern Square, farther up near the Aquarium.

The Rowes plaza is pleasant enough, in an unimaginative sort of way, although there doesn't seem to be any particular reason why it's located here. Lantern Square, on the other hand - intended as the climax of the Greenway - is a timid disaster. It's surrounded on three sides by tall metal towers. At night, the towers serve as street lights. Apparently they're supposed to frame the space and, by doing so, define it as a great public square. But they are much too flimsy to accomplish that goal. In fact they appear temporary, as if they're leftovers from some stage set that is in the process of being removed.

Each tower frames, at its feet, a granite seat that looks as stiff and uncomfortable as a furnishing from an Egyptian tomb. Each also supports an overhead metal grille, the purpose of which is unclear, since its open slats don't protect the seat below from either sun or rain.

There are other random moves here - a round pattern in the pavement, a few metal benches, some grass. Lantern Square and its environs look as if they'd been designed by an international committee, no two of whose members spoke the same language. EDAW's design goal is to create a celebratory urban space, a place where we gather to cheer our heroes and mix with one another. But it doesn't come off.

It's a pleasure, after that disappointment, to move on to the North End piece of the Greenway, even though you still have to traverse a construction site to get there. Designed by landscape architect Kathryn Gustafson, of Seattle, the North End is the place where the Greenway, at long last, sings. It's clear at the first glance that this park is the product of a designer who knew what she wanted and how to get it. The park is clear, bold, simple, practical, and memorable.
A long grandstand, its roof protecting a single row of benches, lines the park on the harbor side. Vines are climbing up on it, and they will, presumably, eventually extend out over the open roof to convert the entire grandstand into a green arbor. The grandstand looks out over generous plazas and playing fields, on the far side of which - the city side - there's a buffer of thick planting. That's about it: no fuss, few small gestures. The design goal seems clear: to create a place that can be taken over by any group that wants it, from soccer players to picnickers to food stalls to skateboarders, with a quiet line of witnesses along the grandstand.

more stories like thisAn odd little paving strip of granite angles its way across Gustafson's lawn. It's inexplicable to me, but it does no harm.

The North End park is a gem. I like the Chinatown park, too. As for the Wharf District parks - well, it's helpful to remember that even great cities don't always get things right for the first few centuries. It took half a millennium to finish the Piazza San Marco, in Venice.

A lot of things are going to change around the Greenway, some of them soon. Privately owned sites on both sides will reorient themselves toward the new parks, to take advantage of this valuable frontage. Buildings will sprout new wings and entrances and, one hopes, coffee bars and restaurants with tables and chairs. The Greenway needs that kind of active, vital edge. And Mayor Menino's "Crossroads Initiative," the brainchild of Toronto planner Ken Greenberg, will, if it's fully implemented, upgrade the streets that cross the Greenway, widening sidewalks and planting trees.

Also due to change is the resident population. As more people come to live downtown and become users of the Greenway, it will be safer and livelier. Finally, much depends on the work of the Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy Greenway Conservancy, the group that will manage the Greenway. There's talk of concerts, cafes, performances, ice skating. They'll be needed. Under-programmed, ill-maintained open space in a city quickly degenerates into a wasteland of blowing newspapers, homeless men, and worse.

I'm trying to be hopeful. The depressing truth is that the Greenway, already years overdue, is not what we hoped. As noted, long stretches remain unfinished. Of the three more or less finished park segments, one is very good, one is OK, and one is very weak.

Also promised were four new buildings - two museums, a YMCA, and a "Garden Under Glass," none of which has been started. There was also to be a visitors' center. Maybe, if we live long enough, some of these will bring a splash of vitality and a more human scale to a stretch of land that feels, today, shapeless and unfocused.

So this is a very preliminary report. A lot more needs to happen if the potential of the Greenway is ever to be realized.

Robert Campbell, the Globe's architecture critic, can be reached at camglobe@aol.com.

Link: http://www.boston.com/ae/theater_arts/articles/2007/12/02/a_walk_in_progress/?page=3
 
As for the Wharf District parks - well, it's helpful to remember that even great cities don't always get things right for the first few centuries. It took half a millennium to finish the Piazza San Marco, in Venice.

Thank god somebody said it. People on this board (myself included) are far too impatient.
 
Copley Square

It took over 100 years to get Copley Square 'right'. The head of the BRA who approved the 60's/70's renovation claims he had had back surgery and was medicated when he approved the design. In reality it reflected the current idea of what a city park should be.
 
Thank god somebody said it. People on this board (myself included) are far too impatient.

I won't argue that we're impatient. But most of the time when something in Boston gets placed on the back burner, it ends up not being built, or worse- it's rescaled, redesigned, and half-assed. Piazza San Marco this is not.

That being said, I like what i've seen so far on the Greenway. If excessive benches and bad placement (and they are placed horribly) are a few of the biggest complaints, then we're ok. My feeling is that given a few years, when trees and flora start to fill in and establish themselves, that the RKG will be a nice strip of green through the center of the city. It will never be Central Park, Parque Retiro, or the Boston Common, but given time it'll be sufficient, and considering what it's replacing, sufficient is fine.
 
conservancy

I think you will see these parks evolve at a faster pace than city parks. The Conservancy will be in charge, not the city. The sad thing is that a large number of parks in the city are already maintained by 'friends' groups with little help from the city and i'm sure the number will only increase.
 
I deliberately made a point of not doing any special research.

He should have done some research, because his review is pretty clueless.

For this observer, this key part of the Greenway is a perplexing mess. Its two focal points are a circular plaza in front of the great arch of Rowes Wharf, and a rectangular area, which I'll call Lantern Square, farther up near the Aquarium.
The plaza in front of Rowe's Wharf is on parcel 18. It's not part of the Wharf Parks, and it isn't a focal point, since the space is meant to be occupied by the NCAC building.

The Rowes plaza is pleasant enough, in an unimaginative sort of way, although there doesn't seem to be any particular reason why it's located here.
Presumably there isn't one. it's just a way to make the empty space a little more pleasant until the NCAC is built.

There are other random moves here - a round pattern in the pavement
And little holes in the pattern from which jets of water shoot up into the air. Otherwise known as a fountain.

An odd little paving strip of granite angles its way across Gustafson's lawn. It's inexplicable to me, but it does no harm.
It leads to an opening in the grandstand, and to Salem St. beyond. In effect a continuation of Salem St as a pedestrian path.
 
The plaza in front of Rowe's Wharf is on parcel 18. It's not part of the Wharf Parks, and it isn't a focal point, since the space is meant to be occupied by the NCAC building.

No, the plaza itself stays, the Libeskind building goes on the adjacent green and the ramps. It will only slightly intrude on the arch.

justin
 

Back
Top