Rose Kennedy Greenway

[GMACK24]

I'm guessing it looked something like this?

(two girls wresting in the Copley Square fountain after the Celtics parade)

ha ha yeah cept she had just a bra on.

lol ! ! !

 

[GMACK24]

also just wanted to let you all know some of us are gonna meet at the fountain on Friday night

7PM - 7:30 please feel free to stop by if you are around....

http://www.flickr.com/groups/bostonmassachusetts_/discuss/72157606098875923/

 

[shirley kressel]

Shirley has no idea how expensive parks have become in Boston.

You probably know that the park construction has all been done by the Turnpike Authority, without private money. We're now just talking about management.

Harvard will pay $3.5 million to construct a one acre park (land is currently vacant) behind the library on N. Harvard St in Allston. Harvard has agreed to spend $220,000 a year for 10 years to maintain this one acre park.

I checked on this. These figures don't tell us what the real costs will be. There was a big "community benefits package" negotiated, and the dollars will be juggled around over time. According to the BRA: "the following caveat is necessary (and it applies to the entire Cooperation Agreement): to the extent that individual items cost less than the amount allotted in the Cooperation Agreement, the money will be redirected to other benefits. There is a whole range of public benefits in the Cooperation Agreement, and it wasn?t always possible to predict exactly how much any particular item would cost, so inevitably (as was made clear during the public discussion around benefits) there will be some need and opportunity to redirect funds as implementation proceeds."

The unfortunate fact is that the Mayor has financially shortchanged the city's Parks Department for years, and made it clear from the get go that the city was not interested in spending a penny to maintain the Greenway parks.

Menino has indeed been shortchanging our parks, but the Greenway isn't City land; it was state land, now it is Turnpike land, so it's not surprising that he wouldn't take on the maintenance. But he did direct $1 million of the City's DNC surplus fund, which was supposed to go to beautifying the city, into the Conservancy. Just like the state: he has the money to give to a group of private corporations, but he doesn't have it to fund his own department. The private Conservancy isn't going to pay for taking care of the Greenway anyway; the state (i.e., the taxpayers) will pay, and pay big, per the pending legislation.

There are moves now afoot to have Harvard pay for upgrading and maintaining the MDC parkland along the Charles as part of its public benefits package as it develops more of its Allston land in the future. Given that, why not turn the Greenway over to Harvard to maintain as well?

On the off chance that this is a serious suggestion: Harvard will pay to maintain parkland where it benefits Harvard (just like the Greenway neighbors are determined to manage the Greenway, for their benefit). It's not a public service. It may be related to their plan to depress the road and make the riverbank part of the campus. I doubt Harvard would have any interest in maintaining the Greenway. (Well, maybe if the state gave them a million dollars an acre, but...probably not. Although...Harvard is now part of the Artery Business Committee, but, still, probably not. )

 

[statler]

Welcome to ArchBoston. I'm glad you have decided to join us. The conversations here tend to become an echo chamber.
It's easy to argue against sound bites in a newspaper. It will be nice to have actual discussions. I hope you continue to post here and in other threads on the board.
And I want to thank you for your help in opposing the demolition of the Shreve, Crump & Low building.

 

[stellarfun]

You probably know that the park construction has all been done by the Turnpike Authority, without private money. We're now just talking about management.


I checked on this. These figures don't tell us what the real costs will be. There was a big "community benefits package" negotiated, and the dollars will be juggled around over time. According to the BRA: "the following caveat is necessary (and it applies to the entire Cooperation Agreement): to the extent that individual items cost less than the amount allotted in the Cooperation Agreement, the money will be redirected to other benefits. There is a whole range of public benefits in the Cooperation Agreement, and it wasn?t always possible to predict exactly how much any particular item would cost, so inevitably (as was made clear during the public discussion around benefits) there will be some need and opportunity to redirect funds as implementation proceeds."


Menino has indeed been shortchanging our parks, but the Greenway isn't City land; it was state land, now it is Turnpike land, so it's not surprising that he wouldn't take on the maintenance. But he did direct $1 million of the City's DNC surplus fund, which was supposed to go to beautifying the city, into the Conservancy. Just like the state: he has the money to give to a group of private corporations, but he doesn't have it to fund his own department. The private Conservancy isn't going to pay for taking care of the Greenway anyway; the state (i.e., the taxpayers) will pay, and pay big, per the pending legislation.


On the off chance that this is a serious suggestion: Harvard will pay to maintain parkland where it benefits Harvard (just like the Greenway neighbors are determined to manage the Greenway, for their benefit). It's not a public service. It may be related to their plan to depress the road and make the riverbank part of the campus. I doubt Harvard would have any interest in maintaining the Greenway. (Well, maybe if the state gave them a million dollars an acre, but...probably not. Although...Harvard is now part of the Artery Business Committee, but, still, probably not. )

Shirley, thanks for your response, and welcome.

Re: the community benefits package. Budgeteers often use the term fungible, meaning there is latitude to shift money between projects or accounts. I agree it makes sense to have that kind of latitude, and indeed may explain why Harvard committed to spend $220,000 annually for 10 years to maintain a one acre park. Some of those upkeep monies presumably could go to maintaining other public realm projects that are part of the benefits package. Though I would argue Harvard could not redistribute the $25+ million in agreed-to funding to cover new projects not specified in the Science I benefits package, e.g., constructing a pedestrian bridge over Soldiers Field road. (It would appear that any such bridge would be part of a future benefits package.)

Harry Mattison if he reads this thread may want to chime in, but I understood Allstonites (and Brightonians) were concerned that the BRA might distribute some of the community benefits to more distant areas of Boston. That the neighborhood residents had such a concern indicates, to me, that the city could do such if it so wished, and Harvard would presumably agree as long as the total package cost remained within reasonable bounds, and the city approved the buildings tied to the package. (I do not know how many other community benefits packages lie in store for Harvard's other future buildings in Allston. Will Harvard have to pay community benefits before constructing new undergraduate housing, or a new hockey rink?)

The Arboretum (i.e., Harvard) has a 999 year lease with the city, so Harvard entering into a long-term custodial arrangement for city land is not completely out of the question. Harvard is eventually going to deck the Turnpike at Allston Landing. While it would be a very big stretch at the moment, one could wistfully conceive of Harvard agreeing to a benefits package near-term that would have the Arboretum develop and maintain the Hort parcels on the Greenway long before Harvard develops the Turnpike land.

 

[statler]

The Arboretum is a good point. It serves as essentially a large horticultural lab for Harvard, but it also serves the City of Boston quite well as a beautiful park.
I'm sure Harvard could do something similar with the Mass Hort parcel.

 

[pelhamhall]

It would be nice if we could turn over all parks to private enterprises. They would be cleaner, better maintained, better-staffed, and they may even make -instead of suck- money.

Imagine the change in City Hall Plaza in just six months if business were to take it over from the incompetent government?

Thankfully, we won't get to see this so-called "Greenway" fall into the same disrepair and blight that other government-controlled land has fallen into.

That being said, the Greenway needs to be developed into something useful that makes money. Every block should have a business on it, and that business should be charged with being the steward of the block. A coffee shop, a beer garden, a book store with cafe, a tourist junk store, a produce market - every single block should have 25% of its lot used by a business. This would be better than developing 25% of the lots and leaving 75% of them vacant (grass and trees on a city median strip is 'vacant') - this is the current model that failed and humiliated politician Mike Dukakis left us with. Why hasn't anybody with any brains changed it yet?

Imagine - the horror - if there was a McDonalds built on the Greenway, and that McDonald's was charged with maintaining the remaining 75% of its lot as a park. You're all recoiling in horror, but that park would likely be the nicest, most-family friendly one of the entire median strip system.

Just pontificating...

 

[Ron Newman]

I'd like to see some pushcart businesses along the Greenway, but please no McDonald's. Those generate huge amounts of litter.

 

[statler]

Imagine - the horror - if there was a McDonalds built on the Greenway, and that McDonald's was charged with maintaining the remaining 75% of its lot as a park. You're all recoiling in horror, but that park would likely be the nicest, most-family friendly one of the entire median strip system.

I was thinking about how to rebut this and I realized I couldn't. It is like if some told you the sky was purple. You look up and see a bright blue sky, but to them the sky was purple. There is just no way to prove it otherwise. So if putting a McDonald's makes for a nice park to some than so be it. We just need to hope those people never gain any kind of control or power.

 

[pelhamhall]

Just using an admittedly way-far-out-there example... If a Starbucks is more to the elitist point of view, then fine, a Starbucks, and if that's not elitist enough, then a BLAK BEAN Organic Coffee Roasters (I made that up, but you can imagine).

The business, whatever it would be, would be forced to build an attractive building and maintain an attractive, friendly, landscaped, and open park.

My guess is that the lot with the business on it will be more attractive, better maintained, have more seating, better lighting at night, and would be used by humans than the other vacant median strip lots.

Of course I don't want to see a McDonalds there - at all. Just pontificating on a lazy Friday.

I walked by the outdoor patio at Grand Canal on the site where the Stop & Shop Building is going to go - and it made me miss Europe - where parkland and commercial businesses intermingle, to everyone's benefit. The Chinese Tower beergarten in Munich's English Garden is an example of what I'm looking for.

The "McDonalds" post was meant to stir controversy. But there's some truth to the comment as well - sometimes even skies with hints of purple can be called blue, and vice versa.

 

[statler]

Ok, thanks for clarifying. I was reacting more to the McDonald's part more than the privatizing part.
I would love to see more retail on and near the Greenway. Not for "Whoo-hoo! People can make money!" sake, but rather the reality of the fact that retail stores bring life and vitality to area in a way that grassy lawns cannot. The fact that people can make money is, at best, a side effect.

 

[vanshnookenraggen]

But doesn't this have more to do with the zoning around the Greenway than privatization of said park. I mean you could just zone for mixes use along the edge of the parks which would allow people to enjoy the use of coffee shops and restaurants without creating private enclaves polices by rent-a-cops.

I was about to propose a BID for parts of the Greenway but then that would potentially create the rent-a-cops we so despise.

 

[pelhamhall]

In Europe, the Panera Bread at 200 High Street would have patrons sitting out on the public park, across the street, in tables that Panera provided. Runners would bring the food out to the table - even (gasp) beer or wine. The public parks in Greece, Belgium and France are full of private tables/table service where the waitstaff actually crosses streets to get to. Imagine that in the US - lawsuits across the boards for everyone.

 

[Ron Newman]

That could work here. The main issue would be people leaving the restaurant without paying.

 

[statler]

In Europe, the Panera Bread at 200 High Street would have patrons sitting out on the public park, across the street, in tables that Panera provided.

A great idea, but of course in Europe the waiters wouldn't have to run across three lanes of traffic to get there.

 

[JimboJones]

All you naysayers are wrong about the RKG, I am happy (and surprised) to report.

Walking through there, earlier this afternoon, I was pleased with what I saw. Mostly.

Some photos, plus short, pithy comments, above each photo.


This is one of several stones across from the Christopher Columbus Park. Very smart idea. The description is a bit misleading (re: inaccurate). The Central Artery did not "replace" the Atlantic Ave elevated; they went two different places and the bridge could have remained, since it was beside the Central Artery, not below it.

If you walk down the Rose Kennedy Greenway (or as I sarcastically call it, the Rose Kennedy Parkway), all of your senses get to enjoy themselves. Here, a crowd crosses from Faneuil Hall to the waterfront while listening to the smooth sounds of a busker strumming "All Along The Watchtower" on his guitar. (It took me a minute to recognize the song, but that was more my fault than his.)

I love when little children run into fountains and urinate and put the stream up their private parts. It's part of what makes living in the city such a joy. Fortunately, here you get to enjoy the smells of the city, as well - in this case, a very very strong chlorine smell (thank G-).

Adven-Tours tour - fun!

My senses, on overload! Hearing, smell ... and here, seeing. This woman was suffering from what looked to be an extreme case of diabetes, her legs swollen beyond belief. Added bonus: she was picking her scabs while I walked by.

In front of the Rowes Wharf hotel. A bit less-traveled, this bit. Not the fault of designers, I don't think, it's just that there aren't any attractions nearby. No doubt this path is well-used during rush hour, when business people head to the wharf to pick up ferries, going south.

Near the InterContinental Hotel and Residences.

Okay, this wasn't so good. Merry Christmas.

This ain't so good, either. Too much brick, or whatever it is. Again, though, there is little around here to attract a crowd, regardless. It's not like if it was covered in grass that people would just run to it.

The most green area of the Greenway, near Chinatown. And, perhaps surprising, the most underused. One guy drinking out of a Budweiser can (how you say "Bud" in Flemish, I don't know), a girl on a cellphone, and two guys grab-assing each other (who knew?), and that was about it. Pretty, but what's the point?

Near Chinatown. Lost chances, broken dreams. Underused? Never-to-be-used, more like it. There was more activity in Tiananmen Square.

Hope these photos don't slow down your computers! I don't know how to resize!!!

 

[statler]

Sightseeing with JimboJones:

 

[Suffolk 83]

LMAO

 

[tobyjug]

This thing's got more ammonia pools than the surface of Venus!

"Dewey Square" is the absolute worst. It calls out for something "soaring" and monumental.

 

[Lurker]

Put back Admiral Dewey's monument, BC has 'borrowed' it for long enough!