Designation debate
Parks chief opposes landmark status for Esplanade
By Stephanie Ebbert, Globe Staff | June 9, 2009
Though the Charles River Esplanade is poised for protection as a Boston landmark, the state commissioner who oversees it is opposing landmark status, saying that the parkland - which he once proposed paving over for a temporary road - is already well-preserved.
Richard K. Sullivan Jr., commissioner of the state Department of Conservation and Recreation, said the Esplanade has the highest level of protection by the state.
"A landmark designation is often the measure of last resort to preserve an otherwise unprotected and threatened property," Sullivan wrote in recent comments submitted to the Boston Landmarks Commission. The park is not endangered, he wrote, and doesn't lack protection from future risk.
Four years ago, the department proposed using a stretch of the Esplanade as a temporary roadway during reconstruction of the Storrow Drive tunnel. Though Sullivan would still not say the Esplanade detour was off the table, the controversial proposal was shelved when the state opted for interim repairs that should extend the life expectancy of the tunnel five years. That postponed a decision on how to divert traffic during the later reconstruction.
"I think it's pretty clear that everybody has a bigger vision. We believe that, at DCR, we will be able to take a more parkway park approach to Storrow Drive and the tunnel," Sullivan said.
But his department's parkways could be transferred to the highway department under a transportation overhaul. And the Department of Conservation and Recreation's previous plan for a Storrow Drive detour lane still hangs over the heads of Esplanade enthusiasts.
"I was very disappointed that DCR is opposing landmark status for the Esplanade," said state Representative Martha M. Walz, a Back Bay Democrat. "The idea that DCR could pave the Esplanade is what brought us to the point and proves why the Esplanade needs protection by the Landmarks Commission."
The Boston Landmarks Commission staff issued a report last month recommending the Esplanade get landmark status, which is awarded to preserve sites whose historic, cultural, social, architectural, or aesthetic significance transcends usual zoning considerations. If the board approves the recommendation, the city panel would gain the right to approve or reject changes along the Esplanade.
"What we feel strongly about, with respect to what will come out of landmark status, is that there won't be significant changes made to the Esplanade without a thorough review process," said Sylvia Salas, executive director of The Esplanade Association. "What they're trying to do is protect it from somebody coming in with a bulldozer and putting a highway in the middle of the park."
In its report recommending landmark status, the commission noted that the Esplanade is emblematic of an important aspect of the region's development - the creation of the Metropolitan Park System in the 1890s. The Charlesbank area of the Esplanade was a pioneering urban parkland designed for active recreation, and the Esplanade is viewed as a significant composite of the work of three prominent landscape architects, Frederick Law Olmsted Sr., Charles Eliot, and Arthur Shurcliff.
Sullivan said the Esplanade comprises parcels that make up a district, rather than an individual landmark. He also said that the Esplanade is protected open space under state law, is listed on the National Register of Historic Places, and is overseen by the Massachusetts Historical Commission.
"Really, there isn't any reason to do it. It would just add another layer of bureaucracy to the process," he said.
But the Historical Commission recently approved, with no public discussion, his department's proposal to build a 6-foot-tall fence around the Esplanade's privately built and maintained Teddy Ebersol's Red Sox Fields. When park advocates complained, Secretary of State William F. Galvin, chairman of the Massachusetts Historical Commission, overruled the decision and called for public meetings. The second is scheduled for tomorrow.
At the first meeting, held by the Department of Conservation and Recreation May 27, several residents supported the fence, calling it necessary to protect the playing fields from overuse and to prevent the younger siblings of youth team players from straying onto busy pathways used by swift-moving cyclists and roller-bladers. The fields are now surrounded by a temporary chain-link fence.
Others fear the fence will disrupt the parkland's open vistas and make the playing fields seem cordoned off for private use.
"Frederick Law Olmsted would turn over in his grave," asserted resident and urban designer John Shields.
Proponents have asked the Landmarks Commission to include the fence as it makes a final decision on the Esplanade's landmark status; the commission is now considering how to handle it. Meg Vaillancourt, president of the Friends of Teddy Ebersol's Red Sox Fields, said in comments to the Boston Landmarks Commission that timing is urgent because funding for the fence is part of a DCR contract that expires this month. The Friends group has offered $50,000 toward an estimated $184,000 cost.
"Without the ability to proceed immediately, this combination of public and private funds for this important safety features is clearly at risk of being lost," Vaillancourt wrote.
Stephanie Ebbert can be reached at
ebbert@globe.com.
