Trustees land does not operate like a state or city park. Weird closing times, weird access rules. Also a whiff of money laundering and tax evasion about the way land gets donated.
For any of that? Not saying it's not true, but please, state your objections clearly. And if they don't do it, who will step up? Seems like a park with weird rules and weird hours beats the hell out of no park at all.
King of the derails and you get impatient with others? Wow.
The point, which you seem to be resolutely missing, is that many parks charge admission, all state parks included. Why do you have a case of the angry at the Trustees on that account? It's hardly consistent.
But the reason the Common is such a success is its central location. It connects Back Bay/Beacon Hill/Downtown Crossing/Chinatown/Bay Village/West End. The proposed spots (aside from the Northern Ave Bridge, which already has proposals for green space) are spots that seem like it would need to be a destination you drive or take the T to, rather than simply walking to/through it.
If So. Boston is a possible spot, they should look into exploring the land Massport owns (and leases to the derelict Pappas Family) near the Reserve Channel and the Convention Center. It would at least stitch together Southie/Seaport/Fort Point.
Funny how the same people who moved from the country to the big city, or couldn't stand the suburbs can't seem to live without a patch of anti-urban greenery in the middle of high-density, high-value land.
Density and high-intensity use define what it means to be a city. If you need ever-more public lawns to enjoy your life, you're not a city person - try suburbia, it's lawn heaven.
So, what, there should be zero green space in cities? All concrete, all the time, except for sad little trees along the sidewalks that nobody waters?
This isn't a proposal for a lawn for every condo building down there. It's a park. It works on the exact same economy of scale as everything else in the city - instead of every person having one of everything that they use occasionally and separately, multiple people utilize one, larger thing, and it makes it much more efficient. Public parks are the apartment buildings, zipcars, and public transit versions of single families, 2.5 cars per family, and half-acre lawns that get used four times a year and when you get sick of hearing your children playing Call of Duty all summer.
if you find it so impossible to deal with people that might have a differing opinion than yours
after all, when you leave the city, it becomes quite easy to not have any neighbors
also, consider that maybe you don't belong in boston at all. the value the city & its residents have placed on green spaces long predates your existence here.
edit: ps which dictionary do you use? im having a bit of a problem here,
those of us who actually did grow up here who are everlastingly grateful for the green spaces that we're lucky to have--the Public Garden and Common, the Emerald Necklace, Esplanade, Arboretum, and countless parks. There's such a thing as balance and Boston's green spaces are a huge asset and worthy long-term investment.
You do know where and what that is, and why it was created, yes? And that it seems to have exceeded expectations in terms of the services it provides the city and the property values around it?
There is also Chapter 91 to deal with ... and I assume that you know what that is and what is required under the law, yes?
...about a guy named Frederick Law Olmstead, and some of the things he did. I've never delved into it deeply, but I'm sure there was plenty of disagreement and stomping of feet about what he did. I think it's amazing and I've always been grateful for the parks, myself.
Comments
Please, please
let this happen. There is not enough green space in South Boston and the little we have is over run by dog piss and crap.
- A South Boston Community Member
Not thrilled with Trustees of Reservations
Trustees land does not operate like a state or city park. Weird closing times, weird access rules. Also a whiff of money laundering and tax evasion about the way land gets donated.
Cite?
For any of that? Not saying it's not true, but please, state your objections clearly. And if they don't do it, who will step up? Seems like a park with weird rules and weird hours beats the hell out of no park at all.
indeed
there are many places they run that they'll charge you for being there
As will...
...every single state park from Memorial Day through Labor Day. So?
how many of those
are located where the trustees want to build this proposed park? so?
As usual....
...you are making no sense whatsoever.
i make no sense
it hasn't stopped you from responding to me or from badgering me. keep it up though. my patience with you... is growing minimal.
You're hilarious
King of the derails and you get impatient with others? Wow.
The point, which you seem to be resolutely missing, is that many parks charge admission, all state parks included. Why do you have a case of the angry at the Trustees on that account? It's hardly consistent.
They do that so they have the
They do that so they have the ability to maintain their property.
But the reason the Common is
But the reason the Common is such a success is its central location. It connects Back Bay/Beacon Hill/Downtown Crossing/Chinatown/Bay Village/West End. The proposed spots (aside from the Northern Ave Bridge, which already has proposals for green space) are spots that seem like it would need to be a destination you drive or take the T to, rather than simply walking to/through it.
If So. Boston is a possible spot, they should look into exploring the land Massport owns (and leases to the derelict Pappas Family) near the Reserve Channel and the Convention Center. It would at least stitch together Southie/Seaport/Fort Point.
Funny how the same people who
Funny how the same people who moved from the country to the big city, or couldn't stand the suburbs can't seem to live without a patch of anti-urban greenery in the middle of high-density, high-value land.
Density and high-intensity use define what it means to be a city. If you need ever-more public lawns to enjoy your life, you're not a city person - try suburbia, it's lawn heaven.
So just pave over the Public Garden?
But let's wait until New York lets Trump the Younger stack skyscrapers on Central Park.
So, what, there should be
So, what, there should be zero green space in cities? All concrete, all the time, except for sad little trees along the sidewalks that nobody waters?
This isn't a proposal for a lawn for every condo building down there. It's a park. It works on the exact same economy of scale as everything else in the city - instead of every person having one of everything that they use occasionally and separately, multiple people utilize one, larger thing, and it makes it much more efficient. Public parks are the apartment buildings, zipcars, and public transit versions of single families, 2.5 cars per family, and half-acre lawns that get used four times a year and when you get sick of hearing your children playing Call of Duty all summer.
you might take your own advice
if you find it so impossible to deal with people that might have a differing opinion than yours
after all, when you leave the city, it becomes quite easy to not have any neighbors
also, consider that maybe you don't belong in boston at all. the value the city & its residents have placed on green spaces long predates your existence here.
edit: ps which dictionary do you use? im having a bit of a problem here,
Or...
those of us who actually did grow up here who are everlastingly grateful for the green spaces that we're lucky to have--the Public Garden and Common, the Emerald Necklace, Esplanade, Arboretum, and countless parks. There's such a thing as balance and Boston's green spaces are a huge asset and worthy long-term investment.
Okay
Explain the massive success of Leventhal Park.
You do know where and what that is, and why it was created, yes? And that it seems to have exceeded expectations in terms of the services it provides the city and the property values around it?
There is also Chapter 91 to deal with ... and I assume that you know what that is and what is required under the law, yes?
http://www.mass.gov/eea/agencies/massdep/water/watersheds/chapter-91-the...
You might want to read...
...about a guy named Frederick Law Olmstead, and some of the things he did. I've never delved into it deeply, but I'm sure there was plenty of disagreement and stomping of feet about what he did. I think it's amazing and I've always been grateful for the parks, myself.