Hey, there! Log in / Register

City looks at eliminating part of Day Boulevard to extend Moakley Park to the water

The Dorchester Reporter shows us potential changes to South Boston's Moakley Park as part of a "grand vision" proposed by the city that would feature both improvements to its current use as a park and modifications to turn it into a sort of sponge to protect nearby residences during the increased flooding the area will get as sea levels rise.

Neighborhoods: 
Free tagging: 

Comments

The current Moakley park seems underutilized and "tired". How the current traffic on Day Blvd would be re-routed is a big concern, but worth taking a look at.

up
Voting closed 13

It is really nice, except for the rocks and broken glass in the fields.

It'd be great to get it in a state where more people use it, looks like a good plan.

up
Voting closed 16

I made sure to read the article. You kind of emphasized a small part that might not come to fruition at the expense of the bigger story- a complete rebuild of the park. I mean, they are talking about tearing down the stadium and moving it to the other side.

All in all not a bad proposal, including the shift of traffic (though the people living in the projects might object to the flood of traffic, for the rest of us it's a net neutral proposal.) I just want to know how it's going to be financed.

up
Voting closed 7

And please no comments about how close to JFK and Andrew this park is.

up
Voting closed 9

JFK and Andrew T stops are close.

I walked to this park last weekend and I live in freaking Jamaica Plain! City parks do not require parking. There never should have been a street by the water in the first place. Give the waterfront back to the people. And a huge reason this neighborhood will be flooded is because of car drivers. So stop polluting and get off your ass and walk.

up
Voting closed 36

How much gear were you carrying for your soccer team?

How many balls, cones, first aid stuff, etc.?

up
Voting closed 11

Do you know where they love to play "soccer" even more than here? Europe. Do you know where most people in major cities don't drive? Europe.

up
Voting closed 4

I went to a kid soccer game in Europe - my husband's cousin's kid. Even in France they drive to the pitch with the boatload of crap.

I had an Italian co-coach when I coached my son's team. I asked if they used the same amount of crap. Oh yes, he said - and the coaches would park in on the field outside the pitch, right behind the benches, too!

Saw similar things going on when I biked around Berlin.

Sorry, but your dreamy vision doesn't match up. More of the kids bike there, sure, but the crap hauler has to haul the crap.

up
Voting closed 10

Sorry not sorry.

up
Voting closed 12

One would imagine that there will be parking in the area at the end of the project, just not exactly where it is now. If the Day Blvd thing goes down (and that's not a given), I would imagine that the parking would be around where the dog park is. But then again, plans are still in the theoretical stage.

up
Voting closed 10

By the time this ever gets approved and completed, there's not going to be gas to put in cars.

up
Voting closed 5

Removing that part of Day Blvd would be absolutely amazing, and likely improve the safety of Kosciusko Circle without any other changes. I can imagine the State Police vetoing it, however.

up
Voting closed 12

We shouldn't negotiate with criminal organizations like the State Police. Give the waterfront back to the citizens of Boston.

up
Voting closed 22

Drive cars.

up
Voting closed 7

Then they can find a place to put their private property at their own expense and walk/roll to the park.

up
Voting closed 13

and they can drive those cars down Columbia Rd instead.

up
Voting closed 13

I just like reminding Kinopio that the majority of Boston residents have access to an automobile, and some of them even drive to Carson Beach.

up
Voting closed 8

Let's make this a cars vs bikes vs pedestrians battle. We haven't had one of those in days!

up
Voting closed 3

It's a hodgepodge of sports fields which have a what, 6 month, use rate? What about winter time uses (ice skating, cross country skiing, snow shoeing, indoor pool, velodrome)?

What about some natural landscape? Woods/wild? Ponds/water features/bridges? Vegetable/aesthetic/sculpture gardens? A place to fly a kite? The people living there need some "natural" options.

Running trails or walking/biking/fitness circuit? Pool? Skate park? Existing dog park moves over?

What about picnic areas? Out with the damn food trucks.

I like the existing stadium and think it could be worked with (there's a huge family of skunks living at the stadium now as well as some homeless people - things to consider). Safely getting people to the park (from JFK) is a huge problem to solve. Connecting to L Street Bathhouse and its functions look unconsidered but could better drive the layout.

up
Voting closed 9

What about winter time uses (ice skating, cross country skiing, snow shoeing, indoor pool, velodrome)?

They included a sledding hill (which I think is awesome!) You can x-country ski and snow shoe on any of the fields. Although I'm a big fan of indoor public pools, having one "at the beach" seems like maybe the wrong location.

up
Voting closed 7

Yeah, most of this just reads like "why can't there be literally everything at this park?!!!?!?!"

I mean.... once you mention building a velodrome, I reserve the right to no longer take you seriously.

up
Voting closed 4

c'mon. There are literally 28 velodromes in the entire country, and a whopping two (2) of them are indoor. No one is building a velodrome.

up
Voting closed 5

Good luck evicting the geese!

up
Voting closed 6

I've been involved with a small park design. Not an expert, but some limited experience here.

This looks really cool - the devil is in the details. One thing I see is that there aren't really direct ways for people with mobility limitations, ambulances, patrol vehicles, garbage collection vehicles, etc. to get around to the various features. Pack in pack out ain't going to work in this location, and people can seriously damage themselves playing soccer, etc. This doesn't have to be asphalt, but these things need to exist. Such trailways also support cycling and active transport. This also works so that people can pay a fee to have a party or something and get a limited permit to truck in their food and truck out their crap. This is how people use parks.

There should be some sort of parking lot, but it should be in the grottiest corner and could be limited in size and require a fee for parking at peak times. Every city and town in the commonwealth does this for its swimming beaches, even the ones on the ponds and rivers. The Crane Reservation does it for accessing trails and, of course, the beach. It wouldn't be unreasonable here. Disability plates and placards excepted, of course.

up
Voting closed 7

There are no parks in Boston there there is a fee for parking. Nor Dedham. Or Brookline. Or Newton. Or Milton. Or Quincy...

Also, none of the DCR parks in Boston that provide parking charge for parking.

up
Voting closed 2

They have the room for that.

We keep hearing about parking parking parking. I merely pointed out how most city and town recreational beaches support and manage that - they charge a fee, just like Wright's Pond does.

Once more with more comprehension: cities and towns all across the Commonwealth charge for parking during peak times at recreational areas. The DCR charges for parking at peak times at varying recreation areas. The National Wildlife Refuges do the same. Audubon does it. The Trustees of Reservations do as well. This is a COMMON PRACTICE. Just because you never leave West Roxbury doesn't mean it isn't common or isn't done.

up
Voting closed 5

That in fact "most cities and towns" do not charge for parking. Yes, some beach communities (probably most, but certainly not all, and if you don't believe me, go to Wollaston and Revere Beaches) charge for parking at the beach, and in turn they offer parking for residents. That said, they don't do it because they are supportive of public transportation or biking. They do it to keep people out. Same thing with inland municipalities. The rare few that charge for parking do so to keep the riff raff out. They would include your suburb. The reality is that within the Greater Boston area, including your city, people can park at most parks without having to pay. Houghton's Pond, Lynn Fells, Artisani Park. I could keep going on.

up
Voting closed 0

What you mention goes without saying, but this is not at the detail level you're speaking of. They're still at the 30,000 ft over-arching idea phase. Not the OMG what do the walking path details look like so they won't get destroyed too quickly phase. Or the how is every part of this park universally accessible phase. That will come, just not today.

up
Voting closed 5