PDA

View Full Version : Plan looks to double Common garage


statler
06-05-2007, 04:27 AM
Plan looks to double Common garage size
Consideration is in early stage

By Steve Bailey, Globe Staff | June 5, 2007

The Massachusetts Convention Center Authority plans to explore doubling the size of the garage under the Boston Common, a proposal sure to ignite a debate about cars versus mass transit.

James E. Rooney, executive director of the authority, which owns the garage, said yesterday doubling the current 1,362-space garage could aid downtown development, provide parking for users of a future extension of the Silver Line, and provide new revenue to offset deficits from the state's two convention centers. The garage now produces $5 million in profit to subsidize the centers.

Rooney said the planning process has just begun and no decision has been made about whether the expansion would go forward. "We are not rushing to judgment," he said. "The questions are A, is there demand? And B, does it make sense?"

Boston is one of the most expensive cities in the country to park in . A report last year from Colliers International Property Consultants Inc., a real estate services firm, pegged the city's median daily parking rate at $31, second only to the Midtown and Downtown areas of New York City. With rising demand, Boston garages have recently started charging in 20-minute increments, rather than every 30 minutes, allowing them to capture a full day's rates in less than two hours. The Boston Common garage, which charges $6 for the first hour, is among the best deals in town.

Demand is being pushed by a strengthening economy and a limit on new parking spaces. Long ago, the US Environmental Protection Agency capped the number of parking spaces at Boston's downtown garages and lots at 35,303 to encourage commuters to use mass transportation.

Expanding the garage would be complicated, with approvals needed on city and state levels. Seth Kaplan, a senior attorney for the Conservation Law Foundation, said it would be "extremely difficult" to get approval on the federal parking freeze. He and others were quick to denounce expanding parking under the Common, a Boston icon.

"What kind of signal are you sending by expanding parking downtown?" asked Kaplan. "Should we be spending money for infrastructure that moves people out of their cars or for infrastructure for cars?"

Henry Lee, president of the Friends of the Public Garden, a preservation group that also focuses on Boston Common, called the plan "a terrible idea" that would destroy more than 50 trees. Shirley Kressel, president of the Boston Alliance of Neighborhoods, condemned the idea because it would bring more car traffic.

A city spokeswoman said Mayor Thomas M. Menino had not seen a plan for the expansion but was open to considering it. One city official suggested the city would expect some form of revenue sharing from any expansion.

The Common garage was built in the early 1960s after a long, unsuccessful court battle to stop it.

Discussion of expanding the garage grew out of a recent study by a state commission that concluded Boston could continue to support two convention centers, one in the Back Bay and one on the South Boston waterfront. The garage provides revenue that offsets the losses from the centers, which traditionally lose money but create economic development and visitor dollars.

After a long history of problems -- including the two-year shutdown in the early 1990s for a major renovation -- the Common garage has become a financial winner, returning $5 million a year in income.

Any expansion would occur just south of the current garage on the Boylston Street side of the Common under what are now two youth baseball fields. Rooney estimated that construction would take about two years and could be timed to coincide with the planned expansion of the Silver Line at Charles and Boylston streets. He did not have an estimate for the cost of the expansion.

Rooney said the new parking could serve the substantial new development expected in the Theater District, Chinatown and Park Square. Nearby surface parking lots at Hayward Place, adjacent the Ritz-Carlton, and in the Theater District are expected to disappear if long-delayed developments finally get underway.

"It is intriguing," Rooney said. "But we don't know whether or not we would go forward with it."

Steve Bailey can be reached at bailey@globe.com or at 617-929-2902.
Link (http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2007/06/05/plan_looks_to_double_common_garage_size/)

atlantaden
06-05-2007, 08:58 AM
Shirley Kressel, president of the Boston Alliance of Neighborhoods, condemned the idea because it would bring more car traffic

How did Shirley Kressel go from a sort of goofy neighborhood "gadfly" a few years ago to a respected neighborhood activist today?

PerfectHandle
06-05-2007, 09:05 AM
Shirley Kressel, president of the Boston Alliance of Neighborhoods, condemned the idea because it would bring more car traffic

How did Shirley Kressel go from a sort of goofy neighborhood "gadfly" a few years ago to a respected neighborhood activist today?

She didn't. She just gave herself a title.

Equilibria
06-05-2007, 03:40 PM
I'm not sure how the EPA can seriously support restrictions that discourage people from shopping and working downtown, thus encouraging malls, Walmart, and suburban sprawl.

Ron Newman
06-05-2007, 03:50 PM
I see no justification for adding these parking spaces to an area well-served by public transportation.

jass
06-05-2007, 06:21 PM
I see no justification for adding these parking spaces to an area well-served by public transportation.

I do. Have people who live in areas not served by the subway able to drive in, park, and use public transit for the day. Park in the common, walk around the north end, take the T back to the Pru, take the T back to the car.


Is Henry talking out of his ass when he says 50 trees would be destroyed? I dont see why they would, unless they plan on making this cut and cover, which would be stupid.

JimboJones
06-05-2007, 09:12 PM
Park in Malden. Or in Quincy. Or take commuter rail from No. Billerica or from Springfield.

Ron Newman
06-06-2007, 05:12 PM
The original garage construction inspired this poem (http://www.poets.org/viewmedia.php/prmMID/15280).

Beton Brut
06-06-2007, 05:31 PM
The original garage construction inspired this poem (http://www.poets.org/viewmedia.php/prmMID/15280).

I think the Civil Rights Movement was part of Lowell's inspiration as well...

Always a favorite of mine (Lowell and this particular poem)...It resonates more with each passing year...Back in 1994, when I was in grad school, I wrote a shitty little villanelle, "inspired" by the renovations of said garage...

Though out of context, I often think of this line while waiting for a D Line at Government Center or Park Street:

a savage servility
slides by on grease.

Bobby Digital
06-07-2007, 08:12 PM
Best news I've heard in a while. More parking..... YES! (no sarcasm)


Park in Malden. Or in Quincy. Or take commuter rail from No. Billerica or from Springfield.

Ok so what happens, say if you already live in quincy, you want to go out to the Orpheum, go out to a nice little restaurant nearby after, then have a couple drinks.... you would then get back to quincy how exactly? take a $30 dollar cab ride? or take a $5 dollar cab ride or WALK back to your car in the common and drive home.
Public transportation in this town STOPS people, it STOPS.

oh and it actually MAKES money? and benefits taxpayers? and its underground? Who exactly does this hurt?

the environment? well I like the environment, and im sorry its taking a beating, but its not my fault. (i gave $20 to Environmental Massachusetts and am now a card carrying member) Hopefully in 20 years I can take my hydrogen fuel cell Caddy in town and take out the wifey. But right now this is a hell of an idea.

KentXie
06-07-2007, 09:24 PM
^^ I agree. I know we are very anti-parking but in reality, Boston DOES NEED parking. No city can survive without them and expanding a parking lot in the center of the city would provide car drivers access to most part of the city.

Ron Newman
06-07-2007, 09:53 PM
Extending subway service until 2 am would eliminate this problem, and makes a lot more sense than adding parking spaces.

czsz
06-07-2007, 10:11 PM
Agree with Ron, especially because no, I don't want those people driving through the city after staying out drinking. A nice long T ride out to Quincy might help them sober up a bit.

belmont square
06-07-2007, 10:13 PM
Ok so what happens, say if you already live in quincy, you want to go out to the Orpheum, go out to a nice little restaurant nearby after, then have a couple drinks.... you would then get back to quincy how exactly? take a $30 dollar cab ride? or take a $5 dollar cab ride or WALK back to your car in the common and drive home.

Is there really not enough garage parking downtown to meet demand for nighttime use? I really don't know, but I don't recall ever seeing queues to get into the garages or lots downtown on Friday and Saturday nights.

KentXie
06-07-2007, 11:59 PM
You guys are missing the point. The garage is not just for use at night and not all people who drives to Boston for activities live near the T.

belmont square
06-08-2007, 08:34 AM
The public transportation system serving metropolitan Boston is a very effective way to transport anyone in the metro area into the areas served by this garage. Almost everyone within 45 miles of Boston has less than a 15 minute drive to commuter rail. If commuter rail frequency isn?t suitable for their travel needs, there is parking at the outer ends of the MBTA rapid transit lines. If transit logistics still don?t work for them, there is ample parking available for a price in central Boston. The market has set that price. Adding this garage only serves to lower the market price. I think it's fair to question whether providing cheaper parking for very time-sensitive travelers from distant suburbs should be a transportation priority for the city of Boston.

statler
06-08-2007, 08:47 AM
^^ Very well said! 8)

NIMBOB
06-08-2007, 06:16 PM
The public transportation system serving metropolitan Boston is a very effective way to transport anyone in the metro area into the areas served by this garage. Almost everyone within 45 miles of Boston has less than a 15 minute drive to commuter rail. If commuter rail frequency isn?t suitable for their travel needs, there is parking at the outer ends of the MBTA rapid transit lines. If transit logistics still don?t work for them, there is ample parking available for a price in central Boston. The market has set that price. Adding this garage only serves to lower the market price. I think it's fair to question whether providing cheaper parking for very time-sensitive travelers from distant suburbs should be a transportation priority for the city of Boston.

You do realize that the City/Convention Center Authority hopes to make money with this addition? They're not in this to make it easier/cheaper for people to drive into the city. Any increase in the supply of parking spaces they might create would only be a fraction of the spaces lost from the upcoming development on existing surface lots. Unless they plan on building a 20-story garage on top of the common, I don't think we're going to see a decrease in parking rates any time soon.

statler
06-08-2007, 07:56 PM
Any increase in the supply of parking spaces they might create would only be a fraction of the spaces lost from the upcoming development on existing surface lots.

Won't most/all surface spaces be replaced by garages incorporated into the new developments?

jass
06-09-2007, 01:11 AM
Any increase in the supply of parking spaces they might create would only be a fraction of the spaces lost from the upcoming development on existing surface lots.

Won't most/all surface spaces be replaced by garages incorporated into the new developments?

A new apartment building may have garage parking for the new residents. It will not however replace the 400 (example) spaces used by day parkers,

ablarc
06-09-2007, 06:13 AM
A new apartment building may have garage parking for the new residents. It will not however replace the 400 (example) spaces used by day parkers,
I guess the number allowed by the EPA's cap will be maintained but re-allocated.

Fan Pier area will shuck a lot of spaces; you could think of some of those as migrating to the Common (though I think this is a bad idea; imo the Common is already ruined by being all-too-obviously the roof of the existing garage.)

kz1000ps
06-09-2007, 10:06 AM
(...imo the Common is already ruined by being all-too-obviously the roof of the existing garage.)

Funny, when I encountered the Common for the first time ever I had no clue there was a garage underground; I just assumed the access buildings held bathrooms or information kiosks.

What makes it obvious to you? Or perhaps the more appropriate question would be: what existed in this spot before? Not a bare "parade ground" type area?

Padre Mike
06-09-2007, 07:44 PM
What you see is essentially what was there before the garage. Most of the Common had very few trees originally...it was common grazing land for cattle. In the 19th C, tree-lined malls were planted to encircle the Common. It was a favorite promenade for the residents of Beacon Hill, Park St. and Colonnade Row on Tremont St. (before commercial buildings took hold). Remnants of the malls can be seen along Boylston and Park Sts. The Tremont St. mall was particularly beautiful and lush, but was cut down in order to put in the first subway in America, from Park to Boylston. The Arlington St. and Charles St. malls have also suffered over the years.

When grazing became less important, the Common was planted with many trees. In fact, the Parkman Bandstand used to be surrounded by concentric circles of tall American elms...quite impressive, until they died of Dutch elm disease. Most were cut down forty years ago. One or two might be left, but imagine the canopy of leaves in that area; I remember complete shade in the summer.

Parts of the Charles St. mall were taken over to accommodate the ramps going into and out of the garage, and only recently replanted with trees. The fence was also restored on this side of the Common. But the parade ground remained just that...the place where the militia used to gather for marching maneuvers. To my knowledge, that section of the Common never had many trees for that reason.

The original kiosks for the garage were modernist/ugly buildings. When the garage was repaired, new and larger kiosks were built. The architect took design cues from the little stone building that used to be public toilets, but has long since been abandoned and is beginning to fall apart. In my opinion, the new kiosks lack imagination and are too repetitive in their design.

ablarc
06-09-2007, 10:40 PM
(...imo the Common is already ruined by being all-too-obviously the roof of the existing garage.)

Funny, when I encountered the Common for the first time ever I had no clue there was a garage underground; I just assumed the access buildings held bathrooms or information kiosks.

What makes it obvious to you? Or perhaps the more appropriate question would be: what existed in this spot before? Not a bare "parade ground" type area?
Before the garage, the Common had much more obviously natural topography and healthier grass. Also the trees were bigger, though as Padre Mike says, there weren't very many.

Google the aerial; you'll see the garage clearly.

Most folks aren't especially conscious that the topography is preternaturally even, but they may be sensitive to the general dreariness that results. The Common is dreary where the garage sits under it.

Bobby Digital
06-10-2007, 05:48 AM
Its like they say about statistics, you can get them to say whatever you want them to say.

Its a stretch to say the grass is unhealthy because of the parking garage. Grass needs very little soil to be healthy. Its called foot traffic and sun baking. Man what do you have against parking lots? Even underground ones!

Ron Newman
06-10-2007, 06:19 AM
The Parade Ground is meant to be treeless, and was so before the parking garage was built. It is there for large public gatherings such as Shakespeare in the Park, or a Landmarks Orchestra concert. It's currently closed for reseeding, because it has been used so much for these purposes in the last few years.

Bobby Digital
06-10-2007, 07:16 AM
The Parade Ground is meant to be treeless, and was so before the parking garage was built. It is there for large public gatherings such as Shakespeare in the Park, or a Landmarks Orchestra concert. It's currently closed for reseeding, because it has been used so much for these purposes in the last few years.

Right on. that was my next point but I wanted to be concise on my first one. Some people illogically ignore the importance of things serving a purpose. It's not all aesthetics.

JoeSixpack
07-29-2007, 11:06 PM
That garage also serves those who do happen to live in Beacon Hill, and other neighborhoods, as well as visitors to the area.

Going in town for Dinner and a show, then maybe having something after is an inconvenience for some, when the constraints of the T come into play.

I am for public transportation. But I also for the right drive someplace else after going to a show, other than back to the car by rail.

I happen to live in town. But I am not going to spend $35 on a cab from Cambridge or Somerville, if I want to see a rock show after a play. Or whatever the scenario.

We have a downtown, attempting to be revitalized, and more growth coming. That there is a train does not address the fact that there are too few spaces to park.

That the trains stop early is an issue. But just one.