OK, I know this isn’t the most pressing issue in the world right now, but it showed up again in the Sunday Globe (sorry, can’t find a link for some reason – it’s in the "Starts and Stops" column in the City/Region section, page B2), and it has been driving me crazy for years.
If you’ve ever tried to drive on Storrow Drive outbound between Leverett Circle and the Arlington Street exit on a day when there’s an event at the Hatch Shell, you have suffered through an agonizing traffic jam as cars are forced into one lane. Why? Because a small number of cars are permitted to park in the right lane of Storrow Drive before and during these events.
Obviously, allowing such parking makes no sense on its own terms – thousands and thousands of people attend these events, and the tiny number of cars that can fit in the "parking" lane does almost nothing to relieve the pressure on parking elsewhere in Boston for people who unaccountably choose to drive to an event at the Hatch Shell (come on people – take the T). And the traffic jam is horrible for lots of reasons. It is a tremendous inconvenience for the thousands of people who suffer through it during the several hours in which the right lane is closed; it wastes innumerable gallons of gas (at $3.50 a pop these days); and it pumps lots and lots of exhaust into the air. So why on earth does the Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR, f/k/a the MDC), allow this?
Here’s their explanation, as reported by the Globe article:
We allow about 80 cars to park there to keep a speeding car from careening into the crowd. It’s a public safety issue, not a convenience issue.
Ah. So DCR is intentionally creating a monster traffic jam, with all of the ill effects noted above, as a "public safety measure." And, of course, they never bother to tell anyone that they’re doing this, even though they know – in fact, they are hoping – that a massive traffic jam will result.
I’m sorry, but this is the STUPIDEST FUCKING THING I HAVE EVER HEARD. First, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem – when asked, the DCR spokesperson admitted that the "careening car" scenario has never happened. Of course, it’s not outside the realm of possibility that it might. But DCR’s solution to this perceived problem is about the worst possible one they could have devised. Here’s a better one: put up a better guard rail – that would protect the many people who jog or bike along the Esplanade even when there’s no Hatch Shell event. I’d almost even prefer that they just close Storrow Drive all together during Hatch Shell events, as long as they put up LOTS OF BIG SIGNS warning us that the closure is coming.
Not to worry, though. According to the Globe article, DCR is "working with Big Dig officials to replace two flip-down signs warning about Hatch Shell events that were removed before the construction at Leverett Circle." Wow – how pathetic is that? We have lots of big electronic signs NOW that can be programmed to say whatever you want. Just USE THEM!
The thing that really drives me nuts about this is how little DCR and the other highway agencies seem to care about how awful it is to get stuck in these kinds of traffic jams, particularly because if they would just bother to put up signs telling people what is going on, it would be so easy to avoid them. You may recall a similar thing that happened a little while ago when the tunnel between I-93 and Leverett Circle was closed for construction, they didn’t bother to tell anyone, and as a result it took nearly an hour to travel the length of the I-93 exit ramp. Again, thousands of people put to tremendous inconvenience, all of it avoidable if the highway dopes would just bother to tell us what’s going on.
patrick-abegg says
I always thought that it was handicapped parking, since the Esplanade doesn’t have great handicapped access.That at leaast would make some sense.This explanation doesn’t.
mtnbkr says
I agree and wrote to S&S yesterday suggesting better protection there and all along Storrow as there are other places where the biking/hiking/walking trail gets very close to traffic and is unprotected.
stomv says
To be honest, I don’t mind the parking, for a number of reasons related to safety and noise.That being said, I completely agree that they should be putting up signs on the streets, informing traffic reporters and local television, radio, and print news, and putting it up on government web pages.
ron-newman says
As a non-car-owner who frequently attends Hatch Shell events, I actually like having the parked cars there. They create a noise barrier between the highway and the musical event that I came to hear.
steve-garfield says
Thanks for writing about this.
charlestowngayguy says
A major pet peeve of mine. Tell Deval this issue could get him tens of thousands of votes (well maybe not that many)
the-troll says
There are alternatives for safety other then using parked cars as barriers. That is the lamest argument
stomv says
I don’t have different odds, except to point out that the sum of your odds far exceeds one. That is, 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/3 + … 1/12 = 2.325. In fact, since there is a nonzero chance that somebody not listed will be nominated (known as “the field”), the sum should really be strictly less than one.So, I suggest that if your sense for who is more likely than whom is on target, that the odds are far closer to:Alberto Gonzales: 4-1Emilio Garza: 7-1Edith Jones: 7-1Edith Clement: 10-1Michael Luttig: 15-1Samuel Alito: 15-1Michael McConnell: 15-1Priscilla Owen: 20-1Janice Rogers Brown: 25-1J. Harvie Wilkinson: 25-1Ted Olson: 50-1The Field: 200-3
ed says
David,both fill the “non-white guy” requirement;I spent hours and hours looking over the constitution of the US, but I couldn’t find this provision anywhere. Man, I must have picked up an out-of-date version or something.
the-troll says
This is beyond me David. But I am hapy with Roberts. I breatrhed a sigh of releif. I do not know what dems want. But beggars canot be choosie.
david says
Ed, my subtle use of “irony” must be the problem. Actually, there is no “non-white guy” requirement in the Constitution. Sorry to have caused any trouble! đŸ™‚
david says
Stomv: in my defense, I would note that, for example, horse-racing odds routinely add up to more than 1. Betting odds are not the same as probabilities. Please note, however: the odds given in this post are for entertainment value only! đŸ˜‰
the-troll says
I was gona tell her that david, but then I thought, “why bother?”
nate says
Thank you for the personal insight– it must have been quite an experience to go to lunch with each of the justices!