MBTA officials are working feverishly to protect the newly-rebuilt Kenmore station from flooding. The Muddy River threatens a repeat of the 1996 disaster that disrupted Green Line operations for months.
The flooding of the Muddy River — and the huge cost it threatens to impose — exemplifies the catastrophic impact of decades of short-sighted greed disguised as public policy.
The Muddy River floods because of the immense damage we have done to the watershed that surrounds it. We see the same impact on Route 1 in Topsfield, caused by the similar damage we’ve caused to the Ipswich River watershed.
Just how bad does it have to get before we learn just how costly these failed tax policies actually are?
Please share widely!
Not enough federal funds are given to create the RIGHT kind of infrastructure to prevent natural disasters such as floods. It is the DUTY of government to take care of this, but they let it slide.
<
p>At this time, this seems to be because “moderate” US Senators will not give enough money for infrastructure projects (that would also create jobs), because they want to balance the budget.
<
p>In the Arkansas Democratic Primary for US Senator, progressive Lt. Gov Bill Halter is challenging Blanche Lincoln, the type of “moderate” I am talking about above.
<
p>If this nation does not invest in the future, we may just end up with rubble, muck, and mire, and nothing else for more than a century of hard work.
… improvements to infrastructure that is not very visible must seem like a tempting target for cuts every time the ‘tax cuts solve all problems’ people hit the airwaves. A much under-appreciated benefit to the Big Dig project was that the underground infrastructure in the area of the work was dealt with.
If it’s a federal problem — is it? Is the Muddy River subject to navigable waterway regulations? — and the Army Corp is in charge, no wonder. They are notoriously slow. They don’t lack for money but perhaps MA lacked the political clout in DC to earmark the project.
<
p>If it’s a state problem, why hasn’t the lege forced the issue? When was the last time a Republican governor could sustain a veto?
The Army Corps has been itching to get this project done — but lots of moving pieces all have to come together at the same time. Congress needs to appropriate money, as does the Commonwealth, Boston, Brookline, and perhaps others. The Corps needs to do their planning and testing, and have people available. There is analysis and process for ecology, historicity, roadway, railway, hydrology, amongst others. Multiple cities and towns, the DCR, MassHighway, and other agencies need to work together to form a Memorandum of Understanding and proceed.
<
p>The problem is precisely that there isn’t a single entity to blame — but that’s also by design because many agencies and jurisdictions have expertise which must be respected.
<
p>At different times in the process, different entities were “slow man”. Direct funding was the slow point during some periods, and during other periods an agency being overworked and too small caused slow downs.
<
p>I’m not arguing that doubling the available money would have made the project perfect and perfectly fast, but with the knowledge of hindsight it sure would have sped things up a bit.
but where does “tax policy” come into this?
Incompetent design, lack of individual responsibility and the MBTA’s screwed up spending priorities.
<
p>
But, that’s easy when you don’t have local knowledge or a genuine interest in solving problems.
<
p>The Muddy River is the drainage for much of Brookline, JP, and the surrounding area. It used to be an estuary, but that changed when the Charles was damned to prevent backflow. Because the slope of the Muddy River is so gentle, it is prone to problems with sediment, problems which are only increased due to the runoff of sand from the roadways in the watershed area. Compounding the problem is invasive species like phragmites, which choke the flow of the river. Additionally, as Fredrick Law Olmsted’s design was altered in the 1950s-90s by building more and more roads crossing this section of the Emerald Necklace, the culverts weren’t big enough for large floods and serve as choke points, thereby not providing sufficient capacity during high water times.
<
p>The D-Line happens to abut the Muddy River. The MBTA doesn’t own the park — it’s shared by Boston and Brookline. There’s a berm designed to keep floodwater out, but any break in the berm could put all of Kenmore Square station under water, as happened in the 1990s.
<
p>
<
p>There is a fix. The Army Corps of Engineers* has a $90+ million dollar plan to dredge the Muddy River from it’s mouth at the Charles upriver for a few miles. This project will
* dredge the pollution from the riverbed and dispose of it properly
* remove the invasive species which choke the river and crowd out native species
* restore Fredrick Law Olmsted’s historic landscape design
* mitigate (though one can never fully eliminate) flood risk to the hospitals, museums, universities, and homes nearby in Boston and Brookline
<
p>This project has been started already — the work by Charlesgate was performed a few years ago, and designs have been drawn to go up river, near the Sears Rotary (Landmark Center) and then farther upward. It’s a tricky project because it involves federal money, state money, quasi-independent agency land and access, city money, and town money.
<
p>Does it have to do with tax policy? Of course. With more federal money, the Corps could do more projects like this, clearing the nationwide backlog. With more state revenue, the state could provide a larger match, thereby enticing the Corps to move MA projects to the top of the queue. With more local money, Boston and Brookline could clean drains and sewers of sediment more often, thereby reducing the amount deposited in the Muddy River, and reducing the depreciation of water flow.
<
p>
<
p>The Army Corps project will restore the historic landscape design, clean up pollution, and dramatically reduce the risk of flooding, including MBTA flooding. While some incompetent design will be fixed (like the undersized culverts), the problem is not caused by incompetent design, but by the reality that the project to fix the problems will take years and about $100M dollars. It’s not caused by a lack of individual responsibility (which individual would you propose be responsible for the Muddy River, which spans a half dozen jurisdictions?), and it sure as hell isn’t caused by MBTA action nor inaction, spending or otherwise.
<
p>
<
p> * yeah, another link to Katrina…
Thank you for presenting the case so well.
<
p>My recollection is that the GOP has opposed each and every one of these needed efforts — just as they opposed similar efforts along the gulf coast prior to Katrina. I grant that there were significant corruption issues in the gulf coast mitigation efforts (misdirected funds, fraudulent contractors, that sort of thing); I am unaware of similar corruption in Massachusetts (yet).
<
p>I invite our other-winged participants to correct any mis-remembrances I may have.
<
p>Anybody want to enumerate watershed management investments that the Massachusetts GOP has aggressively promoted (or even not opposed)?
was placed on Republican Governor Weld’s desk by Democratic Governor Dukakis personally. That the fixes finally started to take place under Democratic Governor Patrick might very well be a coincidence.
Yes, surely just a coincidence (wink wink).
<
p>I’m sure it took more than fifteen years of eager planning to come up with a proposal. Right?
When people believe that it is possible to “starve the beast” via either lower taxes or refusing to increase taxes to meet increased expenses, while simultaneously vocally decrying any reduction in service, this virtually guarantees deferred maintenance. No one can see it for years and years, it is the preferred short-term solution for lack of revenue because roads, bridges, and dams don’t vote.
I appreciate the front-page visibility for this important topic.
Like the 2006 Mother Day’s storm, maybe this weather event was a 50 or 75 or 100 year storm. I don’t know the answer.
<
p>I do know that the Mother’s Day storm was a “40 to 150 year event”. This past storm was somewhat smaller.
<
p>It’s fiscally impossible to engineer every culvert to 100-year storm standards. Maybe the Green Line is sensitive to 25 year storms, and flooding is expected. New Orleans is built BELOW SEA LEVEL. Ya think a Cat 4 or 5 hurricane isn’t going to be a catastrophe?
<
p>I find the argument that tax policy is responsible for the Kenmore Square station flooding silly. What, then, isn’t the fault of tax policy? Lightning strikes? Cancer? Meteors careening towards earth?
<
p>We’re not talking about every culvert. We’re talking about culverts which, if insufficiently sized, can cause billions in damage to the area. Yeah, with a “B”. It’s fiscally irresponsible to not build each culvert along the Muddy River to 100-year storm standards, if not even a higher standard than that.
The Muddy River flooding has been sufficient to threaten the Kenmore Square station in 1996, 2006, and 2010. Perhaps stomv can sketch the statistical criteria for a “100 year event”, and what (if anything) it means that we’ve apparently had three of them in fifteen years.
<
p>As stomv pointed out below, the property damage that each Muddy River flood threatens is measured in the billions of dollars. We are not talking about “every culvert”. We’re talking about, for example, the insane 1940’s decision to route the Muddy River through a culvert in order to build a rotary (and parking lot) in front of the former Sears building at Landmark Center.
<
p>This work should have been done decades ago.
<
p>The situation with the Ipswich river in Topsfield is similar.
<
p>The GOP likes to talk about the “business climate”, and lately likes to bang the drum about “workers”. Here are some photos of Ipswich river flood damage from the 2006 storm — this is the human impact of “starving” the government “beast”. What do you think EBSCO thinks about the “business climate” of its Ipswich facility?
<
p>
EBSCO Publishing with Ipswich (Sylvania) Dam completely submerged in foreground. (Photo credit: Emily Levin)
<
p>
EBSCO Publishing with submerged fish ladder; water levels reached a newly constructed pedestrian footbridge. (Photo credit: Emily Levin)
<
p>
Floodwaters covered the parking lot of a real estate office. (Photo credit: Andy Agapow)
<
p>
Floodwaters reached a historic home in downtown Ipswich. (Photo credit: Emily Levin)
<
p>
Floodwaters submerged many parking lots and reached downtown buildings, causing evacuations. (Photo credit: Andy Agapow)
<
p>Here’s what the Ipswich River Watershed Association has to say about the “silly” argument that tax policy is responsible for such flooding (emphasis mine):
<
p>All of these things require planning, and — yes — responsible tax policy. They require competent government, funded well enough to conduct the designs, create plans, and craft the public policy initiatives that are required. They almost certainly require tax incentives and zoning changes — these in turn require coordination across local, state, and federal lines.
<
p>I ask you again: please offer the initiatives and proposals put forward by anybody in the Massachusetts GOP in the past, say thirty years, that address these watershed management issues.