Hey, there! Log in / Register
Judge slaps BRA; says it can't turn shelter at end of Long Wharf into a restaurant
By adamg on Thu, 08/27/2015 - 9:45am
A shelter it was, a shelter it will stay, judge rules.
A federal judge ruled yesterday the BRA cannot lease the pavilion at the end of Long Wharf to a restaurant because its very own documents show the shelter was always intended to be part of a public park, not a structure available for a commercial lease.
The ruling by US District Court Judge Patti Saris, in what she called "the Long War for Long Wharf," is a victory for a group of North End residents who have been battling with the BRA over the pavilion for years. NorthEndWaterfront.com first reported the ruling this morning.
The ruling came in a lawsuit filed by the BRA against the National Park Service, which originally allowed a BRA request to lease the shelter for use as a restaurant, but then reversed its decision after a couple of retired Park Service workers dug up a 1980 map showing the BRA had included the end of Long Wharf as parkland in its application for federal funds to repair the wharf.
Among the BRA's arguments to overturn the park-service ruling: The BRA had no clue where that map came from and never agreed to it. The BRA said a 1983 map, which excluded the shelter - paid for by the MBTA to cover a Blue Line emergency exit - was the correct one to use.
But Sarris's ruling shows this is yet another case of the authoritity's shoddy control of paperwork over the decades. In fact, the judge writes, "the 1980 map was created by BRA and received by NPS as part of the Long Wharf [funding] grant application."
Yes, Sarris allowed, the park service reversed its original approval and, yes, it was initially negligent in relying on state officials, who said the pavilion was outside the boundaries of the original parkland designation. But the park service was not being arbitrary or capricious in reversing its approval - just scrupulous in reversing a mistake it had made:
Essentially, BRA suggests that NPS cannot reconsider its decisions even after discovering a mistake. But this is not the law. ...
[T]he Court finds that NPS changed its position in good faith after realizing a mistake. This is far from the paradigmatic case for judicial estoppel where a crafty litigant takes one calculated position early on in the litigation and then adroitly flip-flops to another when expedient. Quite to the contrary, NPS’s earlier position disadvantaged the government by surrendering Long Wharf Pavilion’s [Land and Water Conservation Fund] protections.
H/t NorthEndWaterfront.com
Neighborhoods:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
It's a victory for all of us
who enjoy the wharves and our public spaces in general.
Harborwalk encroachment is worse every year and this unnecessary restaurant would have only made it worse. Not to mention deposited more garbage for the rats to feed on.
Plus, what got me was that the BRA thought a restaurant would "help attract visitors to long wharf" .. when has a lack of visitors ever been a problem??
Disagree
That shelter has always seemed very underutilized and in fact out of place there. The idea of putting a small lounge with food there makes total sense and would make the end of the wharf much more of a destination. Whenever I have been out there, there are a few people taking in the view and they move along pretty quickly. Having a place to sit and have a drink and enjoy the view, THAT'S what I call win-win. Pity it can't happen.
I disagree
I disagree with you. See below.
There are plenty of other places to
"sit and have a drink and enjoy the view" along the waterfront. This area is packed with folks just enjoying life during the warmer months; not underutilized in one bit.
I am very happy with this outcome. Human beings need spaces too.
i don't disagree, actually
(except that the wharf is already a destination. its usually full during the summer and fall)
But why does it have to be a choice between the public space that we have and privatization for the profit of a few at the expense of everyone else who wants to visit?
I agree there should be more there, but it can all still be public space. Why not push for improvement of the shelter, with additional benches, tables, etc..?
There is absolutely no lack of food, beverage, and other sustenance in that area. I could see small, seasonal local food stands.. maybe. But a permanent brick-and-mortar building that just occupies space and will spill over onto the harborwalk (ahem, Boston Harbor Hotel)? nothanks.
shhhhhhh
It's nice to have a spot void of restaurants and play areas and all other such. Sitting far out int he harbour and enjoying the quiet is very nice...
Not a "Small Lounge"
This was not a “small lounge.” It was a 220-seat bar/restaurant which would have been open until 1:00 am. It was not confined to the shade pavilion but incorporated it and extended out on both sides. It also had outdoor seating. So the area left for the public to enjoy would have been greatly diminished. Only a person who does not go there often would say that there are few people and that they move along quickly. There are always lots of people sitting there enjoying the harbor without having to pay anything for the privilege. With some tables and chairs in the shade pavilion, even more people could enjoy it. But that is not the BRA’s idea of “activation.”
Wow, looks like the agressive
Wow, looks like the agressive ( "We can build anything we want to in this town and no one will stop us" BRA) got slapped in the face by a Judge. "It was a shelter, and it remains a shelter".
Power of the people who live nearby banded together, is what abolished this project.
BRA , what are thinking, build a high rise on the land with a restaurant on first floor and affordable condos on top.
Always good to see
the BRA's stupid decisions shot down. Few and far between, but small victories, and an arguably lesser known Boston landmark lives on.
The BRA had no clue where
The BRA seems to have a problem with maintaining maps and documents. Were they not the same folks who "lost" the document that obligated the Structure Formerly Known as The Hancock building to maintain an observation deck?
When will the BRA be disbanded? Why does a non-elected agency that is not obligated to respond to voters have the power of eminent domain? Only an elected body answerable to the electorate should have that power. Granted the apathy and lack of electoral competition does not make for a useful or genuinely representative City Council. But the power to pull a person's property with a with a wham bam, thank you mam, here's your check is tyranny.
I have good news
We elected a mayor who ran on a promise to clarify the function and transparency of the BRA, to make it work for the city of Boston not the other way around.
doh!
Actually, I'll Walsh a few more years on this - reforming the BRA is not a quick or easy process given its hydra-like nature.
In all fairness
Marty did kind of clean house at the BRA when he first took office. And hasn't done much of anything beyond pissing off a good chunk of the city since.
We elected a mayor who ran on
However, in this case it took a Judge to overturn a BRA decision, not Marty's reform efforts.
Lost Observation Deck
I've heard that story about the Hancock's observation deck before, and it makes me tremendously disappointed if it's true. We have the Pru, and the Custom House, but I think more observation decks are a good thing, and it saddens me to think that someone's incompetence or greed cost the whole city one.
Wait...
The Custom House has an observation deck open to the public?!
Yes, but
it doesn't seem to be publicized, and I think that the hours are limited, 1-3 p.m. maybe. I also think you are escorted up. I keep thinking of going some day, but haven't made it yet. I hope if anyone knows more, they'll chime in.
I was told it's only for guests
This was last year. Maybe the rules have changed?
Its always been open to the
Its always been open to the public. Last time I went you had to pay a $3 forced donation and you could only go up at 3pm (or was it 1pm?) when escorted (but then stay as long as you wanted).
Yes there is one at Custom House
But it's tiny, outdoors, and scares the heck out of me.
Chris
Let's so do this!!!
I'd be in.
I'm sure the view can't be THAT amazing, especially considering the view I have from home...for a few more days. But I'd do it just to say I've been up there. I'll look into it after the move.
Double check
I think the top is under construction right now, last time I saw it it was covered in scaffolding/tarps. Not sure if that includes the obs. deck, but maybe call ahead to be sure.
If my memory serves me correctly...
The observation deck at 200 Clarendon/The Hancock Tower only showed one side of Boston. The Prudential has a 360 degree view... which is much better IMHO.
Have to check out this Custom House one. Very curious!
BRA a9n't the only department
Boston Water and Sewer does not have full and complete maps of all pipes and storm drains either, and so I found out a few years ago.
It seems back before WWI there were a number of sewers and storm drains that were added to the official city maps but a few were deemed to be privately constructed and owned, and the responsibility of the owner, who in many cases are long-since passed away, and new property owners may not know they have a storm drain on their land, or that they are responsible for them.
Indeed, when the city or a private property owner digs these days, Dig Safe may not find everything, especially since "state of the art" at the turn of the century was brick and mortar, and not metal pipes that show up with Dig Safe equipment.
This writer has spoken in development meetings to explain the old drains and only after using ground radar or sonar did they find things. Indeed all you need to do is reference some of the old Bromley maps of the city. You can find them at Ward Maps on line.
You may also be interested to know that the City Archives also have very little information on roadway intersections that are named after WWI veterans. We've all seen these commemorative signs at some street corners, but actually finding out who these people were is almost impossible. And so I found when researching one of my ancestors.
So... BRA doesn't have old files? Sure.
Yes, but the BRA drafted the construction agreement!
The BRA was established in 1957. The Hancock Tower was built in 1976.
Do the math.
"Redevelopment"
Great news.
Every little speck of land does not need to be "redeveloped".
Thank freakin god
And the judge. And the citizens of the North End that led the fight. Nothing is sacred to the BRA. Nothing. Long Wharf is one of my favorite places in the city. I have taken so many out of town visitors there and we just sit and watch the harbor activity, the people, the birds, the planes etc. So tired of the BRA determining that if it doesn't cater to rich people, then it must not be worth having around. They truly do have their heads up the you know where, and are completely out of touch with the people of Boston.
HA HA!!
.
Great News
I'm often over there waiting for the Fast Ferry on weekends. It's such a nice tranquil space. I've gone down there in the late fall and sat there when there's virtually no tourists. I'm glad to see it won't be turned into yet another restaurant and will remain a park.
And the BRA is wrong, that area during the summer is always chocked full of tourists, it's one of the better, and more easily accessible spots of the harbor. You can see all the yachts and get a great view of Eastie and many other harbor points.
Everything you say is correct, but...
How many of those people are UNDER the shelter? Probably very few unless it's raining. The end of the wharf is a great place, but that space under the shelter is really wasted.....not in the "we must fill every inch of public space" kind of way. But as long as they bothered to build this structure, it's weird to not use it.
Oh, for pete's sake...
I see many folks "under the shelter", when I visit, and really does it matter? Nit pick much?
What, do you wish it to be crammed to the fish gills with people standing around looking at each other? People sit outside near the water on sunny days; if they want shade they sit inside the shelter.
Geez.
Shade is essential.
I'm amazed people wallow in such a deep abstraction swamp that they forgot we need shade on hot days.
The sun is particularly lethal if you are old. This year marks the first time I've physically experienced sun exposure with two near encounters with heat stroke. One bout effected my liver for a couple of days.
I was making video over at Charles River Peninsula in Needham yesterday and much of the excursion involved seeking the shaded trails and moving from one shade stretch to next with raging heat glare between each.
I'll be so psyched when this unusually vicious summer finally subsides.
unusually vicious summer? seriously?
have you lived here long?
this has been an unusually beautiful summer, by Boston stds and my experiences over the past 50 years.
what am I missing here?
Highest temp July on record.
And August was no prize either, while September has a couple of potential 90 degree days.
I've only been here since 1955, so I may not have a finger tip sweep sense of the season.
Here's one report. http://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2015/08/20/july-record-warm/32045131/
I generally recall July having a respectable number of days below 80.
I check it all every day to plan trips as my video gear gets stressed above 80. When I head out, it usually involves 5 to 7 mile video hikes. It probably makes a difference if your day time is mainly spent outside or in a climate controlled cubicle.
Age is another factor and I'm a pasty white northern euromutt without a lot of heat tolerance DNA.
I gotta call you out on that
According to the National Weather Service, Boston was a scant half degree warmer than normal in July, with 10 days when Logan didn't top 80 (including 3 days when 70 wasn't hit) versus 4 days surpassing 90. Heck, the meteorologists on TV were close to brain explosions with the idea that we were never going to hit 90 (which we did on the 19th). In the past 30 years, the hottest July was 1994, when the average temperature was over 4 degrees warmer than the 95 year average now. God, that was a hot summer.
But mind you, that is only one weather station. That said, the weather station is within 2 miles of Long Wharf, separated by water.
(disclosure, I hate the heat, which leads me to love the shade. Hooray for shade at the end of Long Wharf.)
Call away.
If you observe closely, Logan numbers are always a few degrees lower because it sticks out into the Harbor.
Inland is three or for degrees warmer except for the onset of winter when the water factor makes Logan warmer. We don't live at Logan. And most of us down live on the waterfront. We live in sweaty roasting cauldrons like Hyde Park and Somerville to name a few.
Those cool days coincided with storms. When a storm front moves in it usually brings cooler air until it passes.This year it snapped right back to 80 plus. Show me the July days when it was sunny and 70.
The temp record was for the whole planet and Boston was luckier than Iran.
The water temps were bad too. Hence the influx of sharks as CBS local noted. They like warm water.
http://boston.cbslocal.com/2015/08/10/researchers-spot-more-than-a-dozen...
From your beloved Globe we have an item on Plymouth.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/08/11/high-water-temperatures-for...
It's funny to think you were roused from your torpor for this. I hope you weren't expecting a reward.
Now, let us hope you find some more triumphant rightness as you rummage through the detritus of comment land looking for status scraps.
https://youtu.be/6bERuycEbNs
So, the National Weather Service lied?
I mean, are you saying they just made up numbers?
Are you saying that some how, less than 2 miles away and also along the water, atmospheric conditions at Long Wharf acted different than they have in recent past?
I guess you missed the part where I noted that I was discussing a single data point, not the entirety of the world. Also, we were discussing air temperature, not water temperature. Water temperature behaves differently than air temperature. If you want, I can track down some articles on this for you.
But riddle me this, if NWS Boston just makes up their numbers, wouldn't that mean that every other weather station could just be making up numbers, too?
No Logan is just useless for where you live.
The inland office is in Taunton for the NWS.
They have stations everywhere as you can readily look up. Long wharf wasn't more than a side note in the broader point that it was hot and awful nearly every day away from the immediate coast. I'm sure it was cool and wonderful there.
When I pull up NWS or Weather Underground every day, I'm looking for conditions where I'm going, not on the ass end of Logan.
I nearly got heat stroke on May 26th up in the Burns Wildlife Management Area. It hit the 80s and stayed there. Early June was better and then it just took off. My second heat damage incident happened on along the Wenham Canal on July 24th.
Conditions have been sucky but are improving.
But not useless for Long Wharf
Yes, in inland Roslindale the temps tend to be a few degrees higher, but the trend is there regardless. Sadly, Blue Hill does not provide the same data, so we are left with Worcester and Providence as our nearest comparison. They also did not have extremes in July.
Now, were is an overall weather discussion, rather than Long Wharf, yes, for the entire planet, it was very warm, but in our small portion of the planet, not so much.
but is it wasted?
Thats a matter of opinion. Think of it this way. Let's take the water out of the picture and make this any town's "Common" here in MA. Most have a gazebo.. do people sit in there all the time? No. But it's pretty, and it is somewhat used. Same here.
The problem I have with this proposal is that the BRA wants to give up a highly sought valuable structure for profit. Believe what you want, but this is the main reason why they want to do this. What restaurateur wouldn't want a 180 degree view of the water from his restaurant? Very few. The BRA wanted to make a buck, and knew they could until the NPS said other wise.
Also there's a TON of places to eat on the wharf. BHC has a place, there's a few places in Long Wharf itself (the hotel, and the buildings after). And stuff on the other side that faces Christopher Columbus Park. And of course, Fanueil Hall across the greenway has more food places than people can count. Did this area really need yet another place to get food? No, it didn't. So leave it alone .
Apples and Oranges
We can all agree that a restaurant on the wharf is not filling an urgent need to feed people who otherwise can't find a morsel. The food vendors at Quincy market are really a red herring in this discussion.
This "gazebo" is not in the middle of the common, so it's not fair to remove the harbor from the equation. A small food operation with drinks - would not be detrimental to the rest of the area on the end of the wharf.
And so the city makes money. Hurrah for that! As a tax payer (sorry, I hate when people drag that line out...) I'm happy to see the city bringing in additional revenue from non-tax sources. Why is it a bad thing for the BRA to make money?
I didn't say that
But the BRA makes money elsewhere.. see the parking garage next to my office building for an example of how the BRA is gonna make bank on stuff. The BRA has other interests to make money that don't require taking over parkland to do so.
Leave well enough alone is my point. Just because it doesn't have hundreds of people standing there every day doesn't mean it isn't wanted or used.
You missed my point about the common. I didn't mean Boston Common, but many towns in MA have commons with gazebos on them. Many are hardly used but they aren't converted to asandwich shop or a dunkin donuts because of their lack of use. I think that's my point.
Absolutely right
The problem is that no one can actually sit under the shelter because there are no benches except along the very outside overhang nearest the water. A restaurant may not have been the answer but a better use of the space could be accomplished with a little effort. I would love for this space actually provide me with a bit of shade while I eat my lunch on a hot summer day.
That's just what I was
That's just what I was thinking. The space is pretty much useless without seating. If they had some tables and chairs it would be a nice place to sit and relax or have lunch and enjoy the view.
the BRA could put in a bench and chairs
(I am one of the "North End Ten".) I agree that seating would improve the shade shelter. The BRA owns the whole park, and could easily install seating (a picnic table, say). However, leaving the area less desirable supports the BRA's argument for a restaurant. A good solution would be to turn over the area to the city parks agency, and let them maintain it as a public park.
How to use that shelter
What the above commenter said.
Find out where the Greenway Conservancy and the mayor's office bought those plastic Adirondack chairs for the Greenway and City Hall Plaza, get some and toss them into the shelter for us Pasty-Americans who enjoy a good harbor view but don't want to turn into lobsters on the sun-baked plaza there.
City Hall Adirondacks are beong put to good use by the homeless
I walk thru City Hall plaza every morning and am still pleasantly surprised when I see a group of homeless vets from the shelter relaxing in such great style.
Monetize
Where does all the $ that comes from monetizing everything, no matter how trivial or sentimental, end up? Who's pockets are being lined? Who's paying for their kids extremely expensive private school education, with the bonuses they make by monetizing everything under the sun? Follow the $ trail.
Good for the judge who got tough on the BRA!
What right does the BRA have to turn a shelter for the homeless into a restaurant? No right at all, as far as I'm concerned!
Actually, BRA staffers prefer
Actually, BRA staffers prefer the term "housing challenged" - no joke! And the homeless problem in our city is no joke either. There are many things which should be done to address it but handing over public open space to restaurant operators is not one of them.