Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [MysticCrossing] Mystic Master Plan

Expand Messages
  • Gillespie, Jason
    DCR, at the time MDC, did put out a Request for Responses in October of 2002 that closed in November of 2003 for development of a Mystic River Comprehensive
    Message 1 of 4 , Feb 3, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      DCR, at the time MDC, did put out a Request for Responses in October of 2002
      that closed in November of 2003 for development of a Mystic River
      Comprehensive Master Plan. The RFR amount was for an estimated $250,000.
      Bids were accepted, but the project was not awarded to my knowledge.

      See the following link to the original RFR notice.

      http://www.comm-pass.com/Comm-PASS/Scripts/xdoc_view.idc?doc_id=014204

      -----Original Message-----
      From: DavidD/JaneS [mailto:davdjans@...]
      Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2004 11:36 AM
      To: MysticCrossing@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [MysticCrossing] Re: Sister Bridges (was Fact Sheet on
      Mystic Station Settlement - Earhart Dam B


      Greetings--

      It is very disturbing to hear that the DCR Mystic Master Plan is not in
      process. This Master Plan process started just about four years ago when
      the Mystic View Task Force (MVTF) invited someone from the MDC to speak
      at our monthly meeting, March 2000. The person who spoke was Dan
      Driscoll. He so inspired us that even though the time was very short,
      MVTF contacted the representative for Assembly Square, Timothy Toomey,
      to put in a line item for a master plan for the lower Mystic. Dan
      Driscoll worked with MVTF to obtain a dollar amount. Rep. Toomey and his
      staff worked hard on gaining passage. He had the support of the
      Somerville delegation. Charles Shannon worked for passage on the Senate
      side. Gov. Celluci vetoed the line item, but the veto was overridden.

      For some reason the MDC did not act right away, and the $250,000 was
      lost. It then had to be retrieved. MVTF learned the lesson that nothing
      should taken for granted. MVTF arranged a meeting with Julia O'Brien,
      MDC Director of Planning, to make sure that everything was back on
      track. A staff person from Rep. Toomey's office attended. Also, Rep.
      Jehlen was there. Below is a letter to editor of The Boston Globe that
      I wrote back in June 2000 that pertains this subject.

      Is there some kind of politics involved at the state level now?

      --Jane Sauer

      6/24/00
      The Boston Globe
      Letter to the Editor
      "Somerville parkland"
      by Jane Sauer

      I read with interest the June 16 editorial, "Greening the Neponset,"
      about the Pope John Paul II Park under MDC jurisdiction, completed with
      $8 million in state operating funds.

      There is poorly maintained MDC parkland on the Mystic River in the
      Assembly Square area of Somerville, New England's most densely populated
      city. With over 18,000 people per square mile, we are 50% more densely
      populated than Boston. A recent survey of the western portion of this
      MDC parkland found that four sections of the river overlook railings
      were missing, a once decrepit picnic table had vanished, none of the
      eight benches were usable, four had only the damaged concrete supports
      remaining, and there were no trash receptacles. Wouldn't it be fair if
      Somerville's 75,000 residents had a few functioning benches to sit on so
      we could enjoy this small stretch of riverfront?

      The problem is that the MDC now has to operate largely through line
      items in the state budget, and not according to the overall maintenance
      and capital improvement needs of the parklands it oversees. It is time
      to change the system.

      Note. As often happens this letter was cut by The Boston Globe.
      Unfortunately the last paragraph was also deleted, leaving out an
      important point.


      Lisa Brukilacchio wrote:

      >Bryce- thanks for pointing out that it is the underpassages that are needed
      >for safe pedestrian and bike access at both 28 and 99--and the importance
      of
      >continuing to work closely with the municipalities to address these two
      >sisters.
      >
      >Re the DCR Mystic Master Plan, at the Mystic Basin Team meeting on
      Thursday,
      >it sounded as if the plan hit a snag and is NOT in progress. Seems that Dan
      >Driscoll is working hard to revive it, so it was suggested that supporting
      >this planning process itself should be a major emphasis of communication
      >with the state at this time, in order to leverage the maximum benefits and
      >to support our long term vision of improved public access.
      >
      >Lisa Brukilacchio
      >
      >-----Original Message-----
      >From: Bryce Nesbitt [mailto:bryce1@...]
      >Sent: Sunday, February 01, 2004 1:39 AM
      >To: MysticCrossing@yahoogroups.com
      >Subject: [MysticCrossing] Re: Sister Bridges (was Fact Sheet on Mystic
      >Station Settlement - Earhart Dam B
      >
      >
      >View the "Connections.gif" graphic in the files section at
      >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MysticCrossing/
      >
      >At the route 99 and route 28 bridges the big problem is not crossing
      >the river, but staying on the same side of the river.
      >
      >Medford residents can be especially helpful by monitoring the progress
      >of the new Department of Conservation & Recreation master plan for the
      >Mystic River, which is underway. The project boundaries are from the
      >Route 99 bridge to the confluence of Alewife Brook.
      >
      > -Bryce
      >
      >
      >--- In MysticCrossing@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Mela" <r.mela@c...> wrote:
      >
      >
      >>Where is information on the coalition and the master plan available?
      >>Do you have/need Medford residents involved?
      >>
      >>--- In MysticCrossing@yahoogroups.com, "Bhupesh Patel" <bhupes@m...>
      >>wrote:
      >>
      >>
      >>>Hey Somerville bikers and committee,
      >>>Great news...
      >>>As I have mentioned at our meetings there is a large Mystic River
      >>>
      >>>
      >>Coalition from several groups and cities and we have been pushing for
      >>what I call the "three sister bridges" to be a connected for
      >>pedestrians and bicyclists across the Mystic River.
      >>
      >>
      >>>The "three sisters" are-
      >>> Route 28
      >>> Amelia Earhart Dam
      >>> Route 99
      >>>Well check out this fact sheet attached.
      >>>By the way they are also marked on our own "masterplan" for bike
      >>>
      >>>
      >routes.
      >
      >
      >>>Bhupesh
      >>>
      >>>
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >To visit your group on the web, go to:
      > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MysticCrossing/
      >
      >To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > MysticCrossing-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
      > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >To visit your group on the web, go to:
      > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MysticCrossing/
      >
      >To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > MysticCrossing-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
      > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >







      Yahoo! Groups Links

      To visit your group on the web, go to:
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MysticCrossing/

      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      MysticCrossing-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
      http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    • Doug Mink
      ... Last summer and fall, a lot of MDC funding was frozen in the merger into the DCR. Program managers sometimes found out that they had lost the funding
      Message 2 of 4 , Feb 3, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Jason Gillespie wrote:
        >
        > DCR, at the time MDC, did put out a Request for Responses in October of 2002
        > that closed in November of 2003 for development of a Mystic River
        > Comprehensive Master Plan. The RFR amount was for an estimated $250,000.
        > Bids were accepted, but the project was not awarded to my knowledge.

        Last summer and fall, a lot of MDC funding was frozen in the merger into
        the DCR. Program managers sometimes found out that they had lost the
        funding weeks after it happened. As of the beginning of January, there
        were no permanent appointees in DCR immediately below the head of the
        agency, and no new projects (or at least vanishingly few) were being
        initiated. Appointments are supposed to be made by spring. The
        Neponset, where I volunteer, lost several projects. The money may
        be gone permanently, but it is possible that the legislators who got
        it in the first place can wrench it free (though I believe that one
        of the goals of the Romney adminstrations merger of DEM and MDC was
        to remove the hand of the legislaturefrom agency decisions).

        -Doug Mink
      • Bryce W Nesbitt
        Another area project (the Watertown Branch Rail Trail) was stalled for similar reasons. Everything was a go , but the issuing of the notice to proceed.
        Message 3 of 4 , Feb 3, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          Another area project (the Watertown Branch Rail Trail) was stalled for
          similar reasons. Everything was a "go", but the issuing of the notice
          to proceed. Apparently the DCR had let go the contract administrator,
          but he came back as a contractor two days a week.

          The MDC had indeed become dysfunctional, and all the meddling by the
          legislature was a sign of that sickness. When you can't get a pothole
          fixed without calling a Senator, something is wrong. The legislative
          micro-management of the MDC/DCR is something I hope will fade away.

          -Bryce

          Doug Mink wrote:

          >
          >Last summer and fall, a lot of MDC funding was frozen in the merger into
          >the DCR. Program managers sometimes found out that they had lost the
          >funding weeks after it happened. As of the beginning of January, there
          >were no permanent appointees in DCR immediately below the head of the
          >agency, and no new projects (or at least vanishingly few) were being
          >initiated. Appointments are supposed to be made by spring. The
          >Neponset, where I volunteer, lost several projects. The money may
          >be gone permanently, but it is possible that the legislators who got
          >it in the first place can wrench it free (though I believe that one
          >of the goals of the Romney adminstrations merger of DEM and MDC was
          >to remove the hand of the legislaturefrom agency decisions).
          >
          >-Doug Mink
          >
          >
          >
        • Doug Mink
          ... Among other things, the former MDC Commissioner, who seemed to be too politically well-connected to be removed without removing his entire agency, was
          Message 4 of 4 , Feb 3, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            Bryce W Nesbitt wrote:
            > The MDC had indeed become dysfunctional, and all the meddling by the
            > legislature was a sign of that sickness. When you can't get a pothole
            > fixed without calling a Senator, something is wrong. The legislative
            > micro-management of the MDC/DCR is something I hope will fade away.

            Among other things, the former MDC Commissioner, who seemed to be too
            politically well-connected to be removed without removing his entire
            agency, was opposed to masterplans and said so in a public forum.

            The legislative micromanagement existed because the MDC never was
            able to connect with its own constituents, and greenspace constituents
            have never (at least in my almost 25 years of involvement in Mass.)
            been able to muster enough political power to force adequate funding
            of either the DEM or the MDC. If the new DCR communicates adequately
            with park users and advocates (who do not necessarily have the same
            interests) and then can do what it says it will do, no legislative
            involvement will be needed. If the DCR does not (or is not allowed to)
            respond to its constituents, our only choice will be to ask legislators
            to intervene.

            -Doug Mink
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.