Recent delays on the Storrow Drive project have given opponents of the plan to reroute traffic onto the Esplanade additional time to formulate more creative and hopefully effective strategies to combat incursions on this vital and popular public space.

Designating the Charles River waterfront a landmark makes perfectly good sense, and should actually have been done long ago.  The development of the waterfront as a recreational preserve dates back nearly a hundred years, after all.  The Esplanade is part of seventeen miles of linear recreation space, and more than the Public Garden or the Common, is Boston's Central Park.

At issue is much more than just the disruption of life along the Esplanade.  At issue is the idea that the life of those living in the city should always, as a matter of course, take a back seat to those moving through it.  At issue is the sense of a city as a place to actually be.  And maybe even how to be in a city. And certainly how best to move through a city while respecting that a city is ideally a place to be in as well as to move through.

Progressive ways to address these quality of life issues include greater commitment to and investment in public transportation systems that are comprehensive and efficient (merely functional would be a huge step forward for Metro Boston), and investing in infrastructure that gives equal space to alternative modes of transportation.

A significant "congestion charge," like the one London's Ken Livingston introduced back in 2003 (and plans to increase in '09) with 100% of proceeds going to real, measurable improvements to mass transit in Metro Boston is not unrealistic or impossible to implement, but it would take overthrowing Il Nino.  I wonder if we could recruit Livingston?

Because Menino is a symbol—at least in this realm—of the spiral of poor choices lack of visionary leadership leads to in situations where it is sorely needed.  Instead of kvetching against the City Hall Building—what's done is done—and planning thousand-foot penis extensions, he should be working on making Boston a more livable place for its residents. 

Because the saga of Storrow Drive is about how poor choices lead to poorer and poorer ones on down the line.  Storrow Drive was never meant to be a shortcut through Back Bay.  Poor transportation choices, bad priorities, and lack of consideration for those who make the city their home have led to infrastructure that does not serve the city itself as a livable environment.

We're emerging from a half-century in which flight from the city was the norm.  You can see the scars of this disregard for city neighborhoods everywhere in them, as they were sacrificed to escape routes from them.  A new vision is needed for Boston, and quick fixes to Storrow Drive every few years that disrupt the life of Back Bay and destroy—even if temporarily—a haven that has taken generations now to build should not be part of it. Period.

As long as road construction and automobile transportation remain a priority over conservation and alternative and public transportation in Boston, we'll be fighting these battles forever.  And in the end, no one wins the war.