|Workers at the junction of Route 131 and Haynes Street|
build a stone retaining wall at the corner. This wall is
one of several that will be along Route 131.
"Anonymous said...It is interesting no one has complained about that massive stone wall along 131. That could have been made from cement and save plenty of $$$$ to pay for the brick sidewalk. The gigantic stone wall serves no one but drivers who should have their eyes on the road and will never appreciate the stone work."
The comment above came galloping out of left field.
I let the comment ride, but after a couple of days it began to nag at me. I thought I had misunderstood the purpose of that "gigantic stone wall" on 131. I assumed its purpose was to retain the earth in that area so that it won't spill onto the roadway. It is a functional piece of architecture, and just so happens to have been built from stone. It was not built to solely make the area prettier with stone, it was made to make the area safer, and stone was the material chosen. The wall is also nice to look at for drivers, passengers, and pedestrians. I don't think drivers will loose control of their vehicle as they stare in awe at the beautiful masonry.
So, would a wall made from all concrete have saved us some money? I have no idea, but I like the stone wall, and I know I would not have liked a wall made of all concrete, but that's just me. I like the stone, the commenter likes concrete.
Different people have different tastes. Somethings cost more than other things, and some things can do a job as well as another, such as concrete and stone. It all comes down to taste, and willingness to pay for ones taste.
Now, the other day crews were building another stone retaining wall at the intersection of old Route 15 and Route 131. I don't think I would like a concrete wall there, or anywhere else on route 131. Stone is nice. Stone walls are New England, and that small wall looks great.
It's all a matter of taste.