The project-by-project approach to the containment of rising sea levels is fundamentally flawed (“On climate projects, a break in the action: Real estate delays underscore risks of relying on the private sector,” Page A1, April 7). When I was a city planner in northern Nevada 45 years ago, we prohibited this methodology in flood-prone areas. The logic behind our approach was simple: The water has to go somewhere. If it doesn’t go on your property, it has to go somewhere else. What may be the best solution for your property may lead to a significantly worse outcome for your neighbor.
The first step is to create a comprehensive plan for Boston Harbor and its environs. Developers would then construct water control projects to these specifications. It would incentivize landowners to do their share, because if they don’t, they will get other people’s water. This would lead to the best and fairest result for the entire community.