Bob comments:
1. Introductory.
2. History.
3. Neighbors Complain.
4. Town-Gown Meeting, February 7, 2006.
5. Cambridge Chronicle, February 9, 2006
6. Summary.
1. Introductory.
There was a time through about the mid-20th Century that a number of blocks closest the Charles River near Harvard Square were working class neighborhoods.
The only really significant remaining neighborhood housing area is Kerry Corner, and it is walled off by Harvard buildings in the first block or two.
A useful map is at http://www.cambridgema.gov/~CDD/cp/neigh/maps/nhood_map_7.pdf. This map may be blown up into great detail.
Kerry Corner is bounded generally on the east by Putnam Avenue and on the north by Mt. Auburn Street. The Putnam Avenue portion has a number of one block street between Putnam and Banks Street.
Running from Mt. Auburn Street, the first is the dog-leg end of Green Street which extends from MIT land. The second, connecting Putnam and Banks is Surrey Street, and then comes
The last street is Flagg Street which starts at Putnam and runs past Banks to Memorial Drive. East of the Memorial Drive end of Flagg Street is Corporal Burns Playground.
The extension of Green Street in Kerry Corner is called Grant Street. It runs two blocks, past Athens Street (one block, Mt. Auburn to Grant) and ends at DeWolfe Street.
The extension of Surrey is Cowperthwaite Street. Mid-block between Cowperthwaite and Grant Street to Mt. Auburn from Putnam to the midblock Athens to DeWolf is still neighborhood scale, like the area between Banks and Putnam Avenue.
2. History.
The zoning of most of the area is highly destructive.
In 1976, I saved the 18th Century building at the corner of Banks and Mt. Auburn from destruction by Harvard using fine print in the then valid condo conversion protections in the Cambridge Rent control ordinance.
In 1979, I downzoned the block between Banks Street and Putnam Avenue from Harvard Square zoning to neighborhood zoning and downzoned several parcels between Mt. Auburn and Mass. Ave. as other parts of a major downzoning which significantly protected East Harvard Square.
When we filed the 1979 downzoning we were deeply concerned about Kerry Corner and would have been pleased to include a downzoning for it as well, but there were very major political obstacles in which Roman Catholic residents were concerned about allowing Church development of a parcel on the east side of DeWolf Street.
Harvard then and now was the big threat. The repeated pitch from Harvard was always that they had no intention of construction before about 2005 with no comment after that. In the period starting about 2000, well intended people got shafted by people working closely with the Cambridge development department and a very destructive zoning change was passed.
Harvard is going forward with construction on Cowperthwaite and in a parking lot generally bounded by Grant and Banks.
Harvard's information on the plan can be found at: http://www.riversidehousing.harvard.edu/bgc_housing.php.
3. Neighbors Complain.
At a meeting on January 17, 2006, residents near the Cowperthwaite construction complained of apparently dangerous material being removed from the construction site. They informed people at the meeting that the two landfills receiving excavation materials were refusing to accept this material and that it was being piled on site pending decision on processing.
They complained that Harvard and the City of Cambridge refused to identify the problem or the extent of the problem.
4. Town-Gown Meeting, February 7, 2006.
At the town-gown meeting on February 7, 2006, I questioned two people who were at that meeting and either lived near the site or have been active working to protect the neighbors. The site is about one to two blocks from the Charles River. Both said they did not intend to raise the matter in comments. So I did. I hade a straight forward presentation similar to the immediately preceding paragraphs and asked for Harvard to identify the problem.
Harvard’s response was that Harvard knew of no such problem.
Neither of the neighborhood people commented on the problem.
5. Cambridge Chronicle, February 9, 2006
The Cambridge Chronicle, on January 9, 2006, reported that the neighbors were concerned about lack of availability of reports on dust from the site.
The Chronicle made no comment about pollutants.
6. Summary.
There is nothing in these various reports which is inconsistent with each other, although I am bewildered about the reticence of the neighbors at the town-gown meeting.
I personally know nothing.
