Saturday, August 31, 2013
Sunday, August 25, 2013
Charles River, Cambridge, MA, USA: Cambridge Machine “Victory” Near the Grand Junction Railroad.
1. Introduction.
2. Attack on transit related zoning rebuffed.
3. The history of the zoning.
4. Bikeway.
5. Objection to lies on the Grand Junction alternatives.
6. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
1. Introduction.
This is one of those many points which are related to the ongoing outrages on the Charles River, but you really need to know what you are doing to realize it.
I will try to put things in context without overwhelming. Please send questions to boblat@yahoo.com.
2. Attack on transit related zoning rebuffed.
This is a cropped satellite photo with added language from a state filing in 2006. The Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese is at the bottom left of the photo. At the top of the photo, under the “p” in Cambridgeport, is 240 Sidney Street.
The first two photos, below, are from Sidney first looking at 240 Sidney Street, then across the street. The third photo shows Fullmore Park across the street and neighboring housing. The third photo will be clearer by clicking on it and blowing up the view. Fullmore Park is in the middle of the block shown on the right of the middle photo. The large tree sticking out is Fullmore Park.
Neighbors of 240 Sidney Street in Cambridge first learned that their homes were going to be overwhelmed with a massive project at 240 Sidney Street when the developer sought relief from zoning requirements. The developer is building way out of scale with the existing neighborhood, and he wanted to provide less than the parking required under zoning law.
The zoning is based on the future construction of a rapid transit station close to the project, but the station is not coming and key representations by city staff concerning that station when the zoning was passed were blatantly false, and continue to be blatantly false.
I have reported on this zoning and on the proposed zoning amendment submitted by the neighbors which would have zoned that block so that it fits in with the neighborhood.
I warned the petitioners to avoid the “neighborhood association” because there are people in the group who are their proven enemies.
Recently, the neighbors have announced a “compromise” which fits in with the mentality of the Cambridge Machine. The good guys get to declare victory and the developers get their project.
I am not going to do the major effort needed to do a full review. I will give a brief summary.
Basically, the project has been required to provide the parking required under the zoning ordinance. The number of units proposed has been reduced but the number of units with more bedrooms has been increased. This sounds like the usual con games. The same amount of construction but with a slightly more politically correct configuration.
When dealing with the Cambridge Machine, the fully predictable con is to compromise, compromise, compromise, but do it in such a manner that the people concerned about the neighborhood are dealing with folks who will not meaningfully compromise and / or are not in a position to meaningfully compromise.
My first advice to zoning change drafters has always been to only compromise with the City Council because the City Council is the only entity in a meaningful position to provide anything.
The Cambridge Machine’s standard pitch is to avoid talking with the only people likely to deliver, the City Council and negotiate, negotiate, negotiate with those who are delivering nothing or next to nothing.
Naturally, you can never be positive just which “friend” was crucial in the decision, or if the petitioners simply got talked into it by the developers. But there is a very standard pattern.
It is a shame. This parcel and this zoning change could have been crucial, but the con artists are very strongly visible.
3. The history of the zoning.
The key to this zoning is the subway proposal known as the “Urban Ring” on which I have worked since about 1985. The idea is to connect the existing subway spoke arrangement with a new subway which crosses the spokes and allows people to travel about the Boston Metropolitan Area without adding to the congestion in the core downtown area.
In about 1986, shocked at the destructiveness of the subway proposal to the residential Cambridgeport neighborhood, I proposed an alternate crossing of the Charles River. In 1991, the Mass. Bay Transit Authority adopted my alternative as one of two possible ways for the subway to cross the Charles River. During the past few years, the state legislature has subsidized construction in the Fenway Park / Kenmore area which makes it highly unlikely that the original crossing will be implemented.
The City of Cambridge has consistently lied that the original crossing is the only Charles River crossing in existence. In the early 2000s, based on this flat out lie, the Cambridge City Council changed zoning districts in southern Cambridgeport around the Grand Junction railroad track to allow for the “Putnam Avenue” station on the crossing alternative which no longer seems likely to be implemented, the one the City lies is the only one on the table.
On the satellite photo, you can see the Grand Junction railroad travelling diagonally up and to the right from the Destroyed Nesting area on the bottom left. As you follow it up, you will see one street and then a second street striking the Grand Junction from the left at almost a right angle. There is a black line to the right of the Grand Junction whose top end is between the two right angle streets.
The second, higher, street, is Putnam Avenue. The proposed station on the crossing alternative which almost certainly will not occur would be at the point where Putnam Avenue strikes the Grand Junction.
Following Putnam Avenue to the left until you are below that “p” in Cambridgeport and you will be at the other end of the 240 Putnam Avenue project. The station which will never exist is the justification for the massive project which the neighbors apparently got conned out of objecting to.
Here are the two alternatives on the Cambridge side as submitted to environmental review by the state during consideration of the Urban Ring proposal.
The first map shows the BU Crossing. This is the one the City of Cambridge lies is the only crossing that exists. It crosses the Charles River very close to the Destroyed Nesting Area and is highly destructive to the Charles River environment. The hashed line follows the Grand Junction until it reaches the Charles River and then deviates to the east of the Grand Junction to cross the Charles River. The last circle to the left is the Putnam Avenue Station which will never exist and which is the basis for the grossly large project the folks were conned out of meaningfully opposing.
This is the alternative which the City of Cambridge has lied for 22 years now that it does not exist. When this zoning was approved, the lie was “only” 12 years old.
The subway turns way before the Putnam Avenue Station which will never exist. The station shown on the map at the turn has always been described as an erroneous depiction. In both maps, the second station going up from the Charles River is at Massachusetts Avenue and the Grand Junction. The route south (down) from this station would travel under MIT’s athletic fields, and then under the Charles River, creating an excellent megastation with a station under Brookline Avenue and over the Massachusetts Turnpike (I90) which would connect to the existing Green Line station in Kenmore Square and to the Commuter Rail Yawkey Station (named after the long term Red Sox owner). This megastation would be very close to Fenway Park, the home field for the Boston Red Sox.
Under the Cambridge preferred option / BU Crossing, Yawkey Station would be moved three blocks in the BU Crossing. Yawkey Station stays in place under the Kenmore Crossing. Yawkey Station has received a significant state subsidy for reconstruction in place as part of a massive project being built in the area of Fenway Park.
So, grossly disproportionate development was allowed in the 2000s zoning change at 240 Sidney and its area based on a lie that the allowed larger development would be associated with the Putnam Avenue station on an Urban Ring alignment which the City of Cambridge wants and which probably will not be built.
And the Cambridge Machine or others of their ilk look like they have conned the proponents of a very sensible zoning change into accepting next to nothing as a “compromise” rather than challenging zoning which was created based on a fraud which apparently continues to this day: the lie from the City of Cambridge that Putnam Station WILL BE built on the Urban Ring alternative which almost certainly will not be built but which Cambridge constantly insists is the only alternative under consideration.
4. Bikeway.
Here is another copy of the cropped and marked satellite photo.
That black line to the right of the grand junction is pretty much certainly construction which is unbroken on that side of the Grand Junction.
At the bottom end of that black line is a circle. The area on the left side of the Grand Junction is a large parking lot associated with an MIT building left of the Grand Junction and north of Memorial Drive. Cambridge wants to build a supposed bikeway along the Grand Junction destructive of the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
This bikeway is another con game. The real goal is to widen the underpass under Memorial Drive so as to allow two lanes of traffic and a railroad track from the Grand Junction Railroad Bridge to allow Massachusetts Turnpike traffic to be moved from its current exit, now owned by Harvard University to the Grand Junction Railroad Bridge. Once the exit is built, the bikes would be moved to the responsible exit from the Grand Junction at that circle, following a very short connector to Vassar Street which turns at that exact point. The bikes would then connect to their target, Memorial Drive by a much shorter route, the route which would be responsible in the first place, but Cambridge loves fake promises if those fake promises can achieve what would be rejected if honestly be stated.
5. Objection to lies on the Grand Junction alternatives.
Please see http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/05/will-cambridge-ma-usa-stop-lying-about.html.
6. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
State environmental people, DES Hotline: ESF.Hotline@state.ma.us.
MassDOT Accelerated Bridges Program: 857-368-8904 or Stephanie.Boundy@state.ma.us
All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.
Cambridge, MA, USA city councilors: Council@cambridgema.gov.
Plus the links provided in the above email.
**********
For people listening to Boston Sierra Club endorsements of environmentally destructive members of the Cambridge City Council, you should be aware that
(1) using the world’s definition of “environmentalism,” there are no environmentally responsible members of the Cambridge City Council, and
(2) there are Cambridge Machine activists very visible and apparently very active in the Boston Sierra Club.
If you are talking to a person associated with the Boston Sierra Club, do a credibility check. Ask if they are familiar with the “Urban Ring” rapid transit proposal. This is a subway proposal designed to link the existing subway spokes. I have been working on it since 1985. Cambridge raised the project in a comment to an environmental Impact Statement in the last month or so.
If the Boston Sierra Club “expert” answers “yes,” that he / she is familiar with the Urban Ring rapid transit proposal, ask how many rail options there are. If the answer is “one,” you are getting the flat out lie put out by the City of Cambridge.
Cambridge’s flat out lie is that, of the TWO rail options, the only one that exists is the environmentally destructive streetcar option which the City of Cambridge supports. This option would be highly destructive to the environment near the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
The reality is that THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS SUBSIDIZED THE OTHER OPTION, the responsible Orange Line / heavy rail option, the Kenmore crossing. The state legislature has subsidized the expansion of Yawkey Station as part of the massive Fenway Park area project which has gotten recent press.
Cambridge’s nonsensical proposal would move Yawkey Station three blocks. The Cambridge proposal would not work without moving Yawkey Station. The Kenmore Crossing uses the now subsidized and being expanded Yawkey Station as part of a brilliant megastation.
You should immediately respond to such nonsense from a Sierra Club “expert” by having nothing more to do with this person. Whether the person is stupid or venal is irrelevant, the person has no credibility and is not worthy of your time.
It is frequently difficult to pin these irresponsible people down in general. The deviant behavior in my test is extreme. They are pious in their demands that, if you are politically correct and pro environment, you have to rubber stamp them. Please do not waste your time arguing about destruction they can wiggle around.
Turn your back on them and walk away fast.
2. Attack on transit related zoning rebuffed.
3. The history of the zoning.
4. Bikeway.
5. Objection to lies on the Grand Junction alternatives.
6. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
1. Introduction.
This is one of those many points which are related to the ongoing outrages on the Charles River, but you really need to know what you are doing to realize it.
I will try to put things in context without overwhelming. Please send questions to boblat@yahoo.com.
2. Attack on transit related zoning rebuffed.
This is a cropped satellite photo with added language from a state filing in 2006. The Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese is at the bottom left of the photo. At the top of the photo, under the “p” in Cambridgeport, is 240 Sidney Street.
The first two photos, below, are from Sidney first looking at 240 Sidney Street, then across the street. The third photo shows Fullmore Park across the street and neighboring housing. The third photo will be clearer by clicking on it and blowing up the view. Fullmore Park is in the middle of the block shown on the right of the middle photo. The large tree sticking out is Fullmore Park.
Neighbors of 240 Sidney Street in Cambridge first learned that their homes were going to be overwhelmed with a massive project at 240 Sidney Street when the developer sought relief from zoning requirements. The developer is building way out of scale with the existing neighborhood, and he wanted to provide less than the parking required under zoning law.
The zoning is based on the future construction of a rapid transit station close to the project, but the station is not coming and key representations by city staff concerning that station when the zoning was passed were blatantly false, and continue to be blatantly false.
I have reported on this zoning and on the proposed zoning amendment submitted by the neighbors which would have zoned that block so that it fits in with the neighborhood.
I warned the petitioners to avoid the “neighborhood association” because there are people in the group who are their proven enemies.
Recently, the neighbors have announced a “compromise” which fits in with the mentality of the Cambridge Machine. The good guys get to declare victory and the developers get their project.
I am not going to do the major effort needed to do a full review. I will give a brief summary.
Basically, the project has been required to provide the parking required under the zoning ordinance. The number of units proposed has been reduced but the number of units with more bedrooms has been increased. This sounds like the usual con games. The same amount of construction but with a slightly more politically correct configuration.
When dealing with the Cambridge Machine, the fully predictable con is to compromise, compromise, compromise, but do it in such a manner that the people concerned about the neighborhood are dealing with folks who will not meaningfully compromise and / or are not in a position to meaningfully compromise.
My first advice to zoning change drafters has always been to only compromise with the City Council because the City Council is the only entity in a meaningful position to provide anything.
The Cambridge Machine’s standard pitch is to avoid talking with the only people likely to deliver, the City Council and negotiate, negotiate, negotiate with those who are delivering nothing or next to nothing.
Naturally, you can never be positive just which “friend” was crucial in the decision, or if the petitioners simply got talked into it by the developers. But there is a very standard pattern.
It is a shame. This parcel and this zoning change could have been crucial, but the con artists are very strongly visible.
3. The history of the zoning.
The key to this zoning is the subway proposal known as the “Urban Ring” on which I have worked since about 1985. The idea is to connect the existing subway spoke arrangement with a new subway which crosses the spokes and allows people to travel about the Boston Metropolitan Area without adding to the congestion in the core downtown area.
In about 1986, shocked at the destructiveness of the subway proposal to the residential Cambridgeport neighborhood, I proposed an alternate crossing of the Charles River. In 1991, the Mass. Bay Transit Authority adopted my alternative as one of two possible ways for the subway to cross the Charles River. During the past few years, the state legislature has subsidized construction in the Fenway Park / Kenmore area which makes it highly unlikely that the original crossing will be implemented.
The City of Cambridge has consistently lied that the original crossing is the only Charles River crossing in existence. In the early 2000s, based on this flat out lie, the Cambridge City Council changed zoning districts in southern Cambridgeport around the Grand Junction railroad track to allow for the “Putnam Avenue” station on the crossing alternative which no longer seems likely to be implemented, the one the City lies is the only one on the table.
The second, higher, street, is Putnam Avenue. The proposed station on the crossing alternative which almost certainly will not occur would be at the point where Putnam Avenue strikes the Grand Junction.
Following Putnam Avenue to the left until you are below that “p” in Cambridgeport and you will be at the other end of the 240 Putnam Avenue project. The station which will never exist is the justification for the massive project which the neighbors apparently got conned out of objecting to.
Here are the two alternatives on the Cambridge side as submitted to environmental review by the state during consideration of the Urban Ring proposal.
The first map shows the BU Crossing. This is the one the City of Cambridge lies is the only crossing that exists. It crosses the Charles River very close to the Destroyed Nesting Area and is highly destructive to the Charles River environment. The hashed line follows the Grand Junction until it reaches the Charles River and then deviates to the east of the Grand Junction to cross the Charles River. The last circle to the left is the Putnam Avenue Station which will never exist and which is the basis for the grossly large project the folks were conned out of meaningfully opposing.
This is the alternative which the City of Cambridge has lied for 22 years now that it does not exist. When this zoning was approved, the lie was “only” 12 years old.
The subway turns way before the Putnam Avenue Station which will never exist. The station shown on the map at the turn has always been described as an erroneous depiction. In both maps, the second station going up from the Charles River is at Massachusetts Avenue and the Grand Junction. The route south (down) from this station would travel under MIT’s athletic fields, and then under the Charles River, creating an excellent megastation with a station under Brookline Avenue and over the Massachusetts Turnpike (I90) which would connect to the existing Green Line station in Kenmore Square and to the Commuter Rail Yawkey Station (named after the long term Red Sox owner). This megastation would be very close to Fenway Park, the home field for the Boston Red Sox.
Under the Cambridge preferred option / BU Crossing, Yawkey Station would be moved three blocks in the BU Crossing. Yawkey Station stays in place under the Kenmore Crossing. Yawkey Station has received a significant state subsidy for reconstruction in place as part of a massive project being built in the area of Fenway Park.
So, grossly disproportionate development was allowed in the 2000s zoning change at 240 Sidney and its area based on a lie that the allowed larger development would be associated with the Putnam Avenue station on an Urban Ring alignment which the City of Cambridge wants and which probably will not be built.
And the Cambridge Machine or others of their ilk look like they have conned the proponents of a very sensible zoning change into accepting next to nothing as a “compromise” rather than challenging zoning which was created based on a fraud which apparently continues to this day: the lie from the City of Cambridge that Putnam Station WILL BE built on the Urban Ring alternative which almost certainly will not be built but which Cambridge constantly insists is the only alternative under consideration.
4. Bikeway.
Here is another copy of the cropped and marked satellite photo.
That black line to the right of the grand junction is pretty much certainly construction which is unbroken on that side of the Grand Junction.
At the bottom end of that black line is a circle. The area on the left side of the Grand Junction is a large parking lot associated with an MIT building left of the Grand Junction and north of Memorial Drive. Cambridge wants to build a supposed bikeway along the Grand Junction destructive of the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
This bikeway is another con game. The real goal is to widen the underpass under Memorial Drive so as to allow two lanes of traffic and a railroad track from the Grand Junction Railroad Bridge to allow Massachusetts Turnpike traffic to be moved from its current exit, now owned by Harvard University to the Grand Junction Railroad Bridge. Once the exit is built, the bikes would be moved to the responsible exit from the Grand Junction at that circle, following a very short connector to Vassar Street which turns at that exact point. The bikes would then connect to their target, Memorial Drive by a much shorter route, the route which would be responsible in the first place, but Cambridge loves fake promises if those fake promises can achieve what would be rejected if honestly be stated.
5. Objection to lies on the Grand Junction alternatives.
Please see http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/05/will-cambridge-ma-usa-stop-lying-about.html.
6. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
State environmental people, DES Hotline: ESF.Hotline@state.ma.us.
MassDOT Accelerated Bridges Program: 857-368-8904 or Stephanie.Boundy@state.ma.us
All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.
Cambridge, MA, USA city councilors: Council@cambridgema.gov.
Plus the links provided in the above email.
**********
For people listening to Boston Sierra Club endorsements of environmentally destructive members of the Cambridge City Council, you should be aware that
(1) using the world’s definition of “environmentalism,” there are no environmentally responsible members of the Cambridge City Council, and
(2) there are Cambridge Machine activists very visible and apparently very active in the Boston Sierra Club.
If you are talking to a person associated with the Boston Sierra Club, do a credibility check. Ask if they are familiar with the “Urban Ring” rapid transit proposal. This is a subway proposal designed to link the existing subway spokes. I have been working on it since 1985. Cambridge raised the project in a comment to an environmental Impact Statement in the last month or so.
If the Boston Sierra Club “expert” answers “yes,” that he / she is familiar with the Urban Ring rapid transit proposal, ask how many rail options there are. If the answer is “one,” you are getting the flat out lie put out by the City of Cambridge.
Cambridge’s flat out lie is that, of the TWO rail options, the only one that exists is the environmentally destructive streetcar option which the City of Cambridge supports. This option would be highly destructive to the environment near the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
The reality is that THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS SUBSIDIZED THE OTHER OPTION, the responsible Orange Line / heavy rail option, the Kenmore crossing. The state legislature has subsidized the expansion of Yawkey Station as part of the massive Fenway Park area project which has gotten recent press.
Cambridge’s nonsensical proposal would move Yawkey Station three blocks. The Cambridge proposal would not work without moving Yawkey Station. The Kenmore Crossing uses the now subsidized and being expanded Yawkey Station as part of a brilliant megastation.
You should immediately respond to such nonsense from a Sierra Club “expert” by having nothing more to do with this person. Whether the person is stupid or venal is irrelevant, the person has no credibility and is not worthy of your time.
It is frequently difficult to pin these irresponsible people down in general. The deviant behavior in my test is extreme. They are pious in their demands that, if you are politically correct and pro environment, you have to rubber stamp them. Please do not waste your time arguing about destruction they can wiggle around.
Turn your back on them and walk away fast.
Thursday, August 22, 2013
Farewell Faithful Mallard Martyr, Rancho Cucamonga, CA, USA.
1. Introduction.
2. Report.
3. Summary.
4. Reminiscence.
1. Introduction.
Annabel Osberg was kind enough to mail a hard copy of a press clipping from California.
She transmitted it with a note reading as follows:
***********
I thought you might be interested in the enclosed article, for it shows the pervasiveness of anti-waterfowl sentiment. This article was published in the Grapevine Press, August 2013 issue. It’s a newspaper local to Rancho Cucamonga, CA.
***********
I am at a loss as to the proper way to handle this clipping. I tried following to their website but access requires a subscription. The topic is such that I would anticipate that the publisher would be very happy to be quoted with a citation. So I am citing, using Anabel’s note to identify the publication and date.
2. Report.
“Rarewell Faithful Mallard Martyr
“For the past few months, we have published updates on the wild Mallard ducks that were making themselves at home in the backyards of several residents, who wrote to us complaining of droppings in swimming pools, stained plaster, and added time and expense for cleaning the pools. One resident wrote that ‘something is going to have to be done real soon about these ducks because I don’t know how much longer the residents in Red Hill can take care of them.’ Could this be a death threat?
“Update: As you can see from the picture, one of the Mallards was found lying on Vineyard Avenue, across from Red Hill Park, dead as a doornail. Surely this duck was not stupid enough to walk in the street, so he wasn’t run over. The ducks fly masterfully. Was he poisoned? We hope you residents are happy now. You got your wish. Farewell feathered friend.”
The report included a respectful photo of the deceased.
3. Summary.
Thank you Annabel.
4. Reminiscence.
The situation reminds me of a meeting which was conducted in a boat club on the banks of the Charles River with the Massachusetts Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals in attendance.
I attended with a number of people.
The purpose of the meeting was how to handle the “Canada Goose Problem.”
I was thrown out of the meeting. I disagreed with the purpose of the meeting.
There is no Canada Goose problem on the Charles River in Boston / Cambridge, MA and there is no Mallard Duck problem in Rancho Cucamonga, CA.
The problem in both situations is people who demand that the world have the same state of cleanliness as their living rooms. That attitude strikes me as a very great symptom of sickness in the individuals in question. The individuals in question are the problem.
Those people with such irresponsible demands for the world around us should stay in their living rooms.
A very major additional problem is fake animal “protective” groups which prey on these sick people. These fake animal protective groups get paid to resolve non existent animal “problems” either directly or by soliciting donations for their falsely named groups. These fake groups are very major problems.
2. Report.
3. Summary.
4. Reminiscence.
1. Introduction.
Annabel Osberg was kind enough to mail a hard copy of a press clipping from California.
She transmitted it with a note reading as follows:
***********
I thought you might be interested in the enclosed article, for it shows the pervasiveness of anti-waterfowl sentiment. This article was published in the Grapevine Press, August 2013 issue. It’s a newspaper local to Rancho Cucamonga, CA.
***********
I am at a loss as to the proper way to handle this clipping. I tried following to their website but access requires a subscription. The topic is such that I would anticipate that the publisher would be very happy to be quoted with a citation. So I am citing, using Anabel’s note to identify the publication and date.
2. Report.
“Rarewell Faithful Mallard Martyr
“For the past few months, we have published updates on the wild Mallard ducks that were making themselves at home in the backyards of several residents, who wrote to us complaining of droppings in swimming pools, stained plaster, and added time and expense for cleaning the pools. One resident wrote that ‘something is going to have to be done real soon about these ducks because I don’t know how much longer the residents in Red Hill can take care of them.’ Could this be a death threat?
“Update: As you can see from the picture, one of the Mallards was found lying on Vineyard Avenue, across from Red Hill Park, dead as a doornail. Surely this duck was not stupid enough to walk in the street, so he wasn’t run over. The ducks fly masterfully. Was he poisoned? We hope you residents are happy now. You got your wish. Farewell feathered friend.”
The report included a respectful photo of the deceased.
3. Summary.
Thank you Annabel.
4. Reminiscence.
The situation reminds me of a meeting which was conducted in a boat club on the banks of the Charles River with the Massachusetts Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals in attendance.
I attended with a number of people.
The purpose of the meeting was how to handle the “Canada Goose Problem.”
I was thrown out of the meeting. I disagreed with the purpose of the meeting.
There is no Canada Goose problem on the Charles River in Boston / Cambridge, MA and there is no Mallard Duck problem in Rancho Cucamonga, CA.
The problem in both situations is people who demand that the world have the same state of cleanliness as their living rooms. That attitude strikes me as a very great symptom of sickness in the individuals in question. The individuals in question are the problem.
Those people with such irresponsible demands for the world around us should stay in their living rooms.
A very major additional problem is fake animal “protective” groups which prey on these sick people. These fake animal protective groups get paid to resolve non existent animal “problems” either directly or by soliciting donations for their falsely named groups. These fake groups are very major problems.
Monday, August 19, 2013
Charles River, MA, USA: Environmental Destroyer Campaigns on State Issues.
Marc McGovern is a school committee member running for Cambridge City Council.
McGovern has openly and publicly supported the outrage at the Magazine Beach playing fields.
So he is running on, and advertising at least on the Internet, a campaign to raise the minimum wage in Massachusetts.
As is normal in the Cambridge, MA, elections, city councilors have no power over the minimum wage, but they have plenty of power over destroying the environment in and near the city.
As I said, McGovern publicly supported the destruction at Magazine Beach.
His explanation was that he is only responsible for the “good stuff”.
The heartless animal abuse? He claims he is not responsible for that.
The deliberate starvation of the Charles River White Geese? He claims is not responsible for that.
The walling off of the Magazine Beach playing fields from the Charles River with a 10 to 12 foot wall of thick introduced designer bushes? He claims is not responsible for that.
The destruction of the boat dock? He claims he is not responsible for that.
The destruction of grass which survived the better part of a Century and replacement with sickly stuff that will not survive without poisons?
The dumping of poisons to keep alive the sickly grass that needs poisons to survive?
The sickly introduced grass which looks inferior to the undestroyed grass to the west of the playing fields, grass the state and the corrupt Cambridge Machine are now fighting to add to the destruction and which could very likely be identical to the grass they destroyed on the playing fields?
The decrease in size of the Magazine Beach playing fields to drain off the poisons to keep alive the sickly grass which should not be there in the first place?
There is nothing left that is good.
But he claims to be only responsible for the good stuff.
And he says he “improved” the playing fields.
So he runs for Cambridge City Council based on promises which have nothing to do with the responsibilities of the office he is running for.
And he runs away from this strikingly rotten “achievement.”
McGovern has openly and publicly supported the outrage at the Magazine Beach playing fields.
So he is running on, and advertising at least on the Internet, a campaign to raise the minimum wage in Massachusetts.
As is normal in the Cambridge, MA, elections, city councilors have no power over the minimum wage, but they have plenty of power over destroying the environment in and near the city.
As I said, McGovern publicly supported the destruction at Magazine Beach.
His explanation was that he is only responsible for the “good stuff”.
The heartless animal abuse? He claims he is not responsible for that.
The deliberate starvation of the Charles River White Geese? He claims is not responsible for that.
The walling off of the Magazine Beach playing fields from the Charles River with a 10 to 12 foot wall of thick introduced designer bushes? He claims is not responsible for that.
The destruction of the boat dock? He claims he is not responsible for that.
The destruction of grass which survived the better part of a Century and replacement with sickly stuff that will not survive without poisons?
The dumping of poisons to keep alive the sickly grass that needs poisons to survive?
The sickly introduced grass which looks inferior to the undestroyed grass to the west of the playing fields, grass the state and the corrupt Cambridge Machine are now fighting to add to the destruction and which could very likely be identical to the grass they destroyed on the playing fields?
The decrease in size of the Magazine Beach playing fields to drain off the poisons to keep alive the sickly grass which should not be there in the first place?
There is nothing left that is good.
But he claims to be only responsible for the good stuff.
And he says he “improved” the playing fields.
So he runs for Cambridge City Council based on promises which have nothing to do with the responsibilities of the office he is running for.
And he runs away from this strikingly rotten “achievement.”
Saturday, August 17, 2013
Cambridge, MA, USA and the Charles River: Bad Government in Light of Fake Group System.
1. Introduction.
2. Valid Complaint — mismanaged park “improvements,” edited
3. Editor’s response, also edited.
1. Introduction.
The Cambridgeport List Serve had a very valid complaint on apparently unending work on one of their parks which remains closed.
I have replied with an attempt to place the problem in context with the Cambridge Machine’s operations.
2. Valid Complaint — mismanaged park “improvements,” edited
For 15 months, I've been walking by my local park seeing the snail's pace progression and getting frustrated that it remains closed despite what appears to be almost full completion.
Just this past week I discovered the final holdup. They are installing some surface that allows for ice-skating year round. ICE SKATING!?!?!?!
We don't need that.
When the plans were created for the construction, were there public meetings? Were they well-publicized? Was I just lazy and missed them?
I just want to know who approved the completely overdone and wasteful design of this park.
3. Editor’s response, also edited.
This sounds like the Charles River.
ALL the problems at Magazine Beach were created after being kept secret.
The most blatant outrage, the solid wall of introduced bushes is the result of flat out lying. The supposedly holy Master Plan called for a lawn to the river and the Department of Conservation and Recreation non stop cried about water related uses.
Sickly grass has been introduced in place of healthy grass that survived the better part of a Century. Poisons are being dumped to keep this outrage alive.
Acres of playing field have been destroyed to create fancy drains to drain off poisons that should not be there in the first place.
Heartless abuse is being inflicted on the beautiful, valuable 32 year resident Charles River White Geese whom the key manager has repeatedly lied that he has no intention to harm. The least he and the Machine is doing is deliberately starving them.
Friends of the DCR and Cambridge lie that they are concerned about the Charles River. They tell people not to look at the very real problems created over the last 13 years.
Instead of looking at the irresponsibly inflicted harm, they say to look at renovating a bath house which has not been used for 80 years.
These false protectors consider it anti Charles River to be concerned about the outrages inflicted on the Charles River by their friends at the DCR and the City of Cambridge during the past 13 years.
And when the DCR wanted
(1) to expand the outrage to the hill west of the playing fields and
(2) to expand it to the area behind the swimming pool and
(3) to destroy the little parking lot on the hill,
the friends of the DCR and Cambridge could not get a vote to support the expansion of the outrage. So they indulged in blatant corruption to create the form of support without the reality.
And a key member of the outrage runs around lying about her concern for birds while being completely satisfied with heartless abuse of the 30 year resident beautiful and popular Charles River White Geese.
Other key members fought for destruction of the Alewife reservation supporting similar tactics by another fake organization.
The woman who "loves" birds and has no problem with heartless abuse of long time resident birds flat out lied that she was an expert and that Cambridge and the DCR had no intention to do damage at Alewife. This was when her friends in government were in the final stages of preparation for destruction of acres of irreplaceable woodlands there.
The problem is obvious: a company union lying that it is on the side of the neighborhood.
And that company union is just part of a citywide organization which includes blatant company union outrages.
So, of course, open space projects are bizarre. The city has a friend which will
(1) prevent responsible behavior or
(2)` “lead” attempts at responsible behavior in such a way as to minimize its effectiveness.
This is reality. This is the City of Cambridge and its massive destruction by Cambridge and its friends. The city does not have to be responsible. It has fake groups to run interference for it.
2. Valid Complaint — mismanaged park “improvements,” edited
3. Editor’s response, also edited.
1. Introduction.
The Cambridgeport List Serve had a very valid complaint on apparently unending work on one of their parks which remains closed.
I have replied with an attempt to place the problem in context with the Cambridge Machine’s operations.
2. Valid Complaint — mismanaged park “improvements,” edited
For 15 months, I've been walking by my local park seeing the snail's pace progression and getting frustrated that it remains closed despite what appears to be almost full completion.
Just this past week I discovered the final holdup. They are installing some surface that allows for ice-skating year round. ICE SKATING!?!?!?!
We don't need that.
When the plans were created for the construction, were there public meetings? Were they well-publicized? Was I just lazy and missed them?
I just want to know who approved the completely overdone and wasteful design of this park.
3. Editor’s response, also edited.
This sounds like the Charles River.
ALL the problems at Magazine Beach were created after being kept secret.
The most blatant outrage, the solid wall of introduced bushes is the result of flat out lying. The supposedly holy Master Plan called for a lawn to the river and the Department of Conservation and Recreation non stop cried about water related uses.
Sickly grass has been introduced in place of healthy grass that survived the better part of a Century. Poisons are being dumped to keep this outrage alive.
Acres of playing field have been destroyed to create fancy drains to drain off poisons that should not be there in the first place.
Heartless abuse is being inflicted on the beautiful, valuable 32 year resident Charles River White Geese whom the key manager has repeatedly lied that he has no intention to harm. The least he and the Machine is doing is deliberately starving them.
Friends of the DCR and Cambridge lie that they are concerned about the Charles River. They tell people not to look at the very real problems created over the last 13 years.
Instead of looking at the irresponsibly inflicted harm, they say to look at renovating a bath house which has not been used for 80 years.
These false protectors consider it anti Charles River to be concerned about the outrages inflicted on the Charles River by their friends at the DCR and the City of Cambridge during the past 13 years.
And when the DCR wanted
(1) to expand the outrage to the hill west of the playing fields and
(2) to expand it to the area behind the swimming pool and
(3) to destroy the little parking lot on the hill,
the friends of the DCR and Cambridge could not get a vote to support the expansion of the outrage. So they indulged in blatant corruption to create the form of support without the reality.
And a key member of the outrage runs around lying about her concern for birds while being completely satisfied with heartless abuse of the 30 year resident beautiful and popular Charles River White Geese.
Other key members fought for destruction of the Alewife reservation supporting similar tactics by another fake organization.
The woman who "loves" birds and has no problem with heartless abuse of long time resident birds flat out lied that she was an expert and that Cambridge and the DCR had no intention to do damage at Alewife. This was when her friends in government were in the final stages of preparation for destruction of acres of irreplaceable woodlands there.
The problem is obvious: a company union lying that it is on the side of the neighborhood.
And that company union is just part of a citywide organization which includes blatant company union outrages.
So, of course, open space projects are bizarre. The city has a friend which will
(1) prevent responsible behavior or
(2)` “lead” attempts at responsible behavior in such a way as to minimize its effectiveness.
This is reality. This is the City of Cambridge and its massive destruction by Cambridge and its friends. The city does not have to be responsible. It has fake groups to run interference for it.
Wednesday, August 14, 2013
Con Games: How environmental destroyers lie in the City of Cambridge, MA, USA
1. Comment posted.
2. Response (apparently censored I have problems understanding that).
3. Summary.
1. Comment posted.
There is a nasty weed that is found everywhere in Cambridge, and up and down the East Coast for that matter, and it is called Black Swallow-wort.
This weed is non-native (from England!) and is crowding out native vegetation that birds depend on for food.
It is also leading to the extinction of the Monarch butterfly (explanation below).
If you see any BSW growing on your fence, your neighbor's fence, or in any garden bed, field, open space, etc., please pull off the pods whenever and wherever you see them and put the pods in a secure plastic bag. Do not put in the yard waste and do not throw them loosely in your trash bin. The seeds live 10 years in the soil. They are just about ready to burst and might look like milkweed to Monarch butterflies. See attachment for description. On the other hand, if you have milkweed growing in your garden, you should let it be. That is, if you want to save the Monarch.
2. Response (apparently censored I have problems understanding that).
There is a much more destructive problem in the City of Cambridge. It is the City of Cambridge and its friends and their destructiveness.
Cambridge and its friends have destroyed acres of the publicly owned Alewife Reservation and seem poised to destroy the rest.
Cambridge is destroying 22 trees on the Cambridge Common, most because they "block" the view.
Cambridge and its friends are fighting to destroy hundreds of trees on Memorial Drive, have destroyed a significant part of the Magazine Beach playing fields, walling them off from the Charles River, and dumping poisons to keep alive sickly introduced grasses.
And corrupt practices are being used to expand destruction.
One of the most important corrupt practices is for destroyers to lie that they are protecting the environment and use blatant corrupt tactics to expand existing destruction.
There are very major problems. Heartless abuse of long time resident birds on the Charles is flaunted and bragged about.
Look in a mirror. Change to the side you claim to be on, undo the existing outrages and stop the coming outrages.
3. Summary.
This is part of the standard con game from the Cambridge Machine, non stop piety with maximum impact on the audience and minimal value to the environment they are destroying. Destroy, destroy, destroy as fast as possible and go back to the non stop piety.
I am not going to go into this woman’s record. To put it succinctly, the record is quite bad.
One minor edit on my response. I omitted the last sentence of her post, telling people to look at the bad guys website for how to protect the world.
The “native” comment is typical hypocrisy. The destruction at Magazine Beach in particular is that of destroying native vegetation and animal residents, then introducing sickly vegetation which has no business there and needs poisons to survive. So they dump their native (?) poisons, and then destroy playing fields to drain off poisons which should not be there in the first place. Then they yell about things which make them look like decent human beings, rather than the destructive hypocrites they have proven themselves to be.
I was being nice. I omitted a lot of destructiveness. The Longfellow Bridge is part of the omissions but there is a lot more I omitted. I could keep going, and going, and going.
2. Response (apparently censored I have problems understanding that).
3. Summary.
1. Comment posted.
There is a nasty weed that is found everywhere in Cambridge, and up and down the East Coast for that matter, and it is called Black Swallow-wort.
This weed is non-native (from England!) and is crowding out native vegetation that birds depend on for food.
It is also leading to the extinction of the Monarch butterfly (explanation below).
If you see any BSW growing on your fence, your neighbor's fence, or in any garden bed, field, open space, etc., please pull off the pods whenever and wherever you see them and put the pods in a secure plastic bag. Do not put in the yard waste and do not throw them loosely in your trash bin. The seeds live 10 years in the soil. They are just about ready to burst and might look like milkweed to Monarch butterflies. See attachment for description. On the other hand, if you have milkweed growing in your garden, you should let it be. That is, if you want to save the Monarch.
2. Response (apparently censored I have problems understanding that).
There is a much more destructive problem in the City of Cambridge. It is the City of Cambridge and its friends and their destructiveness.
Cambridge and its friends have destroyed acres of the publicly owned Alewife Reservation and seem poised to destroy the rest.
Cambridge is destroying 22 trees on the Cambridge Common, most because they "block" the view.
Cambridge and its friends are fighting to destroy hundreds of trees on Memorial Drive, have destroyed a significant part of the Magazine Beach playing fields, walling them off from the Charles River, and dumping poisons to keep alive sickly introduced grasses.
And corrupt practices are being used to expand destruction.
One of the most important corrupt practices is for destroyers to lie that they are protecting the environment and use blatant corrupt tactics to expand existing destruction.
There are very major problems. Heartless abuse of long time resident birds on the Charles is flaunted and bragged about.
Look in a mirror. Change to the side you claim to be on, undo the existing outrages and stop the coming outrages.
3. Summary.
This is part of the standard con game from the Cambridge Machine, non stop piety with maximum impact on the audience and minimal value to the environment they are destroying. Destroy, destroy, destroy as fast as possible and go back to the non stop piety.
I am not going to go into this woman’s record. To put it succinctly, the record is quite bad.
One minor edit on my response. I omitted the last sentence of her post, telling people to look at the bad guys website for how to protect the world.
The “native” comment is typical hypocrisy. The destruction at Magazine Beach in particular is that of destroying native vegetation and animal residents, then introducing sickly vegetation which has no business there and needs poisons to survive. So they dump their native (?) poisons, and then destroy playing fields to drain off poisons which should not be there in the first place. Then they yell about things which make them look like decent human beings, rather than the destructive hypocrites they have proven themselves to be.
I was being nice. I omitted a lot of destructiveness. The Longfellow Bridge is part of the omissions but there is a lot more I omitted. I could keep going, and going, and going.
Saturday, August 10, 2013
Analysis of Governor Patrick’s Environmentally Destructive Environmental Bond Bill, H3332
1. Introductory.
2. Transmittal Letter.
3. Specific dangerous categories.
A. Summary.
B. Pages 5-6.
C. Page 6.
D. Page 19.
4. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
1. Introductory.
The falsely named Charles River “Conservancy” has bragged that Governor Patrick is seeking bonds for massive environmental destruction on the Charles River.
I have researched the matter further, based on my prior reports on this blog and review of the destructive bill in question as stated by this falsely named group.
The bill in question is on the Internet at http://www.mass.gov/legis/journal/desktop/2013/H3332.pdf.
It was submitted on March 15, 2013 and is scheduled to be presented in legislative hearing in September 2013.
Here is my analysis of the bill. I would appreciate input at boblat@yahoo.com.
2. Transmittal Letter.
The following are excerpts from the Governor’s Transmittal Letter:
On page 1, the Governor states:
************
Last October, my administration published our sixth capital investment plan, which presented a responsible capital investment strategy for fiscal year 2013 through fiscal year 2017. In order to provide for continued investment in our Commonwealth’s infrastructure and innovation economy, I am filing a series of bond bills, in addition to this bill to support this plan’s future funding needs through fiscal year 2017.
************
On page 2, he lists the following suspect categories. Pleased be advised that the destructive people we deal with commonly lie that they are doing the opposite of reality.
************
$121 million for Department of Conservation and Recreation for parkways, trains, recreation facilities, waterways and flood control,
. . .
$124 million for land and park programs.
3. Specific dangerous categories.
A. Summary.
Continuing analysis of the bill, I see three highly suspect categories under the rubric of the Department of Conservation and Recreation.
It is unfortunate that the terms are so broad.
The falsely named Charles River “Conservancy” bragged of $2 million to $4 million for its “underpasses” which are opposed by the department responsible for the underpasses, the Department of Transportation because of the proposals destructiveness. They also bragged of approximately $24 million for associated paths. This euphemism for destruction has also been referred to as bike paths. Reality is destruction of hundreds of trees between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge plus massive destruction of animal habitat and wetlands between the Anderson Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge. This impacts all the Charles River from Harvard Square to Beacon Hill.
The last allocation is particularly suspect because it uses the “historic parkways” term.
This term has been used in the past by the destroyers of the DCR to justify environmental destruction on the historic Memorial Drive parkway. They previously sought destruction of these hundreds of trees through Obama anti Great Recession funds. They lied that 100% excellent, healthy trees were “diseased.” The lie was proven in their filing with the City of Cambridge.
I have inserted paragraphing but no paragraphing exists. I am trying to make it readable.
B. Pages 5-6.
2800-7032
For natural resource restoration and protection and to ensure compliance with storm water management and the federal Clean Water Act, including enhanced environmental compliance with laws and regulations, and improvements, and costs associated with site assessment, containment, clean-up, control, removal of, or response actions concerning hazardous materials or substances at forests, parks, reservations and other properties of the department of conservation and recreation.
$24,000,000
C. Page 6.
2800-7107
For the design, construction, reconstruction, improvement or rehabilitation of department or navigable coastal and inland waterways projects, including but not limited to coastal protection, structures, dredging, rivers and stream cleaning, costal structure maintenance, piers, dune stabilization, culvert repair, re-nourishment, erosion control and waterfront access and transportation improvements and related facilities and equipment.
$18,000,000
C. Pages 18 - 19.
2840-7024
For the design, construction, reconstruction, removal, improvement or rehabilitation of department reservations, forests, parks, harbor islands, skating rinks, swimming pools, golf courses, tennis courts, basketball courts, playgrounds, other recreational facilities, beaches and related facilities, storage buildings, office buildings and other parks buildings and equipment and for the planning, design, construction, repair, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or improvement of department bike paths, greenways, recreational trains, and related facilities and equipment.
$31,000,000
D. Page 19.
2890-7020
For the design, construction, reconstruction, repair, improvement, or rehabilitation of department of conservation and recreation parkways, boulevards, multi-use trails, internal state park roads, pedestrian bridges and related appurtenances and equipment including, but not limited to, the consts of engineering and other services for those projects rendered by department of conservation and recreation employees or by consultants; provided, that funds may be expended for pedestrian and bicycle safety, traffic calming, landscape improvements, street lighting, and safety equipment; provided further, that all work funded by this item shall be carried out according to standards developed by the department of conservation and recreation pursuant to historic parkways preservation treatment guidelines to protect the scenic and historic integrity of the bridges and parkways under its control.
$46,000,000
4. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
State environmental people, DES Hotline: ESF.Hotline@state.ma.us.
MassDOT Accelerated Bridges Program: 857-368-8904 or Stephanie.Boundy@state.ma.us
All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.
Cambridge, MA, USA city councilors: Council@cambridgema.gov.
**********
For people listening to Boston Sierra Club endorsements of environmentally destructive members of and candidates for the Cambridge City Council, you should be aware that
(1) using the world’s definition of “environmentalism,” there are no environmentally responsible members of the Cambridge City Council; Cambridge’s definition is that environmentalists protect that which Cambridge does not feel like destroying; the Cambridge pols are oh, so pious using their secret, fraudulent definition;
(2) the school committee member running for Cambridge City Council fought for the outrages at the Magazine Beach playing fields;
(a) his indignant explanation is that he claims to be only responsible for the good stuff;
(b) that explanation is combined with exactly no demonstration of any meaningful opposition whatsoever to the outrages; and
(c) as is usual in Cambridge, his claims of “improvements” are belied by reality. The playing fields have been decreased in size by his project!!!!! This is to drain off the poisons being dumped to keep alive sickly introduced grasses which replaced healthy grass that survived the better part of a century without poisons; and
(3) there are Cambridge Machine activists very visible and apparently very active in the Boston Sierra Club.
If you are talking to a person associated with the Boston Sierra Club, do a credibility check. Ask if they are familiar with the “Urban Ring” rapid transit proposal. This is a subway proposal designed to link the existing subway spokes. I have been working on it since 1985. Cambridge raised the project in a comment to an environmental Impact Statement in the last month or so.
If the Boston Sierra Club “expert” answers “yes,” that he / she is familiar with the Urban Ring rapid transit proposal, ask how many rail options there are. If the answer is “one,” you are getting the flat out lie put out by the City of Cambridge.
Cambridge’s flat out lie is that, of the TWO rail options, the only one that exists is the environmentally destructive streetcar option which the City of Cambridge supports. This option would be highly destructive to the environment near the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
The reality is that THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS SUBSIDIZED THE OTHER OPTION, the responsible Orange Line / heavy rail option, the Kenmore crossing. The state legislature has subsidized the expansion of Yawkey Station as part of the massive Fenway Park area project which has gotten recent press.
Cambridge’s nonsensical proposal would move Yawkey Station three blocks. The Cambridge proposal would not work without moving Yawkey Station. The Kenmore Crossing uses the now subsidized and being expanded Yawkey Station as part of a brilliant megastation.
You should immediately respond to such nonsense from a Sierra Club “expert” by having nothing more to do with this person. Whether the person is stupid or venal is irrelevant, the person has no credibility and is not worthy of your time.
It is frequently difficult to pin these irresponsible people down in general. The deviant behavior in my test is extreme. They are pious in their demands that, if you are politically correct and pro environment, you have to rubber stamp them. Please do not waste your time arguing about destruction they can try to wiggle around.
Turn your back on them and walk away fast.
2. Transmittal Letter.
3. Specific dangerous categories.
A. Summary.
B. Pages 5-6.
C. Page 6.
D. Page 19.
4. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
1. Introductory.
The falsely named Charles River “Conservancy” has bragged that Governor Patrick is seeking bonds for massive environmental destruction on the Charles River.
I have researched the matter further, based on my prior reports on this blog and review of the destructive bill in question as stated by this falsely named group.
The bill in question is on the Internet at http://www.mass.gov/legis/journal/desktop/2013/H3332.pdf.
It was submitted on March 15, 2013 and is scheduled to be presented in legislative hearing in September 2013.
Here is my analysis of the bill. I would appreciate input at boblat@yahoo.com.
2. Transmittal Letter.
The following are excerpts from the Governor’s Transmittal Letter:
On page 1, the Governor states:
************
Last October, my administration published our sixth capital investment plan, which presented a responsible capital investment strategy for fiscal year 2013 through fiscal year 2017. In order to provide for continued investment in our Commonwealth’s infrastructure and innovation economy, I am filing a series of bond bills, in addition to this bill to support this plan’s future funding needs through fiscal year 2017.
************
On page 2, he lists the following suspect categories. Pleased be advised that the destructive people we deal with commonly lie that they are doing the opposite of reality.
************
$121 million for Department of Conservation and Recreation for parkways, trains, recreation facilities, waterways and flood control,
. . .
$124 million for land and park programs.
3. Specific dangerous categories.
A. Summary.
Continuing analysis of the bill, I see three highly suspect categories under the rubric of the Department of Conservation and Recreation.
It is unfortunate that the terms are so broad.
The falsely named Charles River “Conservancy” bragged of $2 million to $4 million for its “underpasses” which are opposed by the department responsible for the underpasses, the Department of Transportation because of the proposals destructiveness. They also bragged of approximately $24 million for associated paths. This euphemism for destruction has also been referred to as bike paths. Reality is destruction of hundreds of trees between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge plus massive destruction of animal habitat and wetlands between the Anderson Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge. This impacts all the Charles River from Harvard Square to Beacon Hill.
The last allocation is particularly suspect because it uses the “historic parkways” term.
This term has been used in the past by the destroyers of the DCR to justify environmental destruction on the historic Memorial Drive parkway. They previously sought destruction of these hundreds of trees through Obama anti Great Recession funds. They lied that 100% excellent, healthy trees were “diseased.” The lie was proven in their filing with the City of Cambridge.
I have inserted paragraphing but no paragraphing exists. I am trying to make it readable.
B. Pages 5-6.
2800-7032
For natural resource restoration and protection and to ensure compliance with storm water management and the federal Clean Water Act, including enhanced environmental compliance with laws and regulations, and improvements, and costs associated with site assessment, containment, clean-up, control, removal of, or response actions concerning hazardous materials or substances at forests, parks, reservations and other properties of the department of conservation and recreation.
$24,000,000
C. Page 6.
2800-7107
For the design, construction, reconstruction, improvement or rehabilitation of department or navigable coastal and inland waterways projects, including but not limited to coastal protection, structures, dredging, rivers and stream cleaning, costal structure maintenance, piers, dune stabilization, culvert repair, re-nourishment, erosion control and waterfront access and transportation improvements and related facilities and equipment.
$18,000,000
C. Pages 18 - 19.
2840-7024
For the design, construction, reconstruction, removal, improvement or rehabilitation of department reservations, forests, parks, harbor islands, skating rinks, swimming pools, golf courses, tennis courts, basketball courts, playgrounds, other recreational facilities, beaches and related facilities, storage buildings, office buildings and other parks buildings and equipment and for the planning, design, construction, repair, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or improvement of department bike paths, greenways, recreational trains, and related facilities and equipment.
$31,000,000
D. Page 19.
2890-7020
For the design, construction, reconstruction, repair, improvement, or rehabilitation of department of conservation and recreation parkways, boulevards, multi-use trails, internal state park roads, pedestrian bridges and related appurtenances and equipment including, but not limited to, the consts of engineering and other services for those projects rendered by department of conservation and recreation employees or by consultants; provided, that funds may be expended for pedestrian and bicycle safety, traffic calming, landscape improvements, street lighting, and safety equipment; provided further, that all work funded by this item shall be carried out according to standards developed by the department of conservation and recreation pursuant to historic parkways preservation treatment guidelines to protect the scenic and historic integrity of the bridges and parkways under its control.
$46,000,000
4. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
State environmental people, DES Hotline: ESF.Hotline@state.ma.us.
MassDOT Accelerated Bridges Program: 857-368-8904 or Stephanie.Boundy@state.ma.us
All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.
Cambridge, MA, USA city councilors: Council@cambridgema.gov.
**********
For people listening to Boston Sierra Club endorsements of environmentally destructive members of and candidates for the Cambridge City Council, you should be aware that
(1) using the world’s definition of “environmentalism,” there are no environmentally responsible members of the Cambridge City Council; Cambridge’s definition is that environmentalists protect that which Cambridge does not feel like destroying; the Cambridge pols are oh, so pious using their secret, fraudulent definition;
(2) the school committee member running for Cambridge City Council fought for the outrages at the Magazine Beach playing fields;
(a) his indignant explanation is that he claims to be only responsible for the good stuff;
(b) that explanation is combined with exactly no demonstration of any meaningful opposition whatsoever to the outrages; and
(c) as is usual in Cambridge, his claims of “improvements” are belied by reality. The playing fields have been decreased in size by his project!!!!! This is to drain off the poisons being dumped to keep alive sickly introduced grasses which replaced healthy grass that survived the better part of a century without poisons; and
(3) there are Cambridge Machine activists very visible and apparently very active in the Boston Sierra Club.
If you are talking to a person associated with the Boston Sierra Club, do a credibility check. Ask if they are familiar with the “Urban Ring” rapid transit proposal. This is a subway proposal designed to link the existing subway spokes. I have been working on it since 1985. Cambridge raised the project in a comment to an environmental Impact Statement in the last month or so.
If the Boston Sierra Club “expert” answers “yes,” that he / she is familiar with the Urban Ring rapid transit proposal, ask how many rail options there are. If the answer is “one,” you are getting the flat out lie put out by the City of Cambridge.
Cambridge’s flat out lie is that, of the TWO rail options, the only one that exists is the environmentally destructive streetcar option which the City of Cambridge supports. This option would be highly destructive to the environment near the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
The reality is that THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS SUBSIDIZED THE OTHER OPTION, the responsible Orange Line / heavy rail option, the Kenmore crossing. The state legislature has subsidized the expansion of Yawkey Station as part of the massive Fenway Park area project which has gotten recent press.
Cambridge’s nonsensical proposal would move Yawkey Station three blocks. The Cambridge proposal would not work without moving Yawkey Station. The Kenmore Crossing uses the now subsidized and being expanded Yawkey Station as part of a brilliant megastation.
You should immediately respond to such nonsense from a Sierra Club “expert” by having nothing more to do with this person. Whether the person is stupid or venal is irrelevant, the person has no credibility and is not worthy of your time.
It is frequently difficult to pin these irresponsible people down in general. The deviant behavior in my test is extreme. They are pious in their demands that, if you are politically correct and pro environment, you have to rubber stamp them. Please do not waste your time arguing about destruction they can try to wiggle around.
Turn your back on them and walk away fast.
Friday, August 09, 2013
Governor’s Tree Destruction Proposal Still Lives; Fraudulent Campaign Ramps up again.
RE: Governor’s Tree Destruction Proposal Still Lives; Fraudulent Campaign Ramps up again.
1. Outrageous Proposal.
2. Comment already.
1. Outrageous Proposal.
The falsely named Charles River “Conservancy” has announced that the governor’s transportation finance bill was not part of the budget which just went through. Instead, it is part of a free standing bill, House Bill 3332 submitted by the governor on March 15, 2013.
CRC has previously announced that the bill includes 2 to 4 million dollars for the “underpasses” they loudly proclaim and about $24 million for associated “paths”. The “paths” include destruction of hundred of trees east of the BU Bridge, between the BU and Longfellow Bridges. The “underpasses” are proposed under the next three bridges west of the BU Bridge. The Massachusetts Department of Transportation, which is responsible for those three bridges, rejects the “underpasses” because they are environmentally destructive and wasteful. MassDOT, to my understanding, has no knowledge of the tree destruction. They have replaced the reprehensible Department of Conservation and Recreation which has previously sought Obama anti Great Recession moneys for the destruction of those trees. That lie called all these excellent trees diseased, a lie proven by their filing with the City of Cambridge.
The tree destruction portion of the bonds is six to twelve times as large in cost as the “underpasses.”
So, naturally, given the corruption which is normal in the fight to destroy the Charles River, the CRC is ramping up its fight for destruction of those hundreds of trees, corruptly calling their effort a fight for “underpasses.”
[Ed, Added, 8/10/2013: MassDOT has replaced the DCR with regard to bridges. DCR and its destructiveness continues to have major power over Memorial Drive. My sloppy, sorry.]
It is entirely possible that the proposal secretly includes a highway in the Charles under the BU Bridge as well, with corresponding further heartless abuse of the Charles River White Geese and the other very few animals who have not been killed off yet in this area of the Charles River.
CRC now has a jogging team running around bearing their fraudulent description of the project, “team underpasses.”
According to CRC, the legislature will hold a hearing on their destructive and falsely described proposal in September 2013.
The bill in question is on the Internet at http://www.mass.gov/legis/journal/desktop/2013/H3332.pdf.
This document is the usually complicated state document. I have done a search on it and have not found the specific funds. I would very much be pleased if someone could find them for me and email me at boblat@yahoo.com.
2. Comment already.
I received the following comment on the fraudulent fight for tree destruction:
*************
Did you run in the "Underpass promotion 5k" today??
Maybe you could infiltrate their group and try to "reeducate" them...
*************
My response:
*************
Striking difference between me and the guys fighting for destruction, I am honest.
1. Outrageous Proposal.
2. Comment already.
1. Outrageous Proposal.
The falsely named Charles River “Conservancy” has announced that the governor’s transportation finance bill was not part of the budget which just went through. Instead, it is part of a free standing bill, House Bill 3332 submitted by the governor on March 15, 2013.
CRC has previously announced that the bill includes 2 to 4 million dollars for the “underpasses” they loudly proclaim and about $24 million for associated “paths”. The “paths” include destruction of hundred of trees east of the BU Bridge, between the BU and Longfellow Bridges. The “underpasses” are proposed under the next three bridges west of the BU Bridge. The Massachusetts Department of Transportation, which is responsible for those three bridges, rejects the “underpasses” because they are environmentally destructive and wasteful. MassDOT, to my understanding, has no knowledge of the tree destruction. They have replaced the reprehensible Department of Conservation and Recreation which has previously sought Obama anti Great Recession moneys for the destruction of those trees. That lie called all these excellent trees diseased, a lie proven by their filing with the City of Cambridge.
The tree destruction portion of the bonds is six to twelve times as large in cost as the “underpasses.”
So, naturally, given the corruption which is normal in the fight to destroy the Charles River, the CRC is ramping up its fight for destruction of those hundreds of trees, corruptly calling their effort a fight for “underpasses.”
[Ed, Added, 8/10/2013: MassDOT has replaced the DCR with regard to bridges. DCR and its destructiveness continues to have major power over Memorial Drive. My sloppy, sorry.]
It is entirely possible that the proposal secretly includes a highway in the Charles under the BU Bridge as well, with corresponding further heartless abuse of the Charles River White Geese and the other very few animals who have not been killed off yet in this area of the Charles River.
CRC now has a jogging team running around bearing their fraudulent description of the project, “team underpasses.”
According to CRC, the legislature will hold a hearing on their destructive and falsely described proposal in September 2013.
The bill in question is on the Internet at http://www.mass.gov/legis/journal/desktop/2013/H3332.pdf.
This document is the usually complicated state document. I have done a search on it and have not found the specific funds. I would very much be pleased if someone could find them for me and email me at boblat@yahoo.com.
2. Comment already.
I received the following comment on the fraudulent fight for tree destruction:
*************
Did you run in the "Underpass promotion 5k" today??
Maybe you could infiltrate their group and try to "reeducate" them...
*************
My response:
*************
Striking difference between me and the guys fighting for destruction, I am honest.
Wednesday, August 07, 2013
The Real Game on the Charles River, a very destructive situation in Cambridge, MA, USA.
The Real Game on the Charles River, a very destructive situation in Cambridge, MA, USA.
1. Introduction.
2. The Inner Belt.
3. Company Union response.
4. The Inner Belt returned, for the benefit of Harvard, MIT, and . . .
5. Summary. Now versus the 70s.
6. Links.
7. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
1. Introduction.
People do all sorts of things. The most rotten people involved on the Charles River hate the environment and hate animals. They destroy, loudly proclaiming they are “improving” things.
The real problem is Harvard University.
Harvard acts behind the scenes and only announces their presence after all the work has been done.
Harvard is creating a new empire in the Allston neighborhood of Boston, just across the Charles River from Cambridge. They made massive purchases in secret and only announced their power when they had achieved what they were looking to do.
Harvard is the real game, the real destroyer, and Harvard has put together a very large coalition, all of whom see some sort of advantage in environmental destruction.
2. The Inner Belt.
Major parts of the Boston area were destroyed because of earlier destructive dreamers.
They had a dream for their own great highways, and like so many destructive people nowadays, they did not give a damn about what they destroyed.
Cambridge beat them. Not the fake groups with their subtle connections to the City of Cambridge and its pols, Cambridge beat them.
The biggest victory of responsible people occurred in 1972.
3. Company Union response.
James Leo Sullivan returned to office as Cambridge City Manager in 1974. He has remained in office through related individuals to the current day.
James Leo’s people made no secret that they wanted to create a system of “neighborhood associations.”
They then proceeded to recognize as “neighborhood associations” only groups which were not dangerous to the goals of the City of Cambridge.
Groups which were not considered “responsible” were not “recognized.”
At least one group which was recognized and which deviated from the City Manager’s definition of responsibility suddenly had problems with funding.
In my opinion, this influence even stretched into Rent Control. A key group got money for an advocacy organization. That key group then proceeded to block organizing on tenant issues. They turned affordable housing advocates into self serving individuals because they prevented expansion of advocacy beyond what was in place. The stench of self serving did not help during the statewide vote which killed rent control.
The recognized groups have behaved altogether too often, on matters that count to the City Manager’s people, in the manner of company unions.
Company unions step into a situation which cries for organization and fill that void to prevent organizing.
The Alewife Reservation is being destroyed by a company union which lies that it is defending Alewife. It loudly proclaims that it is the be all and end all. It tells people only to look at the private developers. It tells people to ignore the very real and already started destruction of the core Alewife reservation by their friends in city government.
There are many, many real problems on the Charles River. The local company union lies that it is a neighborhood association. It lies that it loves the Charles River. Just ignore all the very real problems. Look at a bathhouse which has not been used for 80 years and NOTHING ELSE. Ignore the real problems. The destructive bureaucrats wanted to expand the real problems including destruction of hundreds of trees and animal habit. The machine could not get the vote it wanted. So it resorted to blatantly corrupt tactics, as fast as possible to hide its corruption.
That group supported the Alewife destroyers until destruction got blatant. They did not object to the destruction. They simply suddenly declared Alewife not part of its neighborhood, as it was not part of their neighborhood when the destruction was not yet visible.
Key members of “recognized” groups have been very visible in citywide zoning initiatives which sounded lovely but which, in reality, destroyed meaningful protections. A similar group is very visible in the Boston Sierra Club which endorses environmentally destructive Cambridge City Councilors for reelection. The “recognized” groups routinely scratch each others’ backs, particularly including the fight to destroy Alewife.
Related people commonly create lovely sounding organizations which sound so great and altogether too often have achievements exactly the opposite of their stated goals, if you understand what is going on. If you listen to the con artists, black is white and white is black.
4. The Inner Belt returned, for the benefit of Harvard, MIT, and . . .
In this areal photo from a state filing in 2006, at left is a rail yard which is in the process of being moved to Worcester, MA. Above that rail yard is the Allston - Cambridge exit from I90, the Massachusetts Turnpike. The wide line parallel to the Charles River in the lower middle of the photo is the Massachusetts Turnpike. To the right is the BU Bridge and under it the Grand Junction railroad bridge which connects that rail yard to another rail yard several miles to the northeast.
In 2003 or so, the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority did a study on the Grand Junction railroad bridge and determined that it could physically be expanded and converted to an off ramp from the Massachusetts Turnpike to Cambridge.
Several months later, Harvard University bought the rail yard and Massachusetts Turnpike exit to Allston / Cambridge. Their subsequent activities are consistent with a relocation of the Harvard Medical School to this location.
A whole bunch of destructive “improvements” have occurred.
The Grand Junction railroad extends in a straight line from the bridge to the upper left. Cambridge constructed a new roadway system in the area to the left of the grand junction, ostensibly to support massive construction with heavy MIT involvement. The new roadway system is in the undeveloped area to the left of the Grand Junction almost at the top of the photo.
The plans showed a whole bunch of trees being planted. There was a major gap in planned tree planting next to the Grand Junction in the exact location where connections to an exit / entrance highway from the Mass. Pike could be placed.
The MBTA plan showed widening of the Grand Junction railroad bridge to contain one lane off the Mass. Pike, one lane onto the Mass. Pike, and a railroad track, in place of the current structure designed to hold two railroad tracks.
Various plans have showed highway construction up the Grand Junction to Kendall Square in the name of “busways”.
Cambridge is fighting for bike highways along the Grand Junction. To no surprise, their bike highway proposal calls for widening the rail underpass under Memorial Drive.
The MBTA off ramps from the Mass. Pike would not work without widening the rail underpass to hold two traffic lanes and one railroad track.
The Cambridge bike highway plan is typically stupid. Very careful inspection of the aerial photo shows an L shaped street, Vassar Street, to the right of the Grand Junction and slightly below the connecting area. The Bike Highway makes sense cutting to Vassar Street to Memorial Drive. Going through the destroyed nesting area is much longer and much more expensive, but the route gives the off ramps the opening needed under Memorial Drive. When reality occurs, the Bike highway can be moved to Vassar Street and reality.
A gentleman I showed this map to yesterday immediately commented “urban ring.”
5. Summary. Now versus the 70s.
The big difference between now and when the Inner Belt was killed before? A massive system of very powerful Company Unions.
6. Links.
Relevant on the ground photos on the bike highway have been posted at:
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/05/destroyed-nesting-area-north-south.html
These photos are directly relevant to the Inner Belt revival as well.
7. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
State environmental people, DES Hotline: ESF.Hotline@state.ma.us.
MassDOT Accelerated Bridges Program: 857-368-8904 or Stephanie.Boundy@state.ma.us
All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.
Cambridge, MA, USA city councilors: Council@cambridgema.gov.
**********
For people listening to Boston Sierra Club endorsements of environmentally destructive members of the Cambridge City Council, you should be aware that
(1) using the world’s definition of “environmentalism,” there are no environmentally responsible members of the Cambridge City Council; Cambridge’s definition is that environmentalists protect that which Cambridge does not feel like destroying; the Cambridge pols are oh, so pious using their secret, fraudulent definition; and
(2) there are Cambridge Machine activists very visible and apparently very active in the Boston Sierra Club.
If you are talking to a person associated with the Boston Sierra Club, do a credibility check. Ask if they are familiar with the “Urban Ring” rapid transit proposal. This is a subway proposal designed to link the existing subway spokes. I have been working on it since 1985. Cambridge raised the project in a comment to an environmental Impact Statement in the last month or so.
If the Boston Sierra Club “expert” answers “yes,” that he / she is familiar with the Urban Ring rapid transit proposal, ask how many rail options there are. If the answer is “one,” you are getting the flat out lie put out by the City of Cambridge.
Cambridge’s flat out lie is that, of the TWO rail options, the only one that exists is the environmentally destructive streetcar option which the City of Cambridge supports. This option would be highly destructive to the environment near the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
The reality is that THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS SUBSIDIZED THE OTHER OPTION, the responsible Orange Line / heavy rail option, the Kenmore crossing. The state legislature has subsidized the expansion of Yawkey Station as part of the massive Fenway Park area project which has gotten recent press.
Cambridge’s nonsensical proposal would move Yawkey Station three blocks. The Cambridge proposal would not work without moving Yawkey Station. The Kenmore Crossing uses the now subsidized and being expanded Yawkey Station as part of a brilliant megastation.
You should immediately respond to such nonsense from a Sierra Club “expert” by having nothing more to do with this person. Whether the person is stupid or venal is irrelevant, the person has no credibility and is not worthy of your time.
It is frequently difficult to pin these irresponsible people down in general. The deviant behavior in my test is extreme. They are pious in their demands that, if you are politically correct and pro environment, you have to rubber stamp them. Please do not waste your time arguing about destruction they can try to wiggle around.
Turn your back on them and walk away fast.
1. Introduction.
2. The Inner Belt.
3. Company Union response.
4. The Inner Belt returned, for the benefit of Harvard, MIT, and . . .
5. Summary. Now versus the 70s.
6. Links.
7. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
1. Introduction.
People do all sorts of things. The most rotten people involved on the Charles River hate the environment and hate animals. They destroy, loudly proclaiming they are “improving” things.
The real problem is Harvard University.
Harvard acts behind the scenes and only announces their presence after all the work has been done.
Harvard is creating a new empire in the Allston neighborhood of Boston, just across the Charles River from Cambridge. They made massive purchases in secret and only announced their power when they had achieved what they were looking to do.
Harvard is the real game, the real destroyer, and Harvard has put together a very large coalition, all of whom see some sort of advantage in environmental destruction.
2. The Inner Belt.
Major parts of the Boston area were destroyed because of earlier destructive dreamers.
They had a dream for their own great highways, and like so many destructive people nowadays, they did not give a damn about what they destroyed.
Cambridge beat them. Not the fake groups with their subtle connections to the City of Cambridge and its pols, Cambridge beat them.
The biggest victory of responsible people occurred in 1972.
3. Company Union response.
James Leo Sullivan returned to office as Cambridge City Manager in 1974. He has remained in office through related individuals to the current day.
James Leo’s people made no secret that they wanted to create a system of “neighborhood associations.”
They then proceeded to recognize as “neighborhood associations” only groups which were not dangerous to the goals of the City of Cambridge.
Groups which were not considered “responsible” were not “recognized.”
At least one group which was recognized and which deviated from the City Manager’s definition of responsibility suddenly had problems with funding.
In my opinion, this influence even stretched into Rent Control. A key group got money for an advocacy organization. That key group then proceeded to block organizing on tenant issues. They turned affordable housing advocates into self serving individuals because they prevented expansion of advocacy beyond what was in place. The stench of self serving did not help during the statewide vote which killed rent control.
The recognized groups have behaved altogether too often, on matters that count to the City Manager’s people, in the manner of company unions.
Company unions step into a situation which cries for organization and fill that void to prevent organizing.
The Alewife Reservation is being destroyed by a company union which lies that it is defending Alewife. It loudly proclaims that it is the be all and end all. It tells people only to look at the private developers. It tells people to ignore the very real and already started destruction of the core Alewife reservation by their friends in city government.
There are many, many real problems on the Charles River. The local company union lies that it is a neighborhood association. It lies that it loves the Charles River. Just ignore all the very real problems. Look at a bathhouse which has not been used for 80 years and NOTHING ELSE. Ignore the real problems. The destructive bureaucrats wanted to expand the real problems including destruction of hundreds of trees and animal habit. The machine could not get the vote it wanted. So it resorted to blatantly corrupt tactics, as fast as possible to hide its corruption.
That group supported the Alewife destroyers until destruction got blatant. They did not object to the destruction. They simply suddenly declared Alewife not part of its neighborhood, as it was not part of their neighborhood when the destruction was not yet visible.
Key members of “recognized” groups have been very visible in citywide zoning initiatives which sounded lovely but which, in reality, destroyed meaningful protections. A similar group is very visible in the Boston Sierra Club which endorses environmentally destructive Cambridge City Councilors for reelection. The “recognized” groups routinely scratch each others’ backs, particularly including the fight to destroy Alewife.
Related people commonly create lovely sounding organizations which sound so great and altogether too often have achievements exactly the opposite of their stated goals, if you understand what is going on. If you listen to the con artists, black is white and white is black.
4. The Inner Belt returned, for the benefit of Harvard, MIT, and . . .
In this areal photo from a state filing in 2006, at left is a rail yard which is in the process of being moved to Worcester, MA. Above that rail yard is the Allston - Cambridge exit from I90, the Massachusetts Turnpike. The wide line parallel to the Charles River in the lower middle of the photo is the Massachusetts Turnpike. To the right is the BU Bridge and under it the Grand Junction railroad bridge which connects that rail yard to another rail yard several miles to the northeast.
In 2003 or so, the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority did a study on the Grand Junction railroad bridge and determined that it could physically be expanded and converted to an off ramp from the Massachusetts Turnpike to Cambridge.
Several months later, Harvard University bought the rail yard and Massachusetts Turnpike exit to Allston / Cambridge. Their subsequent activities are consistent with a relocation of the Harvard Medical School to this location.
A whole bunch of destructive “improvements” have occurred.
The Grand Junction railroad extends in a straight line from the bridge to the upper left. Cambridge constructed a new roadway system in the area to the left of the grand junction, ostensibly to support massive construction with heavy MIT involvement. The new roadway system is in the undeveloped area to the left of the Grand Junction almost at the top of the photo.
The plans showed a whole bunch of trees being planted. There was a major gap in planned tree planting next to the Grand Junction in the exact location where connections to an exit / entrance highway from the Mass. Pike could be placed.
The MBTA plan showed widening of the Grand Junction railroad bridge to contain one lane off the Mass. Pike, one lane onto the Mass. Pike, and a railroad track, in place of the current structure designed to hold two railroad tracks.
Various plans have showed highway construction up the Grand Junction to Kendall Square in the name of “busways”.
Cambridge is fighting for bike highways along the Grand Junction. To no surprise, their bike highway proposal calls for widening the rail underpass under Memorial Drive.
The MBTA off ramps from the Mass. Pike would not work without widening the rail underpass to hold two traffic lanes and one railroad track.
The Cambridge bike highway plan is typically stupid. Very careful inspection of the aerial photo shows an L shaped street, Vassar Street, to the right of the Grand Junction and slightly below the connecting area. The Bike Highway makes sense cutting to Vassar Street to Memorial Drive. Going through the destroyed nesting area is much longer and much more expensive, but the route gives the off ramps the opening needed under Memorial Drive. When reality occurs, the Bike highway can be moved to Vassar Street and reality.
A gentleman I showed this map to yesterday immediately commented “urban ring.”
5. Summary. Now versus the 70s.
The big difference between now and when the Inner Belt was killed before? A massive system of very powerful Company Unions.
6. Links.
Relevant on the ground photos on the bike highway have been posted at:
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/05/destroyed-nesting-area-north-south.html
These photos are directly relevant to the Inner Belt revival as well.
7. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
State environmental people, DES Hotline: ESF.Hotline@state.ma.us.
MassDOT Accelerated Bridges Program: 857-368-8904 or Stephanie.Boundy@state.ma.us
All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.
Cambridge, MA, USA city councilors: Council@cambridgema.gov.
**********
For people listening to Boston Sierra Club endorsements of environmentally destructive members of the Cambridge City Council, you should be aware that
(1) using the world’s definition of “environmentalism,” there are no environmentally responsible members of the Cambridge City Council; Cambridge’s definition is that environmentalists protect that which Cambridge does not feel like destroying; the Cambridge pols are oh, so pious using their secret, fraudulent definition; and
(2) there are Cambridge Machine activists very visible and apparently very active in the Boston Sierra Club.
If you are talking to a person associated with the Boston Sierra Club, do a credibility check. Ask if they are familiar with the “Urban Ring” rapid transit proposal. This is a subway proposal designed to link the existing subway spokes. I have been working on it since 1985. Cambridge raised the project in a comment to an environmental Impact Statement in the last month or so.
If the Boston Sierra Club “expert” answers “yes,” that he / she is familiar with the Urban Ring rapid transit proposal, ask how many rail options there are. If the answer is “one,” you are getting the flat out lie put out by the City of Cambridge.
Cambridge’s flat out lie is that, of the TWO rail options, the only one that exists is the environmentally destructive streetcar option which the City of Cambridge supports. This option would be highly destructive to the environment near the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
The reality is that THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS SUBSIDIZED THE OTHER OPTION, the responsible Orange Line / heavy rail option, the Kenmore crossing. The state legislature has subsidized the expansion of Yawkey Station as part of the massive Fenway Park area project which has gotten recent press.
Cambridge’s nonsensical proposal would move Yawkey Station three blocks. The Cambridge proposal would not work without moving Yawkey Station. The Kenmore Crossing uses the now subsidized and being expanded Yawkey Station as part of a brilliant megastation.
You should immediately respond to such nonsense from a Sierra Club “expert” by having nothing more to do with this person. Whether the person is stupid or venal is irrelevant, the person has no credibility and is not worthy of your time.
It is frequently difficult to pin these irresponsible people down in general. The deviant behavior in my test is extreme. They are pious in their demands that, if you are politically correct and pro environment, you have to rubber stamp them. Please do not waste your time arguing about destruction they can try to wiggle around.
Turn your back on them and walk away fast.
Monday, August 05, 2013
RE: Understanding the Cambridge Machine — Retaliation
1. Introduction.
2. Question.
3. Editor.
4. Question.
5. Response.
1. Introduction.
This follows upon my analysis of the Cambridge Machine posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/08/understanding-cambridge-machine.html.
Follow on questions.
2. Question.
Would they kill?
3. Editor.
There is very major danger.
Malvina Monteiro had her life destroyed, and these bastards consider that normal.
They use the power of government and the power of a massive, well organized machine. They do not have to be so crude as to physically kill.
4. Question.
Monteiro case only shows that if you are employed by the Machine, then they can destroy your professional life. That seems to be rather obvious.
Can they use their cronies in law enforcement to fabricate a criminal case against an "undesirable person", things like that?
Or, can they actually kill, if they feel like it?
5. Response.
You are raising excellent questions.
There is one major problem with the usual response of "They would never stoop so low" in that they keep proving such a statement wrong.
One excellent example is a woman who has been an activist for disabled folk whom the city does not want to recognize as disabled.
She went to the Western Avenue police station to check records with her companion dog and found the dog being sicced upon by a cop with a pitbull without teeth. The pitbull at the instigation of the cop latched onto her dog with its gums. This was in front of a bunch of cops in the public area. She asked the cop on duty for help. He refused. She sought the tape of the lobby the next day and, somehow, they neglected to put in one that day.
Part of her presentation on my show is posted at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyKlZ8eO2Xs. The dog was with her and was still visibly shaken from the experience.
There is no public knowledge of any punishment. Clearly, it is a very severe mistake to think "they would never stoop so low."
And the shunning definitely makes living and working in Cambridge not nice.
2. Question.
3. Editor.
4. Question.
5. Response.
1. Introduction.
This follows upon my analysis of the Cambridge Machine posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/08/understanding-cambridge-machine.html.
Follow on questions.
2. Question.
Would they kill?
3. Editor.
There is very major danger.
Malvina Monteiro had her life destroyed, and these bastards consider that normal.
They use the power of government and the power of a massive, well organized machine. They do not have to be so crude as to physically kill.
4. Question.
Monteiro case only shows that if you are employed by the Machine, then they can destroy your professional life. That seems to be rather obvious.
Can they use their cronies in law enforcement to fabricate a criminal case against an "undesirable person", things like that?
Or, can they actually kill, if they feel like it?
5. Response.
You are raising excellent questions.
There is one major problem with the usual response of "They would never stoop so low" in that they keep proving such a statement wrong.
One excellent example is a woman who has been an activist for disabled folk whom the city does not want to recognize as disabled.
She went to the Western Avenue police station to check records with her companion dog and found the dog being sicced upon by a cop with a pitbull without teeth. The pitbull at the instigation of the cop latched onto her dog with its gums. This was in front of a bunch of cops in the public area. She asked the cop on duty for help. He refused. She sought the tape of the lobby the next day and, somehow, they neglected to put in one that day.
Part of her presentation on my show is posted at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyKlZ8eO2Xs. The dog was with her and was still visibly shaken from the experience.
There is no public knowledge of any punishment. Clearly, it is a very severe mistake to think "they would never stoop so low."
And the shunning definitely makes living and working in Cambridge not nice.
Saturday, August 03, 2013
Understanding the Cambridge Machine
1. Question.
2. Money.
3. Would they be willing to kill?
4. Summary.
1. Question.
I would like to understand the Cambridge Machine better.
How much money is split? Is organized crime involved, and to what extent? Would they be ready to kill people, if they think the threat to their power is real?
2. Money.
The money probably is unproveable. You have the standard boycott of noncompliant persons and the very clear threat of such shunning. And the standard situation in which professionals active in Cambridge see approvals to their benefit elsewhere, approvals which would be lost if the activists were meaningfully doing what they say they are doing. They would be shunned if they were meaningfully doing what they say they are doing.
The exact workings are undeterminent. It is a matter of a fake reality in which the voters are told one thing and the developers and contractors know better. So both sides are kept happy.
The situation dates back to James Leo Sullivan who used his Development Department to create a series of "neighborhood associations" naturally including his friends. The controllers of the various controlled entities gave the groups apparent functions which they fulfilled except insofar as the functions conflicted with the wishes of the city government. The groups are controlled by smaller core entities which are hand selected by the creators. In the past, I have had significant successes by calling out people to meetings, but, with the death of rent control, there was no need for the pols to keep an eye on each other. Then, the falsities got much more intense.
The reality, however, is that it is always impossible to identify specific types. Many folks are simply outnumbered by con artists who gang up on them. At least in theory it is impossible to tell the knaves from the fools. They all sound and act alike. So many very terrible things, in reality, have seeds in the Cambridge City Government which are buried as far as possible.
The first target was the best park in the central part of the city for a high school expansion which could have been done in place as a campus style school, but they wanted a consolidated school and they wanted to expand the library in place. 23 hundred year old trees were destroyed with the lie: we are replacing the Cambridge Street park with a park on Broadway. Excellent trees with grass and a lot of saplings. The obvious happened. The library expansion was done and almost all the saplings were destroyed. The back stabbers on Broadway got what they deserved and the city and the environment lost badly.
I got a preliminary injunction which lost because the judge found that the park was not a park.
The common law action upon which I based my case has been subsequently watered down so as to make further such initiatives much more difficult if even possible.
There always has been a closely knit core which works together. They were liberal types, most of whom supported rent control. With the death of rent control, Cambridge lost its party system in which the pro and anti rent control factions kept an eye on each other. So the blue collar, anti rent control (landlords, laborers) and the white collar / educational, pro rent control (architects) got together with the city manager's people in the background and significant numbers of city councilors in the background.
The issues which brought the entities together were supposed zoning protections. Once rent control died, the fake initiatives got much more real and deceptive.
A good example is the historical building at 10 Mount Auburn Street in Harvard Square. I saved that building in front of the Rent Control Board. A city manager related zoning petition created the Harvard Square Overlay District, giving meaningless public input in exchange for very real destruction of key fine print in the zoning ordinance. The project built at 8 to 10 Mt. Auburn included the building I saved at a density which would have been impossible before that upzoning. And it goes on.
I stood up to the bastards and frequently had very major successes with The Machine very often being the real opponents. After the death of rent control, their zoning initiatives started getting more and more successful as both sides split the spoils of fake protections.
I was deeply concerned about the Alewife reservation. I found a "protective" group created with machine connections. I was outorganized by The Machine. They are destroying Alewife lying that they are protecting. The game is to yell at private developers on the periphery, tell people to fight, fight, fight, and ignore the real problem, the intention of Cambridge and the state to destroy the core Alewife reservation, supposedly for flood protection, in reality to create an urban park supporting office buildings in place of the historical woodlands the "activists" claim to love.
Talking with the supposed activists in the local supposed neighborhood association is very telling. They are willing to do anything on the issue except the one thing which would work: talk to the city council. Very much the standard situation: company unions which prevent meaningful action by getting people to do anything except things which could win.
The first stage of destruction has occurred at Alewife. Acres have been destroyed for "flood protection" against two year storms, which are nothing.
The area needs storm protection. The alternative to destroying Alewife is to build flood protection with city and state money as large reservoirs under new buildings. The Machine is running around yelling Silver Maple Forest until there are no buildings left to put meaningful flood protection under. The "leader" went into the Chronicle bragging about the first phase destruction, and has continued loudly yelling to play Don Quixote against projects but not against the zoning which creates them.
One of the nastiest things was the Sheila Cook zoning petition which I wrote and Sheila led. The "activists" treated Sheila like crap. Her zoning changed the legal use of a parking lot on state land to open space. When the owner agreed to convert the parking lot to open space, The Machine conducted a celebration in which Machine Activists were treated like royalty and Sheila and I were ignored, shunned.
The same con exists on the Charles River. The pitch is to ignore the very real problems irresponsibly created over the past 13 years and ignore the irresponsible plans to make things even worse. When the state wanted to expand the outrage, The Machine tried to ram it through, but The Meeting front organization did not look like it would approve the outrage. So they delayed the action from the January meeting to the February meeting which was held on April 23 at which time they demonstrated clear corruption.
Throughout all this, the key is holier than thou goals which have a strong tendency not only not to be achieved but to see achievements which the group supposedly opposes. Good people are being misused by lies of omission and commission and by fake definitions under which "environmentalism" has become protecting that part of the environment the City of Cambridge does not feel like destroying at the present time.
By now all active pols have to be part of The Machine or else.
Interestingly, the senator representing the Western part of the city is running for congress bragging of defending Alewife. I explained reality to one of his workers who was appropriate shocked.
3. Would they be willing to kill?
The killing is white collar, shunning.
The destruction of the life of Malvina Monteiro because she filed a civil rights complaint is one of the few excellent examples which have escaped the deliberate murk of shunning.
Judge, Jury and Appeals Court condemned the Cambridge City Manager for destroying the life of Malvina Monteiro in very strong terms.
The decisions gave the Cambridge City Council full power to fire the Cambridge City Manager for malfeasance in office.
Exactly zero attempts were made to fire the Cambridge City Manager. A motion to slap him on the wrist was tabled with some folks who filed the motion voting to table.
4. Summary.
This response, of necessity, left a lot out. Of necessity, for exposition purposes, there are problems with historically following one point after another above. If you notice that problem, please excuse me. Of necessity, as well, are defects in perfect exposition. Perfect exposition would take many, many words. There are analyses on this blog which attempt that. They are very long and thus unreadible.
The situation in Cambridge, MA is rotten. It, however, has a core upon which the structure lacks strength. They live on a foundation of lies. The lies are provable.
The way to win is to put together decent people who are free of the filth, and keep those who are part of the filth out. The core principal is back stabbing with a smile. Persons with any record of back stabbing have to be kept out of any meaningful organization.
2. Money.
3. Would they be willing to kill?
4. Summary.
1. Question.
I would like to understand the Cambridge Machine better.
How much money is split? Is organized crime involved, and to what extent? Would they be ready to kill people, if they think the threat to their power is real?
2. Money.
The money probably is unproveable. You have the standard boycott of noncompliant persons and the very clear threat of such shunning. And the standard situation in which professionals active in Cambridge see approvals to their benefit elsewhere, approvals which would be lost if the activists were meaningfully doing what they say they are doing. They would be shunned if they were meaningfully doing what they say they are doing.
The exact workings are undeterminent. It is a matter of a fake reality in which the voters are told one thing and the developers and contractors know better. So both sides are kept happy.
The situation dates back to James Leo Sullivan who used his Development Department to create a series of "neighborhood associations" naturally including his friends. The controllers of the various controlled entities gave the groups apparent functions which they fulfilled except insofar as the functions conflicted with the wishes of the city government. The groups are controlled by smaller core entities which are hand selected by the creators. In the past, I have had significant successes by calling out people to meetings, but, with the death of rent control, there was no need for the pols to keep an eye on each other. Then, the falsities got much more intense.
The reality, however, is that it is always impossible to identify specific types. Many folks are simply outnumbered by con artists who gang up on them. At least in theory it is impossible to tell the knaves from the fools. They all sound and act alike. So many very terrible things, in reality, have seeds in the Cambridge City Government which are buried as far as possible.
The first target was the best park in the central part of the city for a high school expansion which could have been done in place as a campus style school, but they wanted a consolidated school and they wanted to expand the library in place. 23 hundred year old trees were destroyed with the lie: we are replacing the Cambridge Street park with a park on Broadway. Excellent trees with grass and a lot of saplings. The obvious happened. The library expansion was done and almost all the saplings were destroyed. The back stabbers on Broadway got what they deserved and the city and the environment lost badly.
I got a preliminary injunction which lost because the judge found that the park was not a park.
The common law action upon which I based my case has been subsequently watered down so as to make further such initiatives much more difficult if even possible.
There always has been a closely knit core which works together. They were liberal types, most of whom supported rent control. With the death of rent control, Cambridge lost its party system in which the pro and anti rent control factions kept an eye on each other. So the blue collar, anti rent control (landlords, laborers) and the white collar / educational, pro rent control (architects) got together with the city manager's people in the background and significant numbers of city councilors in the background.
The issues which brought the entities together were supposed zoning protections. Once rent control died, the fake initiatives got much more real and deceptive.
A good example is the historical building at 10 Mount Auburn Street in Harvard Square. I saved that building in front of the Rent Control Board. A city manager related zoning petition created the Harvard Square Overlay District, giving meaningless public input in exchange for very real destruction of key fine print in the zoning ordinance. The project built at 8 to 10 Mt. Auburn included the building I saved at a density which would have been impossible before that upzoning. And it goes on.
I stood up to the bastards and frequently had very major successes with The Machine very often being the real opponents. After the death of rent control, their zoning initiatives started getting more and more successful as both sides split the spoils of fake protections.
I was deeply concerned about the Alewife reservation. I found a "protective" group created with machine connections. I was outorganized by The Machine. They are destroying Alewife lying that they are protecting. The game is to yell at private developers on the periphery, tell people to fight, fight, fight, and ignore the real problem, the intention of Cambridge and the state to destroy the core Alewife reservation, supposedly for flood protection, in reality to create an urban park supporting office buildings in place of the historical woodlands the "activists" claim to love.
Talking with the supposed activists in the local supposed neighborhood association is very telling. They are willing to do anything on the issue except the one thing which would work: talk to the city council. Very much the standard situation: company unions which prevent meaningful action by getting people to do anything except things which could win.
The first stage of destruction has occurred at Alewife. Acres have been destroyed for "flood protection" against two year storms, which are nothing.
The area needs storm protection. The alternative to destroying Alewife is to build flood protection with city and state money as large reservoirs under new buildings. The Machine is running around yelling Silver Maple Forest until there are no buildings left to put meaningful flood protection under. The "leader" went into the Chronicle bragging about the first phase destruction, and has continued loudly yelling to play Don Quixote against projects but not against the zoning which creates them.
One of the nastiest things was the Sheila Cook zoning petition which I wrote and Sheila led. The "activists" treated Sheila like crap. Her zoning changed the legal use of a parking lot on state land to open space. When the owner agreed to convert the parking lot to open space, The Machine conducted a celebration in which Machine Activists were treated like royalty and Sheila and I were ignored, shunned.
The same con exists on the Charles River. The pitch is to ignore the very real problems irresponsibly created over the past 13 years and ignore the irresponsible plans to make things even worse. When the state wanted to expand the outrage, The Machine tried to ram it through, but The Meeting front organization did not look like it would approve the outrage. So they delayed the action from the January meeting to the February meeting which was held on April 23 at which time they demonstrated clear corruption.
Throughout all this, the key is holier than thou goals which have a strong tendency not only not to be achieved but to see achievements which the group supposedly opposes. Good people are being misused by lies of omission and commission and by fake definitions under which "environmentalism" has become protecting that part of the environment the City of Cambridge does not feel like destroying at the present time.
By now all active pols have to be part of The Machine or else.
Interestingly, the senator representing the Western part of the city is running for congress bragging of defending Alewife. I explained reality to one of his workers who was appropriate shocked.
3. Would they be willing to kill?
The killing is white collar, shunning.
The destruction of the life of Malvina Monteiro because she filed a civil rights complaint is one of the few excellent examples which have escaped the deliberate murk of shunning.
Judge, Jury and Appeals Court condemned the Cambridge City Manager for destroying the life of Malvina Monteiro in very strong terms.
The decisions gave the Cambridge City Council full power to fire the Cambridge City Manager for malfeasance in office.
Exactly zero attempts were made to fire the Cambridge City Manager. A motion to slap him on the wrist was tabled with some folks who filed the motion voting to table.
4. Summary.
This response, of necessity, left a lot out. Of necessity, for exposition purposes, there are problems with historically following one point after another above. If you notice that problem, please excuse me. Of necessity, as well, are defects in perfect exposition. Perfect exposition would take many, many words. There are analyses on this blog which attempt that. They are very long and thus unreadible.
The situation in Cambridge, MA is rotten. It, however, has a core upon which the structure lacks strength. They live on a foundation of lies. The lies are provable.
The way to win is to put together decent people who are free of the filth, and keep those who are part of the filth out. The core principal is back stabbing with a smile. Persons with any record of back stabbing have to be kept out of any meaningful organization.
Friday, August 02, 2013
Updates, Mass. Governor’s Tree Destruction: Kendall / Longfellow, Memorial Drive, Charles River, MA
1. Introduction.
2. Longfellow Bridge Repairs.
3. Memorial Drive.
1. Introduction.
We have done extended reports on these problems. This will be concise.
2. Longfellow Bridge Repairs.
The Longfellow Bridge is the second bridge east of the BU Bridge crossing the Charles River.
The project, with possible disclosure somewhere in the fine print, includes inexcusable destruction of excellent groves of trees on the Kendall end of the Longfellow above the subway track tunnel and of a magnificent grove east of the Cambridge end of the Longfellow Bridge next to the ramp from Memorial Drive heading east to the Longfellow Bridge heading to Boston.
The destruction above the subway seems to have been to create a storage area for garbage used in the project, totally unnecessary for the rearrangement of the roadways. A crossover could have been created further into Kendall Square without destruction of that excellent grove.
The destruction of the grove on the access ramp has been given bizarre excuses. The apparent reason is that the engineers are creating a new (lovely to them) toy: They are doing natural storm drainage off the bridge rather than tieing into the existing storm drain systems. Outrageous. But then again, Cambridge has imminent plans to destroy excellent trees on the Cambridge Common because the block the view, and on Memorial Drive with the explanation that Memorial Drive will look great in 40 years.
Mishka’s report:
************
After double-checking, I don't think there was any change in the tree status between Jul 19 and Aug 1.
Two trees are marked for destruction, and one tree marked for transplantation.
Unfortunately, I have to add one more tree to the threatened list: it is not marked, but it is not protected and is "in the wrong place" (very close to the bridge). Moreover, a tree near it is gone (probably at the same time, when the 4 other trees were killed), and it was not marked either
to be best of my knowledge.
3. Memorial Drive.
This is the outrage that the con artists ran around calling “underpasses”, telling people to look at the next three bridges west of the BU Bridge.
The Massachusetts Department of Transportation rejected the project based solely on the lie given to the public. They consider the actual “underpasses” irresponsible and destructive.
The secret fine print came out in the governor’s budget proposal request for bond authorization: $4 million for the underpasses, $24 million for the associated “paths.”
The associated paths stretch to the Longfellow Bridge and including destruction of hundreds of trees between the BU and Longfellow Bridges, stretching not that far from the above outrage.
The budgets are horribly confusing. I have based my concerns on an expert read of the bubbly nonsense put out by the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy.”
This bond authorization would have been in the transportation budget. It seems to have completed its process a week ago.
The falsely named Charles River “Conservancy” had announced it was seeking this falsely named project through lobbying during the period of consideration of the budget.
It has been a week, apparently since the completion of the effort. This falsely named group has not chortled, using the blatantly false description, of its success in getting bond authorization to destroy those hundreds of trees.
I assume these excellent trees are safe for the time being.
But the reality is that Cambridge, MA, has a rotten city government protected by a massive organization with non stop lies of “holier than thou.”
2. Longfellow Bridge Repairs.
3. Memorial Drive.
1. Introduction.
We have done extended reports on these problems. This will be concise.
2. Longfellow Bridge Repairs.
The Longfellow Bridge is the second bridge east of the BU Bridge crossing the Charles River.
The project, with possible disclosure somewhere in the fine print, includes inexcusable destruction of excellent groves of trees on the Kendall end of the Longfellow above the subway track tunnel and of a magnificent grove east of the Cambridge end of the Longfellow Bridge next to the ramp from Memorial Drive heading east to the Longfellow Bridge heading to Boston.
The destruction above the subway seems to have been to create a storage area for garbage used in the project, totally unnecessary for the rearrangement of the roadways. A crossover could have been created further into Kendall Square without destruction of that excellent grove.
The destruction of the grove on the access ramp has been given bizarre excuses. The apparent reason is that the engineers are creating a new (lovely to them) toy: They are doing natural storm drainage off the bridge rather than tieing into the existing storm drain systems. Outrageous. But then again, Cambridge has imminent plans to destroy excellent trees on the Cambridge Common because the block the view, and on Memorial Drive with the explanation that Memorial Drive will look great in 40 years.
Mishka’s report:
************
After double-checking, I don't think there was any change in the tree status between Jul 19 and Aug 1.
Two trees are marked for destruction, and one tree marked for transplantation.
Unfortunately, I have to add one more tree to the threatened list: it is not marked, but it is not protected and is "in the wrong place" (very close to the bridge). Moreover, a tree near it is gone (probably at the same time, when the 4 other trees were killed), and it was not marked either
to be best of my knowledge.
3. Memorial Drive.
This is the outrage that the con artists ran around calling “underpasses”, telling people to look at the next three bridges west of the BU Bridge.
The Massachusetts Department of Transportation rejected the project based solely on the lie given to the public. They consider the actual “underpasses” irresponsible and destructive.
The secret fine print came out in the governor’s budget proposal request for bond authorization: $4 million for the underpasses, $24 million for the associated “paths.”
The associated paths stretch to the Longfellow Bridge and including destruction of hundreds of trees between the BU and Longfellow Bridges, stretching not that far from the above outrage.
The budgets are horribly confusing. I have based my concerns on an expert read of the bubbly nonsense put out by the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy.”
This bond authorization would have been in the transportation budget. It seems to have completed its process a week ago.
The falsely named Charles River “Conservancy” had announced it was seeking this falsely named project through lobbying during the period of consideration of the budget.
It has been a week, apparently since the completion of the effort. This falsely named group has not chortled, using the blatantly false description, of its success in getting bond authorization to destroy those hundreds of trees.
I assume these excellent trees are safe for the time being.
But the reality is that Cambridge, MA, has a rotten city government protected by a massive organization with non stop lies of “holier than thou.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)