Impending Destruction, Cambridge, MA, USA Common, Flagstaff Park, Harvard Square.
3. Contacts, Reality among “Environmental Activists.”
[5/27, 18 and 10]
Let’s put it this way, when you look at the Cambridge Common from its main entrance, facing Harvard Square, the two dominant trees you see are slated to be destroyed. This is the first photo above.
Two out of three excellent trees behind the one on the left are slated to be destroyed. Of the six excellent trees behind the tree on the right, half, three are slated to be destroyed. This is the second photo above.
Of the five trees surrounding the monument to which those trees lead, four are slated to be destroyed. Another adjacent excellent tree to the southwest and a group of three excellent trees to the northeast are slated to be destroyed.
In preparing this report, I am going from my notes as to the particular location identity of trees I have photographed around the monument. As I get to the latter photos, the exact location of particular targeted trees is lost to me. The trees which are the focus of each shot, in each case are targeted. If I am wrong, please correct me.
I could go into a long analysis of the nonsense spouted by the City of Cambridge on this issue. The short, real explanation is that the trees being destroyed are, in the opinion of a very destructive city government, blocking the view. And Cambridge has a ruthless history of environmental destruction. It is horrifying that the targets are so uniformly excellent that, in the latter photos, I cannot separate them.
This view corresponds to the second photo above, but from the entrance to the Common. The tree on the left is the right one of the trees at the entrance. The little tree is not being destroyed.
This is the magnificent right tree of the two fronting the common’s entrance, to be destroyed.
This corresponds to the second view above, just pulling the camera to the right. Counting from the end, next to the safe little tree, the two trees at the end and the 4th tree from the end are being destroyed.
Closer view, last two trees on the right are slated to be destroyed.
View from the other side, last 2 on right, slated to be destroyed.
[06-02, 07 and 08]
Back to the entrance. These are photos of the dominant tree on the left, slated tobe destroyed. The entrance can be seen in the second photo.
Tree on the left is the dominant left tree being destroyed. Both left and right are being destroyed.
[06-02, 10, 2d left]
Second tree on the left, slated to be destroyed.
At the circle around the monument, the right is being destroyed and the left middle.
At the monument, the right front tree is being destroyed.
At the monument, the right tree is being destroyed.
[06-02, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21]
The only question in my mind on the destruction of these trees is the exact location. Assume the central tree is targeted. More than one tree in a particular photo may be targeted.
Looking at the proposed destruction on the Cambridge, MA, USA Common, I am reminded, yet again, that it is always a very severe error to say with regard to the City of Cambridge: “They would never stoop so low.”
I have done a lot of work on the planned massive destruction in the last week or so. The documentation is massive and horribly, perhaps deliberately, confusing. It is even worse for somebody, like me, who has lived through this outrage and remembers a, hopefully former, proposal which was even worse.
The numbers above are my best reading of a horribly confusing plan.
I spent three days doing photographs which have turned out to be close to useless. I took as many shots on June 2 as in the three prior days combined.
I will try to present planned destruction on the Cambridge Common which is publicly announced and unambiguous. There seems to be one tree in the Environmental Notification Form (of 22) which is not included in the tree destruction plan. I am open to corrections. Thank you.
The documents which are public are posted at http://www.cambridgema.gov/CDD/Projects/Transportation/cambridgecommon.aspx. The website is arranged so that you have to hunt through their list and figure out which one you want. The individual documents have major PDF documents which have very valuable components but which are set up so that the individual portions cannot be separately download.
Of particular value is the first document, their Tree Plan. This identifies destruction not kept secret.
The tree destruction plan shows 9 Norway Maples, 1 Red Maple, 6 Japanese Pagodas, 2 Lindens, 2 Elms, and 1 Crabapple to be destroyed. The ENF says 22, as opposed to the 21 in this document. I will try to figure out where the added tree is / post photos which might be of value in that regard.
I have tried to figure out a way to upload this plan to the blog. I have not been successful. PDF does not seem to be convertible.
The City Council preliminary vote concerning the destruction on November 19, 2012, is posted at http://www2.cambridgema.gov/cityclerk/PolicyOrder.cfm?item_id=36509. They voted the actual funds for massive, irresponsible destruction, making things quite imminent, on May 20, 2013. The dispositive action is posted at http://www2.cambridgema.gov/cityClerk/cmLetter.cfm?item_id=24223.
In direct violation of the November 19, 2012 order, no trees to be destroyed are marked. My memory is that the City Council did a walk through. Perhaps they decided the destruction was so offensive that they did not want their constituents to know.
The original motion was retroactively amended so that the original comment in the motion of close to 100 to be destroyed has been changed. It is posted at http://www2.cambridgema.gov/cityClerk/PolicyOrder.cfm?item_id=36485.
The reality is that, under the City Manager’s mentality, there really is no way to tell whether he is lying about the destruction of trees. The lies of omission come when he brags about the replacement and does not say what he is destroying.
The ENF and the Development Department documents brag of a new Bike Highway. This is exactly where the lies of omission come in. The final plans seem to have moved the Bike Highway from on top of excellent trees in the eastern part of Flagstaff Park and the traffic island to the south. The presentation says the highway is now to the west of Flagstaff Park. My guess is that the added tree is associated with the Bike Highway.
The guess is that the additional tree is either on Flagstaff Park or on the traffic island south of it. The traffic island is clearly part of Harvard Square proper.
Here are photos of each from my visit of a week ago.
[05-27, 1 and 22]
3. Contacts, Reality among “Environmental Activists.”
This current outrage includes significant money from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
State environmental people, DES Hotline: ESF.Hotline@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, and
(2) there are Cambridge Machine activists very active and very visible 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. 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.
Then look at the Cambridge Common destruction photos again.