Clarification on Cambridge, MA, USA Machine Admission. Please protect against destruction.

Clarification on Cambridge, MA, USA Machine Admission.  Please protect against destruction.

1. Protect against Destruction.
2. Clarification on Cambridge Machine Admission quoted in our last report.
A. Introduction and Explanation of terms.
B. My Report.
C. The relevant part of the Machine operative’s email.
D. My analysis.
3. Protect against destruction.
4. Links to latest reports of outrages.

1. Protect against Destruction.

Please see email addresses in final section.


2. Clarification on Cambridge Machine Admission quoted in our last report.

A. Introduction and Explanation of terms.

This clarification is presented solely on my own initiative.

“MassDOT” is short for the Massachusetts Department of Transportation.

B. My Report.

(1) On the Blog:

***********

C. Cambridge Machine admits City Control. [ed: This “C is the section from the original report.]

Among the missing [ed: At the 5/1/14 meeting, in comparison to the 4/10/14 meeting] were the head of the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy” and a law school graduate who has a long record of yelling about the meaningless and having contempt for meaningful protections.

She made a very big thing about demanding voting representation for the fake neighborhood association on the MassDOT advisory committee [ed: at the 4/10/14 meeting].

MassDOT has a long experience with the destructiveness of these fake protectors and refused to give the fake group voting membership.

The woman has crowed that “we” now have representation.

Their “representation” is the Cambridge Development Department.  Thus MassDOT can talk to their controllers instead of intermediaries.

***********

(2) On the facebook and email reports:

***********

Our report goes into additional cons from the Cambridge Machine.

One interesting point is that a Cambridge Machine activist seems to admit that the Cambridge Machine is controlled by the Cambridge Development Department.

***********

C. The relevant part of the Machine operative’s email.

As a result of our elected representatives efforts*, Cambridge now has a representative on the Dept. of Transportation’s Community Task Force of residents, institutions, businesses.  It’s Bill Deignan , Transportation Program Manager at our Community Develoment Dept.  Bill attended DOT’s May 1 presentation/Q&A session at City Hall and the Task Force meeting in early May.  Bill’s contact info:  (617) 349-4632, wdeignan@cambridgema.gov.
*Rep./City Councillor Toomey and Reps. Livingstone and DiDomenico pressed for this.

D. My analysis.

(1) General.

The writer made a very major stink that her fake neighborhood association should be given voting membership on the MassDOT advisory committee in the April 10, 2014 meeting.

Her language is very much the equivalent of calling the appointment some sort of achievement, and of satisfying her demands.

To me, her language is an acknowledge that there is no meaningful difference between the appointment of a formal city employee and the appointment of a representative of her fake neighborhood association.

Frankly, if her fake neighborhood association has any meaning whatsoever, and her presentation in the 4/10/14 meeting had any substance, the appointment of a city representative is a well deserved slap in the face.

I would be amazed if, given this location, MassDOT did not appoint a representative of the City of Cambridge.

I would also be amazed if MassDOT gave her fake neighborhood association a voting representative.  MassDOT is not stupid.  MassDOT has seen too much of the Cambridge Machine.

Additionally, however, the position of her fake neighborhood association concerning the Charles River is that it is anti Charles River to Defend the Charles River.  Her fake neighborhood association is very insistent on its demands that any politically correct person has a duty to ignore any and all matters concerning the Charles River except for those matters dictated by the fake neighborhood association.

English translation: A belligerently destructive company union.

Standard tactic by the City of Cambridge in its ongoing attacks on the City of Cambridge.  These fake groups date back to the reappointment of James Leo Sullivan in 1974.  He stated at that time that he wanted to create neighborhood associations.  He and his two successors have done that with a vengeance, a lot of cheerleading groups.

I recall one of Cambridge’s “neighborhood associations” which was receiving funding from the City of Cambridge see its money decrease when the group strayed from the straight and narrow.  This particular entity is one of the entities fighting for the destruction of the Alewife reservation.

(2) Correction.

I am sorry about using quotations when my report presented my honest rewording of her comments.  I wrote my report from the top of my head.


3. Protect against destruction.

I have repeatedly reported on the outrages being inflicted on the Charles River and the Cambridge Common.

I included in the letter to the Cambridge City Council objecting to its imminent outrages on the Cambridge Common my objections to House Bill H4009 initiated by the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation.  This will destroy hundreds of trees between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge, and ALL such destruction is coordinated with the City of Cambridge.  Passage could be imminent.

I summarized many other ongoing and recently accomplished environmental outrages for the City Council of the City of Cambridge has filthy hands.

The imminent target of destruction is the excellent common just north of Harvard Square in Cambridge, MA, USA.

If you would like to be recorded opposing to these outrages, please send an email to dlopez@cambridgema.gov.  That will get your email to Donna Lopez, the City Clerk.  As part of your email, ask that your email be forwarded to the Cambridge City Council and included in their Communications for the next meeting.

Support of my letter opposing the destruction on the Cambridge Common and the destruction in H4009 concerning multiple destruction of trees and animals on the Charles River would be helpful.

Of greater value in opposing the outrages on the Charles River would be communications to state officials as follows:

Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.

All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.

The list of legislators’ emails is set up so that you can copy and paste them into addresses on your email, either original addressees or, better, blind copies.  Please do not miss the addendum at the beginning in which I list the local State Representative who was recently elected.

4. Links to latest reports of outrages.

The plans for destruction under House Bill H4009 are at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/04/tree-destruction-plans-charles-river.html.

These are the official plans posted when they sought Obama moneys, lying of disease to the public.  They have been fighting to destroy these trees for 10 years.  Do not be conned.  Any deviation from these plans will be minor.

The exact citation is House Bill H4009 is Section 2C, line item 2890-7020.

The photos of trees marked for destruction on the Cambridge Common are posted in two parts:

1. http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-cambridge-common-another-target-of.html.
2. http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/cambridge-ma-usa-prepares-to-destroy.html.

My letter of objection to the Cambridge City Council is posted at:
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/destruction-of-cambridge-common-3.html.  The letter includes smaller reproductions of the actual photos.

The Cambridge City Clerk's Printing of my letter and the attachments far surpasses in quality my records.  It is posted at:  http://www2.cambridgema.gov/CityOfCambridge_Content/documents/140602%20latremouille%20com_1.PDF.

Mass. Pike: Victory for the good guys; Cambridge Machine Ramps Up the Con; Please write to defend the trees and animals.

Mass. Pike: Victory for the good guys; Cambridge Machine Ramps Up the Con; Please write to defend the trees and animals.

1. Protection against destruction
2. Mass. Pike: Victory for the Good Guys; Cambridge Machine Admits Control?  Yet another con.

A. Victory for the Good Guys.

B. Mass. Pike Relocation History.

3. Protect against destruction.

1. Protection against destruction.

Please look at the end for information on contacts if you have not contacted yet.  Concerning Cambridge, the Department of Conservation and Recreation and Governor Patrick's outrageous pending destruction on the Charles River and the Cambridge Common.

2. Mass. Pike: Victory for the Good Guys; Cambridge Machine Admits Control?  Yet another con.

A. Victory for the Good Guys.

The plans for the relocated Massachusetts Turnpike (I90) shows a train station between the relocated highway and the Allston Neighborhood.

The Cambridge Machine through the usual lies of “protection” fought for passenger service through Cambridge on the Grand Junction Railroad, connecting to North Station.  The lie was “You can’t win.  You can’t win.  But have we go a deal for you.”

MassDOT saw the characters and saw the lack of value in their fake “compromise”.  MassDOT rejected the passenger route.

What is surprising reading yesterday’s report in the Boston Globe is that the Cambridge Machine had sneaked in a Grand Junction route for that station.  All that was publicly communicated was that the passenger station would be on the main line from South Station to Worcester.  It comes as an incredible surprise to see Grand Junction service.

The station was killed as an “economy”.

The reality, however, is that this change bodes very well for the Green Line A route to Commonwealth Avenue Green Line B and then to Kenmore and the Harvard / Longwood Medical Center.

It is a cheap solution and does the job.

And we are dealing with a responsible agency, not the City of Cambridge, and not the Department of Conservation and Recreation.

B. Mass. Pike Relocation History.

There was a clear pattern in the April 10, 2014 and May 1, 2014 Massachusetts Department of Transporation presentations on the Massachusetts Turnpike (I90) work. 

On April 10, 2014, the meeting was in Boston’s Allston neighborhood.

A batch of the usual pious and demanding Cambridge Machine folks with Massachusetts Institute of Technology connections showed up and mouthed pious, demanding destruction and overload.  

I publicized their connections in these reports, and these “Cambridge” activists did not show up for the May 1, 2014 meeting in Cambridge City Hall.

C. Cambridge Machine admits City Control.

Among the missing were the head of the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy” and a law school graduate who has a long record of yelling about the meaningless and having contempt for meaningful protections.

She made a very big thing about demanding voting representation for the fake neighborhood association on the MassDOT advisory committee.

MassDOT has a long experience with the destructiveness of these fake protectors and refused to give the fake group voting membership.

The woman has crowed that “we” now have representation.

Their “representation” is the Cambridge Development Department.  Thus MassDOT can talk to their controllers instead of intermediaries.

D. “Environmental” Protection?

Noise from the Massachusetts Turnpike has been highly obvious on the Cambridge side of the Charles River, especially toward the river’s edge.  I90 is close to and is raised above the Charles River.  The traffic noise creates a constant but not overly loud background noise.

The plans would, in all aspects, either keep things unchanged or drastically reduce noise.  The off ramps to Brighton and Cambridge would be drastically reduced.  That portion of the highway would be moved toward the Allston neighborhood and lowered to ground level rather than raised way up.

The portion near the BU Bridge would be lowered to the ground insofar as possible.  Smart construction would rebuild it all on the ground, and raise the Grand Junction above it along with Green Line A.

And this Cambridge Machine activist is complaining there would still be “too much” noise?

She has long had contempt for meaningful protection of the Charles.  She yells about building design lying that she is an environmental protector.

Here, the Cambridge Machine is fighting for massive destruction of trees, expansion of the outrage at Magazine Beach’s playing fields, heartless animal abuse, destruction of the little guy’s parking lot at the foot of Magazine Street, and two bike highways on the Charles, destroying, destroying, destroying.

So she is yelling that 40 years of background noise is not reduced enough.

Just another con game.  Do not look at the destruction we are fighting for.  Look at how pious we are on next to meaningless items.

3. Protect against destruction.

I have repeatedly reported on the outrages being inflicted on the Charles River and the Cambridge Common.

I included in the letter to the Cambridge City Council objecting to its imminent outrages on the Cambridge Common my objections to House Bill H4009 initiated by the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation.  This will destroy hundreds of trees between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge, and ALL such destruction is coordinated with the City of Cambridge.  Passage could be imminent.

I summarized many other ongoing and recently accomplished environmental outrages for the City Council of the City of Cambridge has filthy hands.

The imminent target of destruction is the excellent common just north of Harvard Square in Cambridge, MA, USA.

If you would like to be recorded opposing to these outrages, please send an email to dlopez@cambridgema.gov.  That will get your email to Donna Lopez, the City Clerk.  As part of your email, ask that your email be forwarded to the Cambridge City Council and included in their Communications for the next meeting.

Support of my letter opposing the destruction on the Cambridge Common and the destruction in H4006 concerning multiple destruction of trees and animals on the Charles River would be helpful.

Of greater value in opposing the outrages on the Charles River would be communications to state officials as follows:

Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.

All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.

The list of legislators’ emails is set up so that you can copy and paste them into addresses on your email, either original addressees or, better, blind copies.  Please do not miss the addendum at the beginning in which I list the local State Representative who was recently elected.

Charles River, Cambridge / Harvard Square Common: Save a Lot of Excellent Trees; Cambridge, MA, USA,

Charles River, Cambridge / Harvard Square Common: Save a Lot of Excellent Trees; Cambridge, MA, USA

Yesterday, May 28, 2014, I delivered my letter with photographs to the Cambridge, MA, USA City Clerk for inclusion in the Cambridge City Council’s “Communications” list at the coming meeting, Monday night.

This is the one I reported at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/destruction-of-cambridge-common-3.html.  It includes the partial photographs of their intended outrageous destruction of so many excellent trees on the Cambridge Common.

Full sized copies of the photos of the imminent outrage are posted at

• Cambridge Common 1:  http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-cambridge-common-another-target-of.html.

• Cambridge Common 2:  http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/cambridge-ma-usa-prepares-to-destroy.html

I included in the letter my objections to House Bill H4006 initiated by the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation.  This will destroy hundreds of trees between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge, and ALL such destruction is coordinated with the City of Cambridge.  Passage could be imminent.

I summarized many other ongoing and recently accomplished environmental outrages for the City Council of the City of Cambridge has filthy hands.

The imminent target of destruction is the excellent common just north of Harvard Square in Cambridge, MA, USA.

If you would like to be recorded opposing to these outrages, please send an email to dlopez@cambridgema.gov.  That will get your email to Donna Lopez, the City Clerk.  Ask that your email be forwarded to the Cambridge City Council and included in their Communications for the next meeting.

Support of my letter opposing the destruction on the Cambridge Common and the destruction in H4006 concerning multiple destruction of trees and animals on the Charles River would be helpful.

Of greater value in opposing the outrages on the Charles River would be communications to state officials as follows:

Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.

All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.

The list of legislators’ emails is set up so that you can copy and paste them into addresses on your email, either original addressees or, better, blind copies.  Please do not miss the addendum at the beginning of the local State Representative who was recently elected.

At the top is a photo of the entrance of the Cambridge Common facing Harvard Square. This view is slated to be decimated.  Also provided is a photo of an excellent grove of more than 100 trees on Memorial Drive, of which more than 80 trees would be destroyed.  These trees are among the smaller of the trees threatened by H4006.

PS: The City Clerk and her office are extremely efficient.  I followed up my delivery with my own email to her praising her office’s function including improvements she has made.  Those improvements include her giving the Cambridge City Council INDIVIDUAL hard copies of all emails sent to her for inclusion in the Communications list on the City Council agenda.  A brief note as stated above would be extremely helpful in defending the environment a truly outrageous and hypocritical City Council.

Destruction of the Cambridge Common 3: A letter to a reprehensible City Council.

1. Introduction.
2. City Council Letter - scanning.
3. Text before photos in City Council Letter.
4. Text after photos in City Council Letter.


1. Introduction.

I am in the process of sending a letter to the Cambridge City Council following up the last two reports on their outrageous imminent destruction on the Cambridge Common.

Normally, when reporting a letter, I would give the text with graphics, as appropriate, interspersed.

The photos included in the letter have all been published in the last two reports.  Those photos, however, have a very distinctive presentation in this letter.  So I am scanning the letter and reproducing it below, followed by the text before and after the photos.

The Cambridge City Council has four new City Councilors.  Given the real reprehensibleness of the destruction they are inflicting on the Cambridge Common, ordinarily, I would expect one of the new councilors to question the destruction.

But Cambridge has a highly reprehensible Machine running around lying about the City Council.  Reality is irrelevant to these folks.  The big issue is how much lying can they get away with.

This letter will be hand delivered to the City Clerk Tuesday morning, tomorrow morning.  My normal distribution includes an abbreviated email copy to the members of the Cambridge City Council.  If there is honor on the Cambridge City Council, I should think there will be a motion in front of the Cambridge City Council on this outrage.

But then, the City of Cambridge is destroying hundreds of trees on the Charles River working through the Department of Conservation and Recreation in House Bill H4006, along with massive increase in the heartless animal abuse, and the irresponsible southern part of their Grand Junction bicycle highway proposal, and so many other outrages.

The explanation will always be what the voter will swallow.

The explanation on the massive Charles River destruction is fully predictable: how dare you blame the actions on us with regard to an entity which clears everything with the City of Cambridge!!

The Grand Junction is still pending, but highly ominous.

The extremely lying machine, the Cambridge Machine, is a major factor.

Prior reports are posted at:

• Cambridge Common 1:  http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-cambridge-common-another-target-of.html.

• Cambridge Common 2:  http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/cambridge-ma-usa-prepares-to-destroy.html.

Ok, here are the scanned copies.  I will follow with the text before and after the photos.

2. City Council Letter - scanning.

3. Text before photos in City Council Letter.

City Council
City of Cambridge
City Hall
795 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA  02139

RE: Environment Destruction Ongoing in Cambridge, Photos of the Outrages at the Cambridge Common.

To the Honorable, The Cambridge City Council:

Following are photos I took on Saturday, May 25, 2014, of your ongoing environmental outrage on the Cambridge Common:

You are destroying excellent trees, many with the explanation on your ENF that they are in the way of the view.

The first two photos are combined shots.  Your are destroying these excellent views by savaging excellent trees included in these shots with trees you are not destroying YET.

The first two photos are general photos, including both threatened and not.

The third photo is of a tree which was erroneously marked with an orange circle.  The error is blacked out and a comment added to refrain from destroying THIS one.  This clearly communicates what the orange circle means.

The balance of the photos are of trees marked for destruction with an orange circle.  Some of these had to be photographed so closely to catch the circle that their excellent crowns are not visible.  Rest assured, you are destroying excellent trees. I was just only able to photograph the lower portions where the limbs have been pruned.

I did a detailed photo analysis of your outrageous plans.  It is posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/impending-destruction-cambridge-ma-usa.html.

This destruction is the precursor to your planned destruction of hundreds of trees between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge.  Your agent/accomplice, the DCR, seems to obtaining with no fanfare $34 million for this destruction through House Bill H4009.  The last time you tried to destroy these, the DCR flatly lied that the targeted trees were diseased.  Your destruction plans for these are posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/04/tree-destruction-plans-charles-river.html.

You have taken one more step toward environmental destruction associated with H4009 in that portion of the Grand Junction Bike Highway concept which destroys the environment with more heartless animal abuse south of Memorial Drive.  You are helping the DCR implement that portion of their policies which call for killing off or driving away as many resident animals as they can get away with.  This action, of course, follows on your multiple outrages at the Magazine Beach playing fields.  Multiple lies there, of course.  The most visible was the 10 plus year lie by the key manager that he (and you) had no intention to harm the 33 year resident Charles River White Geese.  He has since bragged that he is starving them.  Claims of improving the athletic fields were a fully predictable lie.  The playing fields have seen a destruction in size to accommodate drainage to drain off poisons being dumped there to keep alive sickly introduced grasses which replaced responsible grasses that you destroyed.  The responsible, now destroyed, grasses survived in an environmentally responsible manner for the better part of a Century.

This follows your joint destruction with the DCR of acres of irreplaceable woodlands at Alewife, along with mass killings of resident animals.  You had the nerve to spout pious objecting to developers obeying your zoning laws and doing less reprehensible destruction on their nearby properties.

I could keep on going.  I will not.

So here are the photos, and I am confident that members of the City Council and their friends / agents will continue with the outrageous lie that the members of the City Council doing these terrible things  are environmentalists.


4. Text after photos in City Council Letter.

I am fully aware that members of the Cambridge Machine are very visible in Boston Sierra Club which has repeatedly misinformed the public that members of the Cambridge City Council are pro environment.  With one glaring exception, it is not fully possible to question recently elected members, but the silence / participation in outrages definitely makes it more and more possible to question the environmental qualifications of any member of the Cambridge City Council.

Very normal were the lovely words against private destroyers at Alewife who were obeying zoning, without mentioning your zoning of the area and your own outrages.

I am confident that the Cambridge City Council will not stand up to any of the ongoing outrages or attempt to undo the City Council’s own outrageous past misbehavior.  And that includes FORMALLY objecting to the city council destruction on the Cambridge Common.

It is still possible to undo the Cambridge City Council’s outrageous vote concerning the Cambridge Common.

It is still possible to undo the outrages included in House Bill H4009.  The specific line item is 2890-7020 in section 2C.

Those trees on the Cambridge Common have not YET been destroyed.

Those trees and animals on the Charles River have not YET been destroyed.

You defend South America.  You defend Africa.

Cambridge is most definitely within your jurisdiction.

The outrageous destruction, intensified heartless animal abuse and the needless expense in the southern end of the Grand Junction Bike Proposal can be avoided.  The responsible southern end would connect the Bike Highway to the bend of Vassar Street where Vassar Street comes extremely close, then proceed one property lot to Memorial Drive and the Paul Dudley White Bike Highway.

You have yet to take control of Magazine Beach which was part of the deal associated with so much achieved but never publicized destruction.  You have a right to insist that promises be kept, including the wording of the Charles River Master Plan before it was modified to comport with outrages in violation of the very clear wording of the Charles River Master Plan.  You have a right to expect a lawn to the Charles River, not a walled off Magazine Beach Playing Fields.

The City Council was promised improved fields at Magazine Beach.  You have a right to expect Magazine Beach to have better playing fields than they were when the City Council voted for the changes, not the smaller fields you were given, in order to drain off poisons which should not be dumped and which were never publicly announced.  The poisons are “necessary” to keep alive sickly introduced grasses which were installed to replace healthy, responsible grasses which survived the better part of a Century in a responsible manner.

And to the extent that corrupt actions by a fake group is claimed to bless expansion of the outrages, you certainly have a right to expect honorable behavior, not an encouragement and rewarding of corrupt behavior.  The tactics which are normally used to fight for destruction on the Charles River are the same tactics which achieved the first stage of governmental destruction of the Alewife reservation.  Yell you are the good guy and tell people to do everything except the right thing.  On the Charles, they looked like they might lose a destructive vote, so they simply stole it.

I am uncomfortably concerned that you will continue the destructive hypocrisy which has been the norm in the achievement of so much irresponsible destruction in the City of Cambridge.

Sincerely,



Robert J. La Trémouille

Cambridge, MA, USA, prepares to destroy the heart of the Cambridge Common, part 2, the mark of planned death.

It is absolutely horrible to see the accelerating environmental destruction by the City of Cambridge, MA, USA, and its friends.

The real horror is the nonstop lies of
• “holier than thou” and
• claims that they do not control their destructive friends running around Cambridge lying of the City’s holiness and
• claims that they are not controlling the Department of Conservation and Recreation doing Cambridge’s dirtiwork at the state level.

This is the second report on the imminent destruction of the heart of the Cambridge Common.  This report is based on photos I took yesterday, May 24, 2014.  The first report is posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-cambridge-common-another-target-of.html.

Yesterday’s report includes a lot of links to reports of destruction by this reprehensible city government, and my analysis of whom the destruction is intended to benefit.

My prior tree by tree photo analysis of planned destruction on the Cambridge Common is included in the links.

This is the balance of the photos from yesterday.  I did not publish these yesterday because I accidentally saved them as movies.  I have obtained stills from the movies.  The stills follow.

The purpose of these depictions was to record trees I saw marked for TOTALLY WASTEFUL destruction.  These are the precursors on the coming much larger outrage coming on the Charles River in House Bill H4009.

The next to the last photo translates the mark of death.  This is a tree which was incorrectly marked.  The marker covered up the marking and wrote that this one should not be destroyed.

Cambridge, MA, USA, has a truly reprehensible city government.

The Cambridge Common: Another Target of Cambridge Environmental Destruction, part 1

1. Introduction.
2. Photos preceding an outrage.
3. Who benefits?


1. Introduction.

I have, in recent days, publicized the imminent outrage of hundreds of trees slated for destruction on Memorial Drive as a result of House Bill H4009.

The running feature of defense of the City of Cambridge and its friends is “They would never stoop so low.”  But this is blatantly false.

The outrages at Magazine Beach were justified by the same nonsense, plus flat out lies and omissions.

Our report on that was published at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/08/magazine-beach-using-vegetation-for.html.

We have reported on the outrages at Alewife.  Photos of that destruction are posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/02/cambridge-pols-destroy-alewife-photo.html.

One prior group of photos of the destruction in H4009 was posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2011/04/massive-tree-destruction.html.

The destruction plans are posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/04/tree-destruction-plans-charles-river.html.

This afternoon, I stopped by the Cambridge Common.  Nine city councilors voted to destroy 28 excellent trees there and, to my surprise, they have not yet been destroyed.  Four of the guilty have departed, all well deserved, but unfortunately, one was a promotion.

Five remain.  Four of the incumbents hands are only starting to get filthy.

I say starting to get filthy because those trees are still there, as are the hundreds of trees on the Charles River, and any city councilor or other pol who says “It’s too late” is flat out lying.

There is a lot of lying behind the engine of environmental destruction which is the City of Cambridge, MA, USA and its friends.  And, any pol who has been elected has no business claiming stupidity.

One prior report on the outrage at the Cambridge Common is at:  http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/impending-destruction-cambridge-ma-usa.html.

Remember most of the targeted trees are being destroyed because they block the view.

2. Photos preceding an outrage.

This is a preliminary report.  I see that I accidentally shot a bunch of movies.  So you are getting seven photos with stills from movies to come.

In the next report, the first photo will says everything once I get turned into a still.

An organize spot was placed on the tree.  It was blocked out with a comment not to destroy.

I will not do a detailed analysis.  There is one in the prior report.  The first three photos are of trees in the area threatened.  These photos were taken before I was certain what the orange dot means.  The prior report goes into detail as to which are threatened.  More than one of these excellent trees are threatened.

The final four photos are of many trees clearly under attack by Cambridge and its friends.  These photos were photographed because of the orange dot marking them for destruction.  This will be explained by the first still in the follow on report.

I see a severe defect in photographing to get the spot.  I had to get so close that excellent trees with excellent limbs way up look bare because, if I photographed the top, I would not be able to photograph the spot.  A photo from a further distance which included the line of trees which contains the second and fourth tree in this group is the third photo in the above group of photos I took.  And there are others in the first three photos.

The real purpose of those first three photos was that I saw a lot of threatened trees and photographed the bunch without trying to pick out individually threatened trees.

Realizing this problem, I may or may not edit the movies to get out stills.

3. Who benefits?

Contractors get paid for destroying trees.

Contractors get paid for planting saplings and other grossly inferior replacements.

“Planners” get paid to plan destruction.  Fire a bunch of “planners” and there will be much less destruction.

And a lot of folks in the fake “protective” groups protecting the outrages fall into these categories of beneficiaries, directly or indirectly.

And a whole bunch of office holders lying that they are environmentalists benefit because the Cambridge Machine will very aggressively agree with their lie.  Remember the secret definition of “environmentalism” among these people.  “Environmentalism” in Cambridge, MA, among the Cambridge Machine, is protecting that part of the environment which is NOT being destroyed by Cambridge / its friends this week.

Folks who earn their living destroying our world have a black ball policy.  If any of them MEANINGFULLY stands up to outrages, no matter how irresponsible, they are blackballed.  If they lie, claim there are “defending” and con good people into doing the opposite of what those folks want to do, these are people who are “getting things done.”  Instead of a special place in Hell, to their accomplices, these are folks to look up to

Mass. Legislature: Destruction on Memorial Drive goes from Bond Authorization to Actual Expenditure. Killing off of the Charles River White Geese? Plus hundreds of trees.

1. The rotten reality.
2. Contacts.


1. The rotten reality.

I have been reporting on the ongoing attempts of the DCR and Cambridge to destroy hundreds of trees between the BU Bridge.  The replacement of the prior bill with H4009 makes things much worse.

Including authorization of direct attacks on the abused Charles River White Geese.

Massachusetts House bill H4009 which is late in approvals specifically funds massive destruction on Memorial Drive as follows:

Section 2C

line item 2890-7020, as relevant:

$32,000,000 shall be expended to complete the planning, design and construction of Phase II of the Historic Parkways Initiative along the section of the Memorial Drive between the Longfellow Bridge and the Boston University Bridge, also known as the BU Bridge, in the city of Cambridge, to construct and make improvements to pedestrian pathways, bike and paths, and to make betterments to landscaping; and in accordance with the MassDOT’s Healthy Transportation Directive;

Prior wording was just for bond authorization.  This is expenditure.

Prior wording was vague.

This is extremely specific.

English translation of “construct and make improvements to pedestrian pathways, bike and paths, and to make betterments to landscaping” is “DESTROY, DESTROY, DESTROY”

AND IT SPECIFICALLY INCLUDES THE GHETTO TO WHICH THE CHARLES RIVER WHITE GEESE ARE CONFINED.

Heartless abuse could readily turn into outright killing or greater abuse consistent with the destruction.

The Cambridge City Council is moving forward on a bike highway proposal which includes irresponsible destruction in the undestroyed part of the goose area.  Cambridge’s plans call for two bike highways and a fence blocking access between the main goose area and the adjacent hillside.

The tree destruction plans are posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/04/tree-destruction-plans-charles-river.html.

The Memorial Drive project has been kept as secret as possible.  When the DCR sought to destroy these trees in 2009, they simply lied to the public that they were diseased.

This has been kept below the radar except for chortling by the destructive Charles River “Conservancy”.

Until last week when the Cambridge City Council directed the City Manager for a funding proposal.

And this outrageous rewriting.

2. Contacts.

Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.

All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.

Cambridge, MA, USA city councilors: Council@cambridgema.gov.

Email Letter: DCR Hides Wasteful Destruction in Gov’s Bond Bill; “Support” obtained by Fraud

Email Letter:  DCR Hides Wasteful Destruction in Gov’s Bond Bill; “Support” obtained by Fraud.

I am in the process of sending the following letter to members of the Massachusetts legislature.  This analysis includes typo corrections.

Please note that tree destruction plans are posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/04/tree-destruction-plans-charles-river.html.

Folks who would like to join me may find legislators’ emails at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.




I object to the bonding authorization of $24 million to destroy hundreds of trees on Memorial Drive on the Charles River in Cambridge between the BU and Longfellow Bridges included in H4009 (formerly H3332), as part of “Historical Parkways.”

I object to the bonding of $4 million in the same bill for environmental destruction under the next three bridges over the Charles River under the euphemism of “underpasses.

These projects would include other environmental destruction and massive heartless animal abuse.  There is a lot to destroy in the area.  DCR projects always hurt as many animals as possible ancillary to their goal of killing off or driving away as many animals as they can on the Charles River Basin.  DCR and Cambridge recently started a comparable mass tree destruction and animal pogrom in the Alewife reservation near Alewife station.  They destroyed acres of irreplaceable woodlands and much more looks like it is coming.

***********

I see a pious letter of support by the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy.”  This entity has a strikingly bad record on environmental destruction.  They function as a cheerleader for the reprehensible Department of Conservation and Recreation and the City of Cambridge.

DCR has a policy of killing off or driving away all resident animals on this part of the Charles River.  DCR has been very vicious and cruel in actions supported by this fake “conservancy.”  DCR has indulged in massive destruction supported by a repeated pattern of outrageous lies.

One example of lies is a swim in the CRC did to celebrate destruction at Magazine Beach.  The project walled off Magazine Beach from the Charles River.  It replaced healthy grass with sickly stuff and it started dumping poisons in a previously sacrosanct area.  Athletic fields were destroyed to drain off poisons which should not even be there.

The 33 year resident Charles River White Geese have been deliberately starved and worse since them.

The CRC destroyed most of the ground vegetation between the BU Bridge and the BU Boathouse.  They replaced healthy ground vegetation with dirt.  The DCR has worked with irresponsible railroad workers to make the situation worse.  When the Cambridge Conservation Commission’s executive director objected, the DCR told the railroad workers to keep up the destruction, just to move beyond the very small CCC jurisdiction.

They are heartlessly abusing the local animal residents, most visibly the highly valued 33 year resident Charles River White Geese..

I was shocked just now to review the CRC official position on the destruction in the governor’s bond bill, in a letter to the legislature.  I was shocked by how little the CRC letter meaningfully said about this very destructive bill which it supports.

Separate from this letter, the CRC bragged in a widely distributed email communication of the initial filing of the governor’s bond bill.  Translating the euphemisms, the CRC bragged of $24 million for destruction of hundreds of trees between the BU and Longfellow Bridge with associated attacks on resident animals.

This $24 million bond authorization in the governor’s bond bill was described by the CRC as “incidental” to $4 million for underpasses under the next three bridges west of the BU Bridge.  This “underpasses” project has been condemned as environmentally destructive by a responsible agency, MassDOT.

CRC ran around getting “approvals” for the $4 million in “underpasses” environmental destruction.  They now call the $24 million in massive tree destruction “ancillary” to the $4 million in “underpasses.”  I call such a comparison flat out fraud.  There is no question in my mind that support, albeit misguided, for the $4 million “underpasses” project has been warped into support for the combination of $28 million destruction.  In the sick world which is Cambridge, MA, $24 million is incidental to $4 million.

***********

In response to CRC’s self congratulations, my record is a lot better and my record is on the side I claim to be on.

I am writing individually and as Chair of Friends of the White Geese, a non profit recognized by the Attorney General’s Office.

I have defended the Charles River since 2000 individually and as Chair of Friends of the White Geese.  One of our first achievements was to discredit the predecessor organization to the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy.”  The predecessor “disappeared” and the CRC announced itself a few months later.

The then local State Representative called for an animal pogrom aimed at the Charles River White Geese in the Cambridge Chronicle.  He and his accomplices would have succeed if it were not for Friends of the White Geese, politically, and if it were not for, functionally, the Charles River Urban Wilds Initiative who have been forced to neutralize the deliberate starvation with feedings.

************

I am a former railroader (2 years).  I was involved in Red Line Extension planning.  Since 1985, I have been involved in Urban Ring planning.  In 1986, I proposed the Kenmore Charles River Crossing.  It was adopted as one of two alternatives by the MBTA in 1991.  Since 1991, the City of Cambridge has consistently lied, denying that the Kenmore Crossing exists.  Zoning has been changed in Cambridgeport based on this lie.

I have recently proposed a Green Line A spur creation to support Harvard’s relocation of its Medical School to the Mass. Pike off ramps / railroad yard area in Allston.

************

Starting in 1978, I have written more of the Cambridge Zoning Ordinance than any other person not employed by the City of Cambridge.  My achievements have emphasized environmental protection and housing creation at a responsible scale.  I have downzoned about 85% of the Massachusetts Avenue corridor between Harvard and Central Squares.

The former Inn at Harvard in East Harvard Square was forced on Harvard University by the Cambridge City Council in response to one of my achievements.  The former Inn at Harvard in East Harvard Square was forced on Harvard University by the Cambridge City Council in response to one of my zoning initiatives.   Harvard wanted it 72% larger and built to the lotline.

**************

I have been part of the only meaningful achievement by environmental activists in the Alewife reservation.  I wrote the zoning proposal which resulted in the conversion of a massive, DCR owned private parking lot back to nature.

A comparable group to the CRC ran around fighting for the ongoing and increasing DCR / Cambridge destruction of the Alewife reservation woodlands at Alewife by telling people to look at everything other than the real problem, the highly destructive DCR and Cambridge.

**************

Cambridge has very destructive politics disguising itself as sainthood.

Cambridge and the DCR work very closely together.


**************

The $24 million and $4 million buried in this bill are excellent examples of the problem with Cambridge, the DCR, the falsely named CRC, and so many other influenced groups maneuvering public opinion without disclosing their records and their connections.

Massive Tree Destruction on Charles One Step Closer.  Could a big step be imminent?

1. Introduction.
2. Report from person with apparent knowledge.
3. Response, 5/18/14, 12:53 pm
4. Response 2, 5/20, 3:01 pm
5. Summary.
6. Contacts, Miscellaneous.


1. Introduction.

The following exchange has been edited to keep it relevant, hopefully while communicating with accuracy.  I have corrected some typos of mine.

I am at a loss as to the courtesies.  So I am not identifying the source.

The following long analysis states that the Massachusetts House of Representatives is moving toward approval of bond authorization for destruction of hundreds of trees on Memorial Drive, Cambridge, between the BU and Longfellow Bridges.  Then could come approval by the Massachusetts State Senate and the Governor’s Office.

At this time of the legislative calendar, with an election coming, things can happen VERY RAPIDLY in the Massachusetts legislature.

Section 6, below provides contact information.  I apologize if it is not fully up to date.  The Governor contact is up to date.

2. Report from person with apparent knowledge.

The following was sent 5/17/14 at 12:51 pm

************

House Bill 3332 has been renumbered House Bill 4009.  It had a hearing before the Bonding Committee a few days ago and, if it is reported favorably upon, it will proceed to the Ways and Means Committee prior to a going to a vote in the House.  I do not know if it will be voted upon this session.  If you are tracking it, I would use the new number (4009).

I have reviewed the Bill and the Parkways reference.  It does not call for or require the destruction of any trees.  If the bond bill is authorized with the current language included and the DCR decides to fund that project, there will be an extensive public process regarding the design before changes to the landscape are made.

I understand that there may have been prior preliminary designs to which you reference, but I have not seen them.  I know there is no a final design.  I don’t support the destruction of trees, but do believe that much could be done to improve the pathways and green space between Memorial Drive and the Charles River.  I support securing funds and having a public process to determine the potential improvements to the Cambridge side of the Charles River.

Thanks for your interest.

*************

I have lived with this and tried to follow up.  I have not had the time and regret that I must pass this on without the follow up on my own than I would have liked.


3. Response, 5/18/14, 12:53 pm

Thank you very much for the response and for the new number.

The designation as including destruction is based on a Charles River Conservancy report translated into English combined with the belligerent vagueness.

Lies and deception have been the one common thread in the attacks on the Charles River, and the DCR's behavior has been consistently filthy.

I will not go into details. I am trying to avoid overloading you.

They have the money.  They have the designation.  They have been fighting to destroy those trees for years.

What has varied has been the techniques of lying.  Lies and deception have been the norm on the Charles River.  Magazine Beach with accumulation of lies and very real destruction combined with the fake group doing its company union thing is reality.

CRC knows the basis of those numbers.  CRC bragged of the project being included under the appropriate euphemism.

The last time the DCR sought money to destroy those trees was in 2009 seeking Obama money.  They lied the trees were all diseased, a lie, I understand, which was proved by the DCR filing with the Cambridge Conservation Commission.  The lie would seem to be proved by the destruction plans I have in my possession.

Those destruction plans are posted at Charles River White Geese Blog: Tree Destruction Plans, Charles River, Mass. House Bill H3332..

The scanning was done on a new machine and was done before I fully understood the workings of the machine.  I can improve the quality of the copy and provide a better version should you so wish.

Rewarding a proven irresponsible department with one step more of a blank check is not a good idea.

It rewards very clear deception.  The magic words in that name says way too much.

Thank you very much.


4. Response 2, 5/20, 3:01 pm

I just reread your communication and I get very scared.

Cambridge and the DCR decided before the turn of the decade that they want to destroy these trees.  The DCR indulged in outrageous lying in public in their fight to get Obama moneys.  The lying is similar to 13 years of insisting that they have no intent to harm the Charles River White Geese, the victims of their deliberate starvation in direct violation of their supposedly holy Charles River Master Plan.  The changed the supposedly holy plan after the corrupt destruction.

A “public process” on destroying these trees based on the tender sensitivities of this irresponsible entity is comparable to trying to get fair play from the fake neighborhood association on destruction on the Charles River.

The fake neighborhood association’s primary purpose in life is to fool people into looking at everything except for a truly vile reality.

The tactics of the DCR is its fight for destruction on the Charles have varied from flat out lying to going ahead as secretly as possible, to working through fake groups with little ethics but possibly more than the DCR.

As I said, this, and your analysis, I find very scary on looking more closely at your words, especially since the very destructive Charles River “Conservancy” was bragging when the bill was filed that it would do the destruction the DCR has been fighting for.

If you happened to notice, I recently documented 21 years of outrageous lies on the Urban Ring from the Cambridge Development Department concerning the Urban Ring.  It sounds like one key document has been republished, so that makes 23 years of flat out lies.

These are not honorable people.


5. Summary.

It is always very difficult to evaluate the difference between friend and foe, especially in Cambridge, MA, where publicly active “environmentalists” have a secret definition of “environmentalism” which excludes protection of that part of the environment Cambridge, MA is in the process of destroying.

As I commented on Councilor Mazen, he is being inundated by con artists using terms which the con artists have used for years.  And really, the cons do not change.  What changes is the victim to which the cons are addressed.  The bad guys meet a person who is new to an outrageous situation, and that person, incorrectly, assumes honor and honesty among the people with whom the newcomer is dealing.

One standard con Councilor Mazen repeated which has been used and used and used is that there is a necessity to get the right members of the Planning Board, then maybe they will be responsible.

Then, according to the lie, it is responsible for the Cambridge elected officials to grant all their authority to these appointees of the Cambridge City Manager.

Sounds great, unless you have the experience to recognize reality.  Reality is that Cambridge has a regency of City Managers which has now lasted 40 years.  They know who they control.  Appointees of the Cambridge City Manager have only to look at the cruelty inflicted on Malvina Monteiro to realize that standing up to irresponsible people is very dangerous in Cambridge, MA, USA.

The bad guys who are needed to correct were appointed by the city manager regency.  The newcomers will also be appointed by the city manager regency.

An excellent example of the corruption which exists in the Cambridge City Government is the 33 years of blatant lying on a key details of a regional planning matter, the Urban Ring.  These people simply have no shame.

What I know is that we are dealing, in the DCR and Cambridge bureaucracies with people who should not be trusted.  Blatant lying has been clearer in the DCR.  Sophisticated lying, including controlled groups, is business as usual in the City of Cambridge.

When James Leo Sullivan was returned to the Cambridge City Manager position in 1974, he vowed to create a system of neighborhood organizations.  The wording was positive.  The reality is a bunch of cheerleading groups which, on big stuff, tend (or worse than tend) to achieve the opposite of what they claim to stand for.

The massive destruction of trees on the Charles River is a situation in which an irresponsible bureaucracy has demanded a blank check and one of the fake groups has filled in the balance.  Approval by the Cambridge bureaucrats occurred years ago and the DCR has fought for their common destructive goal.

The plans for destruction which I have posted on this blog, at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/04/tree-destruction-plans-charles-river.html, are by no means preliminary.  These are from 2009 and were associated with seeking approval from the Cambridge Conservation Commission which has limited jurisdiction.  These were prepared in support of the attempt to get Obama moneys and were described to the press with the flat out lie of “diseased.”

And the plans fit the outrages.


6. Contacts, Miscellaneous.

Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.

All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.

Cambridge, MA, USA city councilors: Council@cambridgema.gov.

Mass Pike rearrangement and Rapid Transit planning — Very Clear Demonstration of the Fraud which is “protective” groups in Cambridge, MA, USA

I. Introduction.
II. Communication to MassDOT.
1. Introduction.
2. Green Line A Spur, Phase 1.
3. Urban Ring Plans and the Allegations of the City of Cambridge.
A. Kenmore Crossing, Cambridge Side.
B. Urban Ring Alternatives, Boston Side.
(1) BU Bridge Crossing.
(2) The Kenmore Crossing.
(3) “Bus Tunnel.”


I. Introduction.

This is the fourth in a series of letters officially sent to the Massachusetts Department of Transportation with regard to their meetings on the rearrangement of the Massachusetts Turnpike next to the Charles River in Boston Cambridge, MA.  The meetings were conducted on April 10 and May 1, 2014.

This letter is important because it places the rearrangement of the Mass. Pike in context with transportation planning in the region.  Responsible transportation planning would be environmentally responsible, a very common distinction from the activities and goals of the City of Cambridge, MA, USA.

This letter, however, is important on its own because it proves the lie behind so many “independent” “protective” groups in the City of Cambridge, MA, USA.

The fake neighborhood association fighting for destruction on the Charles River is just one instance of Cambridge groups controlled to various extent by the entity they claim to be keeping an eye on, the City of Cambridge.

The flat out lies over a period of 21 years or more on a key transportation issue says everything that needs to be said about so many “independent” “protective” entities in the City of Cambridge, MA, USA.

You get away from Cambridge, MA and Cambridge, MA dominated groups, and this flat out lie is not existent.  Outside of Cambridge, MA and Cambridge dominated groups, people know reality.

In Cambridge and Cambridge dominated groups, the “experts” unanimously agree with Cambridge’s flat out lie.

I repeat:

In Cambridge and Cambridge dominated groups, the “experts” unanimously agree with Cambridge’s flat out lie.

UNANIMOUS AGREEMENT ON A FLAT OUT LIE says everything as to the “independence” of the self proclaimed protectors.

II. Communication to MassDOT.

May 8, 2014

Patricia Leavenworth, P.E., Chief Engineer, MassDOT
10 Park Plaza
Boston, MA 02116

ATTN: Bridge Project Management, Project File No. 606475

RE: Mass. Pike (I90) Rearrangement in the area west of the BU Bridge, and the rail yards.
Public Meetings April 10, 2014 and May 1, 2014
Fourth Letter: Green Line Spur Connection to Urban Ring Kenmore Crossing Subway.

Madam:

1. Introduction.

This letter expands on my prior communications to provide greater detail as to how a Green Line A would fit into the rest of the system.

This letter will also respond to 20 years of lies coming out of the City of Cambridge that the Kenmore Crossing of the Urban Ring Subway concept does not exist.  I have not heard anything on this matter from Cambridge in the last two years.  I am assuming the lies have continued.

2. Green Line A Spur, Phase 1.

[marked up satellite photo]

The green marking running from left to right on the below depiction roughly shows the absolute minimum Green Line A phase 1 spur the Mass. Pike viaduct project should allow for.

The Green Line A Spur would start at a station in the future Harvard Medical School site (left end).  It would then  run through the area I have shown in my Second Letter (4/22/14), pp. 1-7, in the Mass. Pike viaduct, and connect with the existing Green Line B branch on Commonwealth Avenue in the location where the line bends.  I showed photos of the new switch area on pp. 3 and 4 of that letter.

Green Line A then would run over the existing tracks in the Commonwealth Avenue Green Line B corridor to Kenmore.

At Kenmore, Green Line A would be one of now four Green Line branches connecting to the Urban Ring Kenmore Crossing Subway.  This fully covered connection would allow passengers (including Harvard Med Students) to  make transfers to access the Harvard / Longwood Hospitals via the Urban Ring, Kenmore Crossing route.  Various bus connections would be a reasonable interim arrangement.

I would anticipate that, east of Kenmore, this new Green Line A would connect through to Downtown Boston although it could certainly terminate at Kenmore and run in shuttle fashion to the new Harvard Medical School or to Harvard Square.

Note that the only construction expenses needed to be incurred would be for the Green Line A spur phase 1 running from Commonwealth Avenue to the new Harvard Medical School with a station at the current site of rail yards and the Mass. Pike roadways, and, possibly, a station behind the Boston University residence halls facing the Mass. Pike, with access to B.U.’s Agannis Arena and Nickerson Field, plus this part of Commonwealth Avenue.

This route depiction has been created applying by hand, straight edge and Green marker to my existing satellite photo, and then cropping for purposes of communication.  So the line is sloppy.

I have previously described in my April 18, 2014 letter how to link the new Harvard Medical School station to Harvard Station.  This connection could be done at the same time as the connection to Kenmore or as a phase 2.

It is essential for the Mass. Pike viaduct reconstruction to leave room for future Green Line A construction.  Adequate space must be left, as well, for storage of street car vehicles in a new streetcar yard area adjacent to and parallel to the planned South Station storage.

The capability of doing the work in this Green Line A construction in phases is yet another reason why this route should be left possible with the Mass. Pike viaduct reconstruction.  First Green Line A phase 1 could be constructed to connect the new Harvard Medical School to the main part of the system.  Later Green Line A could be extended so that at it connects to Harvard Square.

The possibility of phasing is yet another saving over Harvard’s horribly expensive Harvard Red Line spur proposal, deep bore which could only be done all at once.

In real analysis, the cost of the Harvard Medical School transportation would be added to the major expense of the “bus tunnel” to connect Ruggles to Longwood to Kenmore.  The “bus tunnel” combined with Green Line A creates a combination of expenses which is much more likely to be achieved than the “bus tunnel” combined with Harvard’s deep bore Red Line spur.

3. Urban Ring Plans and the Allegations of the City of Cambridge.

A. Kenmore Crossing, Cambridge Side.

[MBTA plan]

This is the formal public MBTA plan of the Cambridge side of the Kenmore Crossing river crossing alternative.

This is the Charles River crossing alternative which Cambridge and its controlled entities repeatedly have said does not exist.

B. Urban Ring Alternatives, Boston Side.

For clarity of presentation, I have split a combined MBTA map into the BU Bridge Crossing and the Kenmore Crossing.

(1) BU Bridge Crossing.

[BU Bridge Crossing, Boston side]

The BU Bridge Crossing is shown as a broken line traveling from the Charles River to the west of Boston University’s Student Union Complex (marked “B.U.”), crossing over the Massachusetts Turnpike (I90) and turning to the east under Mountfort Street and south of the Mass. Pike.

An Urban Ring station may be seen in this segment before the line turns again under Park Drive.  It is marked “St. Mary’s” for the street which connects it to Commonwealth Avenue across from  Boston University’s Marsh Chapel.  The plan was to connect this streetcar line to the existing Green Line B across from Marsh Chapel by a tunnel under St. Mary’s Street.  This tunnel would leave passengers on the south sidewalk.  Passengers would then walk over the eastbound portion of Commonwealth Avenue, exposed to all sorts of weather in the final segment, crossing eastbound Commonwealth Avenue.

Closer to the Mass. Pike than the Mountfort / St. Mary’s station and to the station’s right is this alignment’s proposed relocation of Yawkey Station.  Commuter rail passengers would connect to Green Line B through the St. Mary’s tunnel.

The BU Bridge crossing would turn on Park Drive and have a second station under Park Drive between Beacon Street (Green Line C line) and the Green Line D line.  The Urban Ring streetcars would connect to the C and D line from the station.  A new Green Line C station was anticipated to be constructed under Beacon Street for the transfer, but it is not shown on this plan.

Commuter rail passengers would transfer to the Urban Ring at Mountfort / St. Mary’s and take the Urban Ring one stop to this second Urban Ring station and then transfer to Green Line C or D, should they wish to travel on one or the other.

At the bottom, you can see the BU Bridge Crossing turning and going under Brookline Street.  The line to the right is the route of the Kenmore Crossing.

(2). The Kenmore Crossing.

[Kenmore Crossing, Boston side]

This crossing would involve Orange Line quality subway cars.  It would be dug mostly cut and cover through the eastern and southern portion of Kenmore Square.

The line would be constructed under Brookline Avenue and over the Mass. Pike.  The proposed Urban Ring Kenmore station, shown on the map, would run from the existing Kenmore Station to a point east of Yawkey Station.  Yawkey Station is visible to the left of the Urban Ring Kenmore Station.  The station complex would readily connect to Fenway Park.

The Urban Ring Kenmore Station would directly connect to all three (now four) Green Line branches to Brookline, Newton and Allston, and would directly connect to the Commuter Rail.  It will provide excellent covered connections.

Yawkey Station would remain in place, as opposed to being moved three blocks to the west.

The legislature is subsidizing a very large project being built on top of Yawkey Station which will include improvements to Yawkey Station.  That expenditure makes Cambridge’s talk of a new Yawkey Station at St. Mary’s / Mountfort as part of its favored BU Bridge crossing so much nonsense.

Even without the subsidy, the Commuter Rail and Green Line connections in the Kenmore Crossing are excellent, in striking contrast to the hodgepost, messy connections in the City of Cambridge’s favored crossing.

The only place where the BU Bridge crossing is even vaguely in the running is in the City of Cambridge and in its controlled entities.  A very key lie assists in Cambridge’s control of its friends.  This is the lie that the Kenmore Crossing does not exist.  I am not certain if Harvard’s deep bore Red Line spur even allows for the BU Crossing alternative.

(3) “Bus Tunnel.”

The Urban Ring bus studies have proposed a very large bus tunnel which would run to the west of the lines shown under Brookline Avenue in the Kenmore Crossing depiction on page 3.  The tunnel plans may or may not recognize the existence of the BU Bridge Crossing.  Harvard’s horribly expensive Red Line spur would have an expensive connection to the bus tunnel near the Green Line D Fenway Park station.  This major expense would add to the very expensive cost of rebuilding of Harvard station and of deep bore construction.  Green Line A has NO SUCH EXPENSES.

This “bus tunnel” would travel under Longwood Avenue with a stop at Longwood & Louis Pasteur, the subway line stop.  It would have portals near Yawkey Station and near Ruggles Station.  It would travel that portion of the Urban Ring subway route which is shared by the two subway alternatives.  It would be easy to extend this “bus tunnel” in one direction to Kenmore and in the other to Ruggles, providing direct Orange Line connection from downtown Boston to the Longwood Medical Center and to Kenmore.

This obvious extension of the “bus tunnel” would make Kenmore an excellent phase 1 Orange Line / Kenmore Crossing Urban Ring terminus.