I. Report.
II. Contacts: Protect against destruction.
III. Tip.
I. Report.
I delivered the following letter to the Cambridge, MA, City Clerk yesterday, July 24, 2014, for transmittal to the Cambridge City Council Monday night.
The purpose of the introductory section is to respond to the constant corrupt excuses which come out of their ranks.
The first two points are imminent destruction, the outrageous bill in the state legislature to destroy hundreds of trees on the Charles River, and related; plus the imminent outrage on the Cambridge Common.
Spelling corrections have been made.
Some key photos,
This excellent grove at the Memorial Drive split would be destroyed by H4009.
As I respond to the crap at the beginning of the letter, nine city councilors have very filthy hands.
The entrance to the Cambridge Common, on the verge of destruction by a reprehensible city government.
The victims of heartless animal abuse.
The future home of Harvard's new off ramp from the Massachusetts Turnike (I90) to Cambridge. The lie on this is Bike Highway.
The responsible place to connect the proposed Grand Junction Bike Highway to Memorial Drive.
The above photo is taken at the back left corner of the white building below. All they have to do is take a narrow path from the tracks to the road, which is the location nearest the Grand Junction railroad where Vassar Street turns.
The building on the left is the ONLY structure between this connection and Memorial Drive.
City of Cambridge photo from Cambridge puff piece published on the Robert Winters blog. Until Cambridge destroyed, destroyed and conducted a mass animal pogrom, ALL of this area was filled with trees identical to the trees in the background.
An environmental outrage made possible by yet another fake protective organization with clear connections to the City of Cambridge.
Street address is: behind and to the left of 165 CambridgePark Drive, Cambridge, MA.
This site may be accessed by going to, or parking at, Alewife Station on the subway's Red Line. Then walk to CambridgePark Drive, which abuts the station. Turn right. The destruction is visible on the right .3 miles away behind the buildings facing on CambridgePark Drive.
***********
City Council, City of Cambridge
c/o City Clerk, City Hall
695 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02139
RE: Selected ongoing environmental outrages from the City of Cambridge
To the Honorable, the Cambridge City Council:
0. Introduction.
● The DCR is doing it (or whoever is “responsible”).
● The City of Cambridge has no business governing select matters in the City of Cambridge.
● The Development Department told me to do it.
● General.
● Demonstrable Major Lying.
● Heartless animal abuse.
1. Charles River — House Bill H4009.
2. Cambridge Common.
3. Charles River — Underpasses.
4. Charles River — Bicycle Highway, future Massachusetts Turnpike off ramp to Cambridge.
5. Charles River — The Charles River White Geese
6. Alewife.
7. Magazine Beach area.
a. General.
b. Bizarre Wall of Introduced Bushes.
c. Destruction of responsible grass, replacement with poison needing grass.
d. Destruction of playing fields.
8. Danehy Park.
9. Staffing of the Cambridge Development Department.
0. Introduction.
I am writing individually and as chair of Friends of the White Geese, an Attorney General recognized non profit organization since 2001.
First, the things this letter does not include or respect:
● The DCR is doing it (or whoever is “responsible”).
Flat out nonsense, The DCR coordinates all destruction with the City of Cambridge and the City of Cambridge pulls whatever connections it can to further the DCR’s destructive paths. There is no meaningful difference. There are paper cons, but no meaningful differences. If there were meaningful differences, the City Manager would be seeking the support of the City Council against whatever the particular outrage is.
● The City of Cambridge has no business governing select matters in the City of Cambridge.
Another cynical piece of nonsense. On the Charles River in particular, past multiple instances in the record of the Cambridge City Council proves this statement to be a cynical lie. Notwithstanding this, it is bizarre nonsense for a city which conducts its own foreign policy to claim it has no responsibility for environment outrages being accomplished by its friends within its own city limits.
● The Development Department told me to do it.
● General.
First of all, you are elected by the voters. It is your job to be standing up to the Development Department when the Development Department is pursuing vile, destructive activities.
● Demonstrable Major Lying.
An excellent example of the corrupt situation in the Cambridge Development Department is the zoning in the southern part of Cambridgeport. A number of new zoning districts were created in the period 2000 to 2005 based on the lie that, with the Urban Ring subway coming in, a stop at Putnam Avenue and the Grand Junction would justify the zoning.
The staff’s preferred Urban Ring alternative is only one of two. The staff lied to the Cambridge City Council that their preferred alternative was only one possible Urban Ring option.
The much more likely alternative, the Kenmore Crossing, was proposed by me in 1986. It was adopted as one of two options by the MBTA in 1991. The Kenmore Crossing option has received state subsidies with regard to the rebuilding in place of Yawkey Station as part of a massive project. The staff preferred alternative (BU Bridge Crossing) needs Yawkey Station to be moved three blocks for its environmentally irresponsible option to approach having any level or reasonableness..
Last I heard (a couple of years ago), this lie continued to be the “truth” supported by the Cambridge Development department some 23 years after this lie was demonstrably a lie.
● Heartless animal abuse.
Nonstop key in so many projects, especially the DCR’s, is contempt for our world. Casual killing off / heartless abuse of free animals is vile.
The DCR has a policy in its Charles River Master Plan of killing off or driving away as many resident animals it can get away with.
Cambridge has repeatedly aided in this outrage in multiple projects on the Charles River and the two killed off massive numbers of animals at Alewife in that continuing, destructive outrage.
1. Charles River — House Bill H4009.
A senate version of House Bill H4009 has been approved and the mess is going to conference committee.
I have provided this City Council with the DCR’s plans for destruction of hundreds of trees between the BU and Longfellow Bridges. When the DCR sought this money in 2009 from the Obama Great Recession efforts, they lied that this destruction was diseased trees. I provided you their plans. There are no diseased trees.
The DCR has bragged about how lovely the area will look in 40 years.
The reality is that this destruction is for the purpose of straightening out Memorial Drive to take off ramp traffic from the Massachusetts Turnpike which is currently being sought under the Bicycle Highway lie.
“Support” has been obtained by the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy” by lying to people that they were seeking support for “underpasses.” They justified this lie in their announcement of the initial bill, when they called $24 million for this project “incidental” to $4 million for underpasses.
This destruction is an outrage.
The greatest value in it would seem to be as make-work for people who make money out of destroying trees and planting saplings.
2. Cambridge Common.
The justification in the ENF with regard to the imminent destruction of the main entrance to the Cambridge Common, and of these excellent trees, shows the contempt for the environment which is the norm of the City of Cambridge. The ENF states that the trees “block the view” of a monument. Trees are the view and frame the monument.
This public contempt for the environment is normal in the government of the City of Cambridge.
3. Charles River — Underpasses.
I defer to the Massachusetts Department of Transportation on this. The Cambridge City Council’s public support directly conflicts with the outrage expressed by MassDOT over the environmental destruction and flat out waste of money. Another project of principal value to the individuals being paid to do the work.
The extent of the outrage associated with this project includes the reality that the “support” for it turned out to be “support” for destruction of hundreds of trees between the BU and Longfellow Bridges.
4. Charles River — Bicycle Highway, future Massachusetts Turnpike off ramp to Cambridge.
The Grand Junction bike highway makes excellent sense ending at Memorial Drive with a very short connection to Vassar Street at the Vassar Street turn. Beyond that point it is highly destructive and is a stalking horse for an off ramp from the Massachusetts Turnpike. Harvard bought its future Medical School home months after the MBTA proved the Grand Junction railroad bridge could be expanded for this purpose.
Fencing would parallel the temporary bike highway between Memorial Drive and the Charles River. This would restrict movement and perhaps kill the free animals the DCR is fighting to kill off or drive away.
This is just another of pretty much non stop techniques of heartless animal abuse furthering the DCR goal of killing or driving away all resident animals on the Charles River, a policy which demonstrates the vileness and incompetence of the DCR, supported by the Cambridge City Council.
Plans call for bizarre Bike highway construction in the Destroyed Nesting Area to which the Charles River White Geese have been confined in their heartless starvation by the Cambridge City Council and the DCR.
This construction would be much longer and more destructive than connecting the Bike Highway to Vassar Street at the Vassar Street turn. But it would make money for the people paid to do it, and assist the DCR / Cambridge’s heartless animal abuse.
5. Charles River — The Charles River White Geese
In the case of the Charles River White Geese, the heartless confinement, deliberate starvation and constant abuse trashes a very valuable tourist attraction and an irreplaceable scientific gem.
This is a gaggle of free animals whose ancestors were domesticated. This magnificent gaggle has created a viable social structure which has remained intact for 33 years now in spite of corrupt and incompetent governmental entities.
They fed themselves on their own at Magazine Beach until Cambridge and the DCR started to starve them by installing a wall which directly violated constant promises of Cambridge and the DCR.
The heartless attack has constantly been justified by bizarre , corrupt explanations including pretty much non stop lying of “no intent to harm.” Or they simply have been silent and hidden behind groups with connections to the government of the City of Cambridge.
6. Alewife.
Cambridge has destroyed acres of irreplaceable woodlands for protection against 2 year storms. The destruction included a mass pogrom of resident animals.
The area needs protection against 100 year storms. The only way this can responsibly be done is by underground easements for and construction of massive flood protection tanks. Smaller examples are present / being constructed under at least two recent buildings on CambridgePark Drive. Publicly funded and constructed flood storage taken are needed under all new building in the area in addition to corresponding structures needed for the buildings.
Failure to responsibly plan at Alewife leads to certain, perhaps total destruction of all government holdings in this irreplaceable heritage area.
7. Magazine Beach area.
a. General.
Bizarre lies. It is very difficult to understate the outrage funded by the Cambridge City Council here in planning and in implementation led by the current City Manager. The current City Manager also supervised the outrage at Alewife.
Cambridge was promised management rights in the playing fields, but that would involve the City Council reviewing of the destruction accomplished with its money. Management has not been taken.
The situation is so rotten that a miscreant copycatting Cambridge and the DCR’s contempt for wildlife went on a killing spree of resident animals. The public begged the City Council for protection. They reminded the City Council that animal abusers frequently graduate to humans. The Cambridge Chronicle very visibly front paged a memorial for the leader of the gaggle when he was assassinated. It was conducted on top of the MWRA plant.
The Cambridge City Council was “neutral” with a wink and a nod.
The key miscreant graduated to rape and murder in the location where he had been killing the animals this city council had been abusing and has continued to abuse.
The Cambridge City Council spent an hour discussing the rape and murder and did not want to know where it occurred.
Councilor Davis mentioned the location of the rape and murder. She looked around guiltily, swallowed her words and returned to the lie of non responsibility of the Cambridge City Council.
b. Bizarre Wall of Introduced Bushes.
The DCR destroys bordering vegetation twice a year along the Charles River. It has contempt for the natural world.
Magazine Beach is an exception.
The DCR promised a lawn to the river.
The DCR repeatedly insisted it would only allow water related activities on the banks of the Charles River.
Cambridge and the DCR have walled off Magazine Beach with a bizarre wall which blocks water related usage and which has no purpose except to starve the Charles River White Geese as part of the DCR’s reprehensible policy of killing off or driving away all resident animals. The wall is of introduced vegetation which seems to exist nowhere else on the Charles.
But the wall has a value and its value is consistent with the definition of introduced species.
The wall starves the 33 year resident Charles River White Geese.
c. Destruction of responsible grass, replacement with poison needing grass.
The grass at Magazine Beach survived the better part of a century in an environmentally responsible manner, no poisons. The DCR loves poisons. Cambridge and the DCR destroyed the responsible grass and replaced it with grass requiring poisons to survive.
d. Destruction of playing fields.
One of the most important lies in the Magazine Beach outrage was the “improvement” of the playing fields.
But the DCR loves poisons.
So Cambridge and the DCR destroyed playing fields to drain off poisons needed to keep alive sickly grass which replaced healthy grasses which had been there for the better part of a century.
8. Danehy Park.
Destruction of grass to replace it with plastic?
9. Staffing of the Cambridge Development Department.
These multiple outrages show a severe problem in the Cambridge Development Department.
There are too many “planners” looking for work and for justification of an overstaffed department including their own jobs.
So destruction, destruction, destruction.
Solution: fire planners.
II. Contacts: Protect against destruction.
Of great 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/.
His phone number is 888-870-7770.
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.
All Cambridge City Councilors may be reached at council@cambridgema.gov, Their phone number is 617-349-4280. I have previously responded to their nonsense that they can save the world and praise destruction on the Charles River, but they have no business objecting to destruction coordinated with the Cambridge city government.
III. Tip.
The key with the Cambridge City Council is that their weakness is a very distressing and continued lie that they are pro-environment.
It is a very major weakness, but the lack of response to complaint concerning their destruction on the Cambridge Common is not encouraging. Plus their ignoring my prior passing on to them in hard copy the plans for Memorial Drive destruction is very much discouraging. But there are a number of them who are very insistent on the lie that they are pro environment.
Please note my extended response at the beginning above to cynical excuses for outrages.
I have major zoning victories as an environmental technique in Cambridge. It was common to get approvals from the “conservatives.” The “liberals” were then embarrassed into compliance with their claimed positions.
Of major importance with legislators is a widespread contempt for the Department of Conservation and Recreation and its destructiveness. Cambridge, MA, is a distinctive entity which is in sync with the problems that the DCR embodies.
