1. Introductory.
2. Councillor / State Representative Toomey’s Motion.
3. Context.
a. General.
b. Specific.
4. Evaluation.
1. Introductory.
In my report at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2014/10/charles-river-destruction-mit-goes.html, I transmitted key pages of a document published by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
MIT is extremely destructive of the environment of the Charles River. They are in support of the outrageous “Historic Parkways” destruction supported by Chapter 286 of the Acts of 2014 by the Massachusetts legislature. MIT houses at least two groups fighting for destruction on the Charles River.
In my report, I passed on pages of the MIT document I consider of interest so that folks could have those subordinate documents in a usable form.
2. Councillor / State Representative Toomey’s Motion.
Order number 8 on the agenda for the October 20, 2014 meeting of the Cambridge City Council reads as follows:
************
COUNCILOR TOOMEY
WHEREAS: MIT's Property Feasibility Study for the Grand Junction Community Path has been completed; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to report back on possible next steps to advance the creation of the Grand Junction Multi Use Path on City and CRA controlled property identified as Phase 1 in the Grand Junction Feasibility Study and report back to the City Council.
3. Context.
a. General.
Oddly, the MIT document which I reported on does not seem to have been formally submitted to the Cambridge City Council, as far as I can see.
I am tempted to toss a lot of maps and all other sort of documents into this analysis. That is impractical because the MIT document is loaded with beautiful subdocuments which I would love to crop and use. That cropping is a major effort. That adds to a whole lot of beautiful documents I already have. I will package these items in a report which I will publish in the very near future.
Councilor / Representative Toomey was one of the key people if not the key non MassDOT person in MassDOT’s defeat of passenger service on the same Grand Junction railroad tracks in Cambridge when that was proposed a few years ago.
b. Specific.
Working with these things really requires a good library.
Councilor Toomey refers to the “Grand Junction Feasibility Study” refers to a document of the Cambridge Development Department issued in 2006. On page 79, it identifies three suggested “stages” for the bicycle highway. Councilor Toomey quite certainly wrote his motion off the top of his head. I have the advantage of having the document readily available, and he seems to be referring to this table, so I am correcting his terminology accordingly.
I am providing two items only. Here is the map of the Grand Junction prepared by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation on which I have marked the intersections which would be impacted by initiatives on the Grand Junction.
Stage 1 of the bike highway proposal would be in the area between Massachusetts Avenue and Binney Street. Counting from the bottom, these are identified by the second and fourth arrows.
Stage 2 is Toomey’s area of key interest. It is the area above the fourth arrow.
Stage 3 includes the area of environmental concern with regard to the Charles River. The area of environmental concern has been expanded by the MIT document. Stage 3 is the area below the second arrow. Stage 3 is larger than the environmentally sensitive area but includes it.
Secondly, I am providing, uncropped, one relevant page from the MIT package. For usability purposes, I intend to crop this page into three separate documents.
4. Evaluation.
Excellent motion.
The basic concept of the bike highway is fine. If the portion of the bike highway north of the point where the Grand Junction runs next to the bend of Vassar Street were connected to Vassar Street and then to Memorial Drive, the concept would be of great value.
On the MIT page, the relevant map is top left. The Grand Junction Railroad is the diagonal brown, broken line running from the bottom of the map near the letters 4 and 5 up and to the right. Vassar Street, in the area relevant is depicted in blue. Vassar Street is between the Grand Junction Railroad and the Charles River which is at the bottom of the map. Memorial Drive parallels the Charles River. Vassar Street strikes Memorial Drive at a right angle. Just above the point where Vassar Street strikes Memorial Drive, Vassar Street bends. That bend is where the Grand Junction bike highway should connect to Vassar Street from the Grand Junction Railroad and then run to Memorial Drive.
The MIT document moves the area of concern back to Waverly Street by proposing a branch of the bike highway to Waverly Street. That branching is just above the point where the bike highway should connect to Vassar Street and then to Memorial Drive.
Additionally, while I have no knowledge of problems in Stage 2, Toomey’s turf, I certainly defer, as reasonable, to him and to his constituents on problems in that area.
A further point of importance is that Councilor Toomey is limiting the interest of the City of Cambridge to its property and the property of the Cambridge Redevelopment Authority. Highly appropriate.
Thank you, Councilor Toomey.
