Charles River: More money for destructive agency; budgets on both sides of environment.

Charles River: More money for destructive agency; budgets on both sides of environment.


1. Cambridge Chronicle report.
2. General Analysis.
a. Reality in the City of Cambridge, MA, USA.
b. Starvation Wall at Magazine Beach.
c. BU Bridge to the Longfellow Bridge.
(1) Charles River White Geese.
(2) Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
(3) Highway proposal.
(4) Mass. Pike Off Ramp.
(5) Railroad to Boston University’s Cambridge Boat House.
(6) Hundreds of trees and animal habitat being destroyed on Memorial Drive.
(7) Longfellow Bridge.
(8) Memorial Drive / Longfellow Bridge.
d. Grand Junction Bike Highway.
e. Underpasses.
f. Cambridge Common.
g. Fresh Pond.
h. Alewife.
i. Flat out lies — example: Urban Ring.
3. Analysis.


1. Cambridge Chronicle report.

The Cambridge Chronicle is reporting on line on the budget for the Cambridge Development Department.  I am looking at http://cambridge.wickedlocal.com/article/20150528/NEWS/150526979?utm_source=newsletter-20150529&utm_medium=email&utm_term=view_as_webpage&utm_campaign=newsletter.

Here is their summary of the development department budget.  It says a lot.

**********

    What it was last year: $6,335,440

    Total city budget: $545,870,875

    Percentage of total city budget: 1.35%

    Department by the numbers: CDD will hire a net zero associate planner, a housing associate planner and interns to assist with housing, economic development and the department’s website. The fiscal 2016 budget also includes $75,000 for a Grand Junction consultant and $50,000 for an urban design consultant.

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

2. General Analysis.

a. Reality in the City of Cambridge, MA, USA.

This one exhibit from the fraudulent propaganda piece currently in Cambridge City Hall says everything about how vile the City of Cambridge and its City Council are

This photo is taken from the propaganda show's prior stop.  They say they have moved the show.  I have better things to do than to check each self destructive comment in their propaganda.

I will follow with items under serious consideration, approved by a unanimous city council or cleared with the Development Department and the reprehensible City Council does not want to know what is going on.

b. Starvation Wall at Magazine Beach.

The Cambridge City Council walled off the playing fields at Magazine Beach.

The key state manager has publicly bragged that this starves the Charles River White Geese by keeping them away from their food.  Before and then after.

This is a full grown woman standing in the only opening.  That opening can be seen in the second photo above, taken from the Boston side.

The state Department of Conservation and Recreation destroys all bordering vegetation on the Charles River basin twice a year, except for this starvation wall.

The DCR’s glorified Charles River Master Plan brags of intent to kill or drive away all resident animals.

Cambridge and friends destroyed the excellent grass in the Magazine Beach playing fields and replaced it with sickly stuff that requires poisons to survive.  To drain off the poisons they installed an expensive drainage system to drain off poisons to keep alive sickly introduced grasses which should not be in there in the first place.

The current fraud is fighting to keep the poisons and the deliberate starvation, to expand the poisons to the top of the hill west of the playing fields and to the wetlands behind the swimming pool, plus destroy the little guy’s parking lot and to put in a highway which is part of the excuse for massive tree destruction supported by the State House.

And, of course, the most important thing about the current fraud is the lie that they are defending the Charles River, so don’t look at all of the outrages, not just at Magazine Beach.

The flat out lies used to obtain this outrage included the lie that they were provided a “lawn to the river”, and the non stop lie of no “intention to harm” the Charles River White Geese.

Oh, and here is a photo of the little guys’ parking lot just west of the playing fields (and across from Magazine Street) they are fighting to destroy.

c. BU Bridge to the Longfellow Bridge.

(1) Charles River White Geese.

Heartless abuse, deliberate starvation.  Total habitat probably destroyed as part of the 2014 State House vote.

(2) Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.

Entire area likely for casual destruction.  An excellent example is the Muddy River project near Fenway Park where a park was casually destroyed to be “improved.”

(3) Highway proposal.

This magnificent tree above the nesting area is one of the hundreds being destroyed.

This is Cambridge's map of its planned, J shape highway, dominating the Destroyed Nesting Area.

(4) Mass. Pike Off Ramp.

Harvard bought its future medical school site promptly after the local transit authority (MBTA) demonstrated the Grand Junction railroad bridge (photo below) could be expanded to handle an off ramp from the Massachusetts Turnpike (I90) to Cambridge.  In this photo, the green sign in the middle is over the Massachusetts Turnpike.

Multiple outrages prepare the Cambridge side of the Charles River to receive this ramp.  The latest lie is a bike highway.  The usual “explanation” occurs: the usual lie of omission.  They brag of a Grand Junction bike highway and don’t mention the environmental destruction on the Charles River.

Cambridge’s sick Grand Junction Bike Highway (placekeeper) plans call for another starvation wall, a fence paralleling the railroad tracks.  That will prevent resident animals from going between the destroyed nesting area and the wild area.  In the first photo, the Charles River White Geese are desperately hunting for food.

(5) Railroad to Boston University’s Cambridge Boat House.

For the time being, perhaps very short, the area between the railroad and the boat house is a wild area.  Plans are to destroy every single tree.

(6) Hundreds of trees being destroyed on Memorial Drive.

I showed the tree above the Destroyed Nesting Area above.

This 105 tree grove will be decimated.  Think of the outrage on the Cambridge Common.  This plus massive destruction of much larger trees, plus the outrages

(7) Longfellow Bridge.

This excellent grove on top of the Kendall Square end was casually destroyed supposedly as part of the bridge renovation.

To this date, this is a not unreasonable rendition of the site when I went by it yesterday.  Destruction for nothing.  Business as usual in the vile City of Cambridge.

And I repeat, state agencies run plans past the development department.  The difference between Cambridge and responsible communities is obvious.

(8) Memorial Drive / Longfellow Bridge.

Excellent trees, casually destroyed.

d. Grand Junction Bike Highway.

If Cambridge had a responsible government, the bike highway would stop one block north of Memorial Drive up Vassar Street to the east, and connect to Vassar Street and then to Memorial Drive.  But Cambridge does not have a responsible government.

Here are photos of the responsible connector, from the railroad side, from close to it on the Vassar Street side, and from a position closer to Memorial Drive.

On this map, the responsible connector is to the left of the "G" in "Grand Junction."  The connector on Vassar Street to Memorial Drive runs from the "G" to "Memorial".

e. Underpasses.

The fraudulently named Charles River “Conservancy” got support for “underpasses” under the next three bridges to the west of the BU Bridge, and seems to have lied to the legislature that this included support for the $20 million of massive destruction.

The Department of Transportation, responsible for these bridges, has called this outrage an outrage and a waste of money.

f. Cambridge Common.

Before.

After.

The Environmental Notification Form justified destruction on grounds that the trees (first photo) block the view of the monument readily visible in the second photo.

g. Fresh Pond.

Multiple year project to destroy animal habitat and replace it with gardens and the usual lie of “creating” animal habitat after it was destroyed.

h. Alewife.

3.4 acres destroyed, and bragged about.

This is Cambridge's publicity photo.

The trees in the background used to fill this entire area.

The cynical company union con game is a fake group which persuades people to do anything and everything except for what would work.  The leader/creator of the fake group bragged about the destruction.

The Cambridge City Council has repeatedly, over many years, yelled at private developers developing nearby private property IN ACCORDANCE WITH MUNICIPALLY CREATED ZONING.  The Cambridge City never mentions the municipally created zoning, nor does it mention its own outrageous destruction.

i. Flat out lies — example: Urban Ring.

Too many lies over too many years to count.

One excellent example is the proposal for an Urban Ring subway system connecting existing subway lines.  Naturally, Cambridge wants the irresponsible alternative of two possible Charles River crossings.  Cambridge lies that there is no other alternative under consideration.  Cambridge's irresponsible proposal is the BU Bridge alternative.

In 1991, the MBTA adopted a second, responsible alternative, the Kenmore Crossing, which I proposed in 1986.  The legislature has since subsidized the responsible alternative by subsidizing the rebuilding in place of Yawkey Station near Fenway Park.  The BU Bridge crossing requires it to be moved.

Zoning along the Grand Junction was created in the early 2000s based on the lie that only Cambridge’s irresponsible alternative was under consideration.

Last I heard, a couple of years ago, the Development Department was still lying that the apparently victorious alternative, the Kenmore Crossing, does not exist, 20 years after it was made a formal alternative.

Maps of the “non existent” Kenmore crossing taken from MBTA plans, first on the Cambridge side, then on the Boston side.

The City Manager reaffirmed Cambridge's interest in the Urban Ring subway concept in his comments on the Environmental Notification Form for the South Station expansion project last year.

Lying is normal in Cambridge, MA, USA.

I have major zoning victories as an environmental tool.  One big technical difference between my zoning initiatives and those written by the development department is that my zoning does what I say it does.

The existence of the fake groups and their real connection to the development department is just part of the corruption.

3. Analysis.

Key are the provisions for net zero and the Grand Junction consultant.  They are on the opposite sides of the divide.

They will brag about the netzero, and neglect to mention the massive amounts of environmental destruction which goes through the reprehensible destruction.

If Cambridge had a responsible city government, the department would be flat budgeted with NetZero in place of the destructive planners creating the above outrages and acting as the go to for the fake “protective” groups who go to the development department to find out their opinions.

Since Cambridge does not have a responsible government and will not end the Grand Junction bike path by connecting to Vassar Street and to Memorial Drive by Vassar Street, an additional planner for the Grand Junction bike highway is destructive and should not be funded.

Change that funding to a decrease.  Strip the department of the destructive planners doing these various outrages.

Actually, it would be a positive act to transfer city council related planning to the City Clerk, and possibly close down this vile department.

Charles River: Olympics Rapid Transit: A third possible Harvard Station, access from JFK Park

Charles River: Olympics Rapid Transit: A third possible Harvard Station, access from JFK Park.

1. Proposed route, Harvard Stations.
2. Harvard Station S1, S2, further elevator analysis..
3. Harvard Station S3.
4. Connection to and JFK Park.
5. The prior reports.


1. Proposed route, Harvard Stations.

I have been doing a series on possible new rapid transit service for the Boston 2024 Olympics.  A major part of my interest is my appreciation that the Boston 2024 Olympics peope want to destroy the starvation wall Cambridge and friends have created at Magazine Beach as part of their heartless abuse of the 34 year resident gaggle of the Charles River White Geese, and their environmental destruction at the Magazine Beach playing fields.

Normal human beings are a refreshing change over the vileness which dominates politics with regard to  Cambridge, MA, USA and its accomplices in their environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse.

And here is a layout of the three station alternatives for Harvard Station, in the upper part of this map.  I have presented Stations alternatives S1 and S2.  Here we will go into Station 3 and the preferred route in this area.

2. Harvard Station S1, S2, further elevator analysis..

Station alternative S3 only makes sense is S1 and S2 will not work.  It is a lot more expensive and intrusive.  It would still require the moving of the staircase as described in the S2 analysis, and, might require work on the Brattle Square elevator if it interferes with the tunnel.

Looking at the map, going with S1 or S2, the best alternative would be to rebuild the elevator in place if it obstructs the tunnel.  If that does not work, probably the lease obstructive alternative would be to put it on the south side of the Brattle Street side street.

Here is a photo from the sidewalk south of the Brattle Street sidestreet.  Straight ahead is current elevator.  A replacement elevator could readily be constructed on this plaza with a connecting tunnel above the Green Line A tunnel, very much on a straight line between the corners..

3. Harvard Station S3.

Here is the reverse camera view from the previous shot.  This is the last block of Eliot Street.  Station S3 would have to be constructed under this area if S1 and S2 were not feasible.

S3 is major construction. and almost certainly can be avoided.

It is unlikely that a full Green Line three car train could fit under this block.  So the station would almost certainly have to be stretched under Mt. Auburn Street and into the next block.

In the above picture, Mt. Auburn Street is visible.  The below shot is right at the corner.

The opening in the trees slightly right of the center of the photo is the walkway above the Green Line A tunnel.

Connection to Harvard Station would be through the Green Line A tunnel which would, in alternatives S1 and S2 be used for Green Line A.  Connection would be straight to the lower busway removing part of the non load bearing wall.

The waiting area for the lower busway could be expanded into the Green Line A tunnel to handle the traffic from Green Line A, station S3, in addition to folks waiting for buses.

In reality, the distance from the main station concourse to Green Line A would not be significantly different from the existing walk from the pedestrian concourse to northern end cars on Red Line trains.

The distance is longer than it could be with S1 or S2.

And the expense and disruption of S3 is very major.

S3's handicapped elevator would work very well operated in conjunction with handicapped access to the upper bus tunnel.  All that would be appropriate would be to put the elevator near the relocation of the elevator for access just to the busway, close to or to the left of where the photo is taken.  If necessary that one elevator could be used for access both to the upper busway and to station S3.  It certainly would be a lot simpler if the current busway elevator does not have to be replaced.

Once you do the major construction needed to build S3, pedestrian access would be just part of the major project.  There is plenty of room.  The biggest variable is how far beyond Mt. Auburn Street traffic would go.

The construction zone would probably not take up more than the two blocks, but it would take up the two blocks.

Traffic relocation, looking at the map, of traffic from Harvard Square would be left to Mt. Auburn Street.  It can readily handle it.  The block of JFK Street from Mt. Auburn to Eliot Street would have to be used as two way with on street parking, of course, removed.

Traffic to the Brattle Street side street would only be impacted if the upper busway elevator had to be removed.  If it does have to be removed, the first block of the side street would become a stub end.  During construction, all Brattle Street side street service would be from the next street to the north, which connects directly from Harvard Square.

Eliot Street from Eliot Street to JFK Street would see traffic which currently travels on Mt. Auburn Street.  The alternate route is clear.  That traffic would be turning north on JFK Street and then east on Mt. Auburn Street.

The combination of turns to JFK Street would significant increase traffic on JFK Street with probable backups on the approaches.

4. Connection to and JFK Park.

On the preferred alternative 1 route and its companion alternative 2, Green Line A would travel in the existing subway tunnel two stories underground.

This is the entrance from Eliot Street.  To the left is the newest JFK School building.  To the right is the Charles Hotel residential complex.

A view further in.

The trees up above are the ones you are looking at in the previous picture.  This parking lot of the JFK School used to be part of the Red Line train storage area.

On looking at these photos, I realize I was wrong in saying you cannot see the tunnel anymore because of the construction of the building straight ahead.

The thick black line is probably utilities.  As you approach the building, you will see a second line between the thick black line and the pedestrian walkway.  That line is the top of the existing tunnel.  The area between the lines is the tunnel.

Here is Harvard JFK School’s map of the area, and a better view of the parking lot and walkway support.

Access to extend the tunnel would be easy even after reaching the second Harvard Building next to the walkway / subway tunnel.

Here is the view of the walkway from JFK Park.

This is JFK Park.  This is where Alternative 1 would go.  There is even a break between the trees if construction were necessary further up.  JFK Park has been constructed to ease installation of a rapid transit connection.

There is a plaza which would probably have to be rebuilt.  It is between the location from which the last two photos were taken.  It could be possible that the construction under the pedestrian walkway could get far enough down for deep bore.  However, JFK Park, whichever means of crossing the Charles is chosen would have to be the center of construction of the northern end of the tunnel under the Charles River.  It seems inconceivable that that plaza could avoid being rebuilt.

The layout of JFK Park is perfect from an environmental impact point of view.  NO TREES WOULD BE DESTROYED in JFK Park for alternative 1, and JFK Park is key in the construction.

I am sorry about my lack of photo of the plaza.  I anticipate there was a lighting problem.  Note the overexposure above.

Here is a better view of the opening between trees.

5. Layover.

The double track Green Line A would have to end at JFK Park because of the existence of only tunnel room for one train.  There is room in JFK Park, without tree destruction, to add layover tracks for additional cars waiting to get into the terminus, or for storage.

If alternative S1 or S2 is chosen, the tunnel still exists connecting to the existing lower Red Line tunnel.  I am not certain if there is room between S1 and the Red Line tunnel to layover a train as well, almost certainly not.  If S2 is chosen and the rearrangement accomplished for S1, layover would be possible.

6. The prior reports.

● General analysis:  http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2015/04/charles-river-new-green-line-ideal-for.html.

● BU Bridge end of Green Line A:  http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2015/04/charles-river-green-line-boston.html

● Charles River: Green Line A Rapid Transit for Olympics — Harvard Square: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/charles-river-green-line-rapid-transit.html

● Charles River - Harvard Square:  Corrections to Green Line A Harvard Station Proposal:: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/charles-river-harvard-square-to-green.html

● Charles River, Comments:  Olympics, Green Line A; fraud in Cambridge, MA, USA City Hall”  http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/charles-river-comments-olympics-green.html.

● Charles River: Green Line A for Olympics, map with options: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/charles-river-green-line-for-olympics.html

● Charles River: Olympics Rapid Transit map reorganized; change Green Line B rapid transit stop name? http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/charles-river-olympics-rapid-transit.html

● Charles River: Olympics Rapid Transit: One Harvard Station site for consideration. http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/charles-river-olympics-rapid-transit_18.html

● Charles River: Olympics Rapid Transit: A Second Harvard Station site for consideration: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/charles-river-olympics-rapid-transit_19.html

Charles River: More environmental fraud coming from Cambridge, MA, USA.

Charles River: More environmental fraud coming from Cambridge, MA, USA.

1. Introduction.
2. Councilor claims sainthood.
3. This “achievement.”


1. Introduction.

You can frequently tell when the City of Cambridge, MA, USA has done something environmentally reprehensible.

It starts praising itself for its environmental enlightenment, lying through omission about the vile achievement which it keeps as secret as possible.  This behavior is very much non stop, but there does seem to be a bit of an uptake after the latest atrocity.

Since Cambridge destroyed the excellent grove of trees at the entrance to the Cambridge Common, it has opened a propaganda show in City Hall lying that Cambridge and friends are saints on the Charles River.  The show, as presented in its prior stop, features the usual lies of omission plus meaningful lies of commission.  I analyzed this outrage on top of an outrage at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/charles-river-environmental-fraud.html.

A taste of the vileness of the situation can be seen in one exhibit:

2. Councilor claims sainthood.

Councilor Craig Kelley is, as usual,  joining the lies of sainthood team.  Kelley has claimed to be an environmentalist from the beginning.  He never mentions his, and the Cambridge pols’, secret definition of environmentalism.

The secret definition of “environmentalism” is that they are protecting that part of the environment which Cambridge is not destroying.

I am unaware of any environmental outrage passed by the Cambridge City Council during his tenure that did not have Kelley’s vote.

The outrages extend to the Monteiro outrage in which the Cambridge City Council clearly communicated its indifference to the City Manager’s destruction of the life of a black, Cape Verdean, female department head because she exercised her civil / women’s rights in a manner which disagreed with the City Manager.  Three levels of courts condemned the City Manager vehemently.  The Cambridge City Council not only did not fire him.  It named the Cambridge Police Station after him.

Monteiro is important because Monteiro makes it very clear that any person standing up to the Cambridge City Manager, including on environmental matters, opens that person up to the danger that retaliation / abuse can be inflicted without Cambridge City Council punishment of the City Manager.

“Reprehensible” said the trial court judge.  “Ample evidence of . . . outrageous misbehavior” said the appeals court panel.  More than triple penal damages on top of more than $1.1 million lifetime harm, said the jury.

Cambridge, MA, USA is a city in which the City Council has strongly communicated that it is dangerous to meaningfully stand up against Cambridge’s environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse.

After all, whose name is on the Cambridge Police Station!

3. This “achievement.”

Kelley did do a good job of keeping folks aware of the then coming destruction on the Cambridge Common, with the usual lie of omission.  He neglected to mention that he voted for the destruction.

Now, Kelley is “protecting” street trees.

The secret definition of street trees does not include the Cambridge Common on which the City Council just destroyed that excellent grove.

The secret definition of street trees does not include the Alewife Reservation in which the City Council has destroyed 3.4 acres of irreplaceable woodlands and is being put in a position for perhaps total destruction.  The City Council has frequently yelled at the other guy, private developers obeying municipally controlled zoning.  The condemnations never mention the zoning or the municipal responsibility through irresponsible zoning for the outrage the City Council lies that it objects to.

The secret definition of street trees does not include the Fresh Pond Reservation where Cambridge is aggressively destroying animal habitat as part of their installation of gardens.  Animal habitats are so unbeautiful.

The secret definition of street trees does not include the hundreds of trees being destroyed on the Charles River by chapter 286 of Massachusetts Acts of 2014.  The Cambridge City Council has a telling definition of “neutrality” on the Charles River.  The Cambridge City Council is “neutral” on the Charles River except when funding or fighting for destruction.  A more accurate description is a wink and a nod.

But Kelley aggressively insists he is an “environmentalist”.  Just do not expect him, or any of the nine other City Councilors running for election this year, to volunteer to you his / their secret definition of “environmentalism” or his / their real record.

Charles River: Olympics Rapid Transit: A Second Harvard Station site for consideration

Charles River: Olympics Rapid Transit: A Second Harvard Station site for consideration.

1. Proposed route.
2. Harvard Station S2 - photos of the current situation.
a. Northern end of lower busway.
b. Ground view, western end of busway.
c. Lower busway, western end.
d. Upper busway, western end.
e. Ground view, western end.
3. Harvard Station S2, analysis.
4. The prior reports.


1. Proposed route.

I have been doing a series on possible new rapid transit service for the Boston 2024 Olympics.  A major part of my interest is my appreciation that the Boston 2024 Olympics peope want to destroy the starvation wall Cambridge and friends have created at Magazine Beach as part of their heartless abuse of the 34 year resident gaggle of the Charles River White Geese, and their environmental destruction at the Magazine Beach playing fields.

Normal human beings are a refreshing change over the vileness which dominates politics with regard to  Cambridge, MA, USA and its accomplices in their environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse.

2. Harvard Station S2 - photos of the current situation.

This the second of three suggestions for the Harvard Station stop, the lower busway.  It is my preferred alternative..

a. Northern end of lower busway.

Here are the entrances from the man pedestrian plaza in Harvard Station.

There are two entrances from the main pedestrian plaza.

The stairwell to the right leads into the northern portion of the busway.  The ramp straight ahead leads further south, to the western portion of the busway.  The only entrance to the upper busway from the pedestrian plaza is the ramp to the left.

The view from the mezzanine shows how the fare machines block view of the lower busway from much of the station pedestrian area.  The upper busway is readily visible above it.

And here is a view looking straight into the stairwell into the northern end of the lower busway, with the fare machines visible to the right and the entrance to the Red Line subway platforms to the far right..

Here is the view from inside the lower busway, looking north.  The doors to the stairs to the pedestrian plaza are to the right.  The pedestrian waiting area it to the right, the bus highway to the left.  The busway does not have room for buses to pass each other.  The busway curves.

Looking in the opposite direction, the ramp entrance is at the left, and you see some passengers waiting.  The area in the above photo is not used for waiting for buses.  It is strictly used for dropping off passengers.  There is quite a bit of distance between waiting areas.

b. Ground view, western end of busway.

The curve can be seen on the below map of Harvard Square.  The station and Harvard Square proper are in the upper right corner.  On the map, the ground level entrance is marked with the T.  The underground curve you are looking at is to the left of the T and across the street.  The busway goes around the buildings you see on this map.  The western portion of the busway runs under the sidewalk to the left on the map, past Palmer Street, the first side street, and to the Brattle Street side street, the second side street.  The busway is under the sidewalk of what is the first block of Brattle Street.  On the map, S2 indicates this as the location of the S2 station proposal.

Backing away from Harvard Square, proper, here are ground level views on the first block of Brattle Street, above the busways.  The third photo shows the beginning of the ground level pedestrian plaza at the turn of Brattle Street, from the first block to the Brattle Street side street.  This is called Brattle Square.

c. Lower busway, western end.

This photo is from the far western end of the lower busway.  The curve to the right is the corner of the stairwell to the upper busway on the western end of the lower busway.

This is the stairwell.

d. Upper busway, western end.

This is the upper busway from the top of that staircase.  Notice that the pedestrian area is wider.

This is the upper end of the stairwell.

To the left is the stairwell.  Straight ahead is the stairwell from the upper busway to Brattle Square.

The openings at the end of the above photo are show from the other side, to the right in this shot.  At the end of this corridor is the elevator from the ground level at Brattle Square, the point where Brattle Street turns.  The elevator does not go to the lower busway, just to the upper busway.

The elevator was installed after the rebuilding of Harvard Station, probably because of changes in the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act?).  The slope to the upper busway is sharper than the slope to the lower busway.  The lower busway complies with the new requirements.  The upper did not until the elevator was installed.

Here is the look back into the upper busway from the side tunnel.

Here is the view of the western staircase from the busway proper, pretty much a reverse view of the previous.

e. Ground view, western end.

This view is taken very close to the corner of the first block of Brattle Street and the Brattle Street sidestreet.

The grey structure with T’s on it is the elevator to the upper busway.  The opening behind it showing a little bit of red is the staircase to the upper busway.

Here is a view from a slightly different angle.  The Red Line marking on the stairwell is clearer.

Here is a view of the side street and that part of the plaza.

Across the Brattle Street side street is the beginning of Eliot Street.  This would be the beginning of the S3 alternative, if used.

3. Harvard Station S2, analysis.

I have shown you this level of detail to show you the areas which need work as well as the lower busway, station S2.

The tunnel to the former rail yards at Memorial Drive is on the far side of the wall shown in the photos of the lower busway.

It seems likely that the stairwell between the lower and upper busway interrupts the tunnel.  That would require the stair well to be removed.

It seems reasonable to continue the staircase from the ground to the upper level straight ahead to the lower busway.  It might be necessary to make the stairwell less wide.  That would be reasonable since most of the people walking down the stairway would be going to the upper busway or, through it, to the main pedestrian plaza and the red line.

When reaching the lower busway level, it would be simple to install fair machines at the near end and at the end toward the pedestrian plaza, and to build an open fence toward the busway.  If more space is needed for access to the green line trains, the fare machines could be installed at the upper busway end of the stairs.

Passengers using the staircase to access the lower busway would have to walk through the upper busway and down its ramp, but the waiting area would be moved to the foot of the upper busway ramp anyway.

I do not know how deep or the nature of the foundations of the elevator go.  Hopefully, they do not interfere with the tunnel.  If they do, the simplest solution would be to rebuild or resupport the elevator.

Moving the elevator would certainly be possible, probably to the plaza at the beginning of Eliot Street, across the Brattle Street side street.  Moving would definitely complicate access for the handicapped.

Putting the Green Line terminus at this location would force passengers picking up buses at this level into the area next to the pedestrian concourse.

There is quite a bit of room there, much less than the lower busway currently has, but still quite a bit of room.

A key decision for those making the decisions is which makes more sense between S1, terminus at the pedestrian plaza or S2, at the lower busway.

The adjustments for the stairwell and the western elevator would have to be made in either instance.

Using the S1 alternative, you have the additional cost of moving the main elevator.  You also are rearranging the station to use space more efficiently without really cramping things, which would be necessary for S2.

I have been thinking these things over and thinking these things over.  I would think that the decision would be to save the money needed for moving the main elevator, but there is a lot to be said for the more efficient rearrangement in S1.

You tell me.

4. The prior reports.

● General analysis:  http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2015/04/charles-river-new-green-line-ideal-for.html.

● BU Bridge end of Green Line A:  http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2015/04/charles-river-green-line-boston.html

● Charles River: Green Line A Rapid Transit for Olympics — Harvard Square: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/charles-river-green-line-rapid-transit.html

● Charles River - Harvard Square:  Corrections to Green Line A Harvard Station Proposal:: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/charles-river-harvard-square-to-green.html

● Charles River, Comments:  Olympics, Green Line A; fraud in Cambridge, MA, USA City Hall”  http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/charles-river-comments-olympics-green.html.

● Charles River: Green Line A for Olympics, map with options: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/charles-river-green-line-for-olympics.html

● Charles River: Olympics Rapid Transit map reorganized; change Green Line B rapid transit stop name? http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/charles-river-olympics-rapid-transit.html

● Charles River: Olympics Rapid Transit: One Harvard Station site for consideration. http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/charles-river-olympics-rapid-transit_18.html