Recent photos from SECRET destruction on Magazine Beach, courtesy Cambridge (MA, USA) City Council and friends..

Recent photos from SECRET destruction on Magazine Beach, courtesy Cambridge City Council and friends.

1. Prelude.  An environmentally destructive Cambridge City Council proves more lies at Magazine Beach.
2. Introduction.
3. Phil’s reports.
4. Addendum.


1. Prelude.  An environmentally destructive Cambridge City Council proves more lies at Magazine Beach.

This report has been posted by evolution.  Hopefully, this is the final stage of the evolution.

The Cambridge City Council has gone forward with its second SECRET destruction vote on the Charles River, directly and through praised destruction by its companion in environmental outrage, the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recretation.

In the process, it seems to have increased the ongoing count of the outrageous tree destruction at Magazine Beach on the Charles River from 58 to 59.

Here is the most recent destruction by the Cambridge City Council, the DCR, and the fake protectors who hold down voters with their own corrupt tactics.  Details as presented by Phil Barber are in Section 3.

Here are the two trees of which we recently showed the stubs.  These have been marked by coloring by Phil Barber from an older photo.  These are UNDISCLOSED trees 57 and 58 in the plans which started with the DCR filing of plans with the Cambridge Conservation Commission to destroy 54 at Magazine Beach.  Those destruction plans were presented to the Cambridge City Council by our letter of June 6, 2017.  That report is posted at http://focrwg.com/agenda1.html.

Our continuing disclosure of these EXPANDING plans has been called “lies” by the presiding officer of the Cambridge City Council, another lie.  At the same time, the Cambridge City Council has lied about its own sainthood by yelling at constituents for tree destruction.  Most of constituents being yelled are far less irresponsible than the Cambridge City Council and its friends.

The before picture of those two trees, photo marked up by and taken by Phil Barber:

The second SECRET Cambridge City Council vote to directly fund destruction on the Charles has destroyed one ornamental next to the 80 year unused bathhouse at Magazine Beach.

Here is a photo of it from the photos which I took in preparing the 6/6/17 letter.  This doomed tree was, SURPRISE, included in the Cambridge Conservation Commission filing.

,

And here is tree 59 of the 54 announced by the DCR to the Cambridge Conservation Commission.  This is a magnificent Mulberry photograph from Phil Barber’s files.  The DCR filing is confusing.  I do not think this now destroyed mulberry is in the filing.  This destroyed tree is the one at the right in the photo, with many trunks.  The apparent failure to include this tree in the DCR filling with the Conservation Commission is failure to inform of destruction of a tree within the CCC responsibility and thus yet would appear to be another violation.

I remember the walkaround in which the DCR showed off its outrageous plans to the CCC.  I do not remember this tree being pointed out.  It is highly visible on the rise above the Charles River between the doomed and magnificent willow and the 80 year abandoned bathhouse.  So the apparent failure to include would not be just the usual carelessness.  My memory could be confused by a major disagreement on whether the TEN trees in the nearby threatened excellent grove were TEN or THREE as claimed by the DCR.

Have I missed an amendment to the filing?  Possibly.  I try to be on the mailing list for CCC meetings.  I may have not received an announcement of consideration, or it could have been the usual vague description.

Plus our YouTube report is another part of the reality which the presiding officer of the Cambridge City Council from his podium has called “Lies.”  There are many before and after pictures in that report demonstrating who is the liar.

This is our report on the internet on the hundreds of mostly excellent trees destroyed by Cambridge and the DCR in January 2016 on the Charles River between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge.  This report includes its own prequil to the current ongoing outrage by the loudly and falsely claiming tree “protectors” of the Cambridge City Council.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTplCCEJP7o.

2. Introduction.

Phil Barber has followed up on the following destruction by the Cambridge City Council and friends on Magazine Beach on the Charles River.

a. destruction by the Cambridge City Council in its second SECRET funding vote on the Charles river, and on

b. destruction blessed by the Cambridge City Council by not wanting to know what the project it is praising is doing, including in the area allocated for destruction by Department of Conservation and Recreation funds.

First of all, here is the formerly SECRET plans by the DCR and the fake “protectors” saying which area will be paid for by the other of the scoundrels.

The SECRET funding allocation was presented in one map by the City Council’s “kind of activist.”  To, hopefully, minimize confusion, I have divided it into three parts, two of which are being destroyed by the two Cambridge City Council SECRET votes this year.

The first third which I am showing (of the three parts) is the middle of the Magazine Beach destruction zone.  Area 1 seems to be the SECRET implementation of two votes this year.  Area 4 is DCR funding.  Thus, WHILE CONSTANTLY PRAISING DCR plans, the City Council claims to have no responsibility for the destruction it is praising.

I do not believe that area 3 has lifted the veil of SECRECY yet.  Since it includes the destruction of all but one of the trees in the little guys’ park, presumably this is destruction being praised by the Cambridge City Council while claiming to have no responsibility for the destruction it is praising.

Here is the eastern third of the Magazine Beach Destruction area.

The first SECRET vote paying for destruction on the Charles River at Magazine Beach funded heartless animal abuse as the destroyed boat dock at the far right marked "0".

This boat dock was originally destroyed during the 2000's to starve the Charles River White Geese by blocking access to their food of most of the last 38 years while retaining the boat dock.  Blocking access through the Boat Dock blocked the only access left by the construction of the outrageous Starvation Wall blocking the rest of the shore from the Magazine Beach playing fields, their home and food for most of the last 38 years.

This outrage was based on public promises by a governmental sanctified “Charles River Master Plan” and a “swim in” by one of the usual fake groups claiming that the construction would improve swimming.  The “improvement” blocked access and view of the Charles River from its banks along with the heartless starvation.  The Starvation Wall has been admitted by the DCR to be hated by users of Magazine Beach.

This latest machination of the project was repeatedly described as a new boat dock.  The City Council vote was based on an artist rendering which was obvious nonsense.

It is not a new boat dock.  What that project is doing is tossing money at the blockade from feeding which is targeted at the 37 year resident Charles River White Geese while making access worse.

The second SECRET vote would destroy part of the Starvation Wall while apparently putting in a new physical blockade at ground level to continue starvation just as effectively.

The SECRET changes that I recently identified with regard to the public plans brought destruction up to 58 trees (photos below).  I will have to compare this latest destruction.

This report has been delayed a few days as it is.  I am getting it out and will see the level to which this latest destruction is SECRET from previously announced (and hidden as much as possible) plans or not.  Phil's words are as stated.

I have edited Phil's July 8 and July 10 emails in together/  The edit includes one omission from his emails because it was away from the current City Council SECRET destruction, and I am doing way too much explaining as it is.

This publication of this report includes additional thinking going beyond the original presentation.

3. Phil’s reports.

Here's some pix from 7/7/19. The first one is the roots of the torn up ornamental we've corresponded about.

* * * * *

[Ed: A file photo of the ornamental from the photos I took for the 6/6/17 communication to the Cambridge City Council.  This destruction is in the second SECRET destruction paid for by the Cambridge City Council.  This destruction was in the area used for celebration of destruction several months ago.  More than half the participants / destruction funders denied that trees are being destroyed.

]

* * * * *

Second is the stump of the largest tree they took down at the river's edge, a large multi-trunked old mulberry. I suspect is was not "esthetic enough" to fit the "new & improved" park

* * * * *

[Ed: This is also part of the Cambridge’s City Council’s second SECRET funded destruction.  I asked Phil for more detail.  This was his response in his second email]

What a lot of weasels

I did find a photo of the destroyed mulberry. It's the big spreading one to the right

[Ed: I do not think this tree is in the 54 trees which the DCR informed the Cambridge Conservation Commission it intends to destroy.  This is the package which was the basis of my June 6, 2017 letter to the Cambridge City Council.  If not in this package, this destruction brings the Magazine Beach destruction up to 59, in addition to the hundreds destroyed between the BU and Longfellow Bridges.]

* * * * *

Equipment near the Magazine

                          


Tree and brush removal near the Magazine

                           

Just a general view of the reeds growing tall and very lush, unmolested so far. Did I send you the link to an article that suggests that Monsanto was behind recent campaigns to remove so-called invasives, to sell more of their carcinogenic herbicide?

* * * * *

[Phil provided me the following links with regard to the ongoing poisoning of the banks of the Charles River by the DCR and Cambridge:

OK, here's the info

The Troubles of “Invasive” Plants: Collateral Damage, Monsanto, and the Tragedy of Pinyon-Juniper eradication it's at
https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/01/04/108319/

And another

Environmental activists claim “misguided war” on invasive plants is big business for Monsanto, glyphosate 
https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2015/08/19/environmental-activists-claim-misguided-war-invasive-plants-big-business-monsanto-glyphosate/

One more

Ending The Toxic, Costly and Unnecessary War On Invasive Plants: Who Does The War Serve?
https://gathervictoria.com/2015/09/28/ending-the-toxic-costly-and-unnecessary-war-on-invasive-plants-who-does-the-war-serve/

This is also interesting in a horrifying way:

Monsanto Roundup Is Used on Wildlands, but No One Knows How Much http://www.takepart.com/article/2016/07/08/monsantos-roundup-being-sprayed-willdlands-too/
Monsanto's herbicide incorporates a known carcinogen that is banned in the EU and elsewhere

California jury hits Bayer with $2 billion award in Roundup cancer trial
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-bayer-glyphosate-lawsuit/california-jury-hits-bayer-with-2-billion-award-in-roundup-cancer-trial-idUSKCN1SJ29F

* * * * *
 

             

[Ed:   This type of vegetation was destroyed by the Cambridge City Council’s “kind of activist” with associated relocation of poisons to the Charles River.  The vegetation was and is part of a drainage system installed in the late 2000's destruction to drain off poisons first introduced on Magazine Beach as part of THAT outrage.

[Hopefully, the folly of her destruction will result in the drainage pit being reestablished.  IF CAMBRIDGE HAD A RESPONSIBLE CITY GOVERNMENT, the poisons being dumped on Magazine Beach would be ended and a responsible ecosystem restored.

[Instead we get these additional destructive SECRET projects and a city council lying it is saving trees by yelling at private owners almost all of whom are destroying much less than the trees Cambridge and the state are destroying and have destroyed on the Charles River.]

I believe these are the first two large trees I told you were cut down, when I sent photos of the mulch circles and wood chips. The leaning tree to the left is still standing so I am confident these highlighted in red are the ones.

[Ed:  Here is Phil's after photo, previously published.  The Magazine / Bath House he mentions above is in the right rear.  The two photos are taken from opposing sides of the destruction.  The buildings in the rear of the above photo are a Cambridge public school on the far side of Memorial Drive.

[This was the subject of a recent report.  This destruction is in the state funding area and, apparently SECRET from the destruction filing with the Cambridge Conservation Commission.  This increases destruction to 58 with the Cambridge City Council doing non stop self congratulations on “saving” trees while being part of the outrage on the Charles River.]

4. Addendum.

Phil’s report ONLY includes activity to date.

Plans filed with Cambridge Conservation Commission show destruction of the magnificent Willow at southwest corner of playing field, southeast corner of central park.  This is now apparently designated to the Cambridge City Council, unless the DCR and friends decide to defer that and do it by the DCR.

Please see our 6/6/17 letter for much more destruction.

That is at http://focrwg.com/agenda1.html.  It is the baseline and will CONSISTENTLY BE IGNORED BY THE Cambridge City Council as they lie (to use the word of their chair) lie that they are environmental saints.

They do not want to know what they are doing on the Charles River, and other inconvenient locations, except when they ram through destruction as fast and as secretly as possible.

But then again, potential destruction has gone from 54 to 56 to 58 to 59.  Plus the hundreds previously destroyed between the BU and Longfellow Bridges.

Charles River: MassDOT stands up to the bad guys again. Cambridge Commuter Rail deservedly hurt.

Charles River: MassDOT stands up to the bad guys again.  Cambridge Commuter Rail deservedly hurt.

1. General.
2. The latest meeting.  MassDOT’s project.
3. The latest published plan possibly modified.
4. The reality of the bizarre passenger proposal.
A, Passenger Service on the Grand Junction Railroad.
B. A private and highly hated exit from I90 for the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
C. Summary.
5. West Station under the latest MassDOT proposal.
6. A responsible alternative.  A rapid transit connection between BU Bridge / Commonwealth Avenue and Harvard Square.


1. General.

The Massachusetts Department of Transportation has a problem.

They have an Interstate highway (I90) on the Boston side of the Charles River from Magazine Beach which they think needs to be rebuilt.  At the same time, a change in toll taking technology has rendered the existing exit outmoded.  The changes have created the major possibility of straightening out and thus speeding up the Interstate plus getting rid of a large amount of asphalt.

That work should not be unusually difficult.  However, Harvard University has purchased the underlying land and Harvard University wants a private stop added to the passenger railroad line running through the area.

The situation is further complicated by the usual games from activists in Cambridge.  They want major changes in a railroad track going through the eastern part of Cambridge.  They want to add passenger service in a manner which would mess up traffic on five already overloaded Cambridge local streets.

They thus want to use technology which has been outmoded for more the better part of a Century.  Their “improvement” would create passenger train service running across those city streets and creating the sort of mess which railroaders have avoided and have been undoing for the last Century.

These scornful statements about railroading coming from me are coming from a person with two years railroading experience at a low labor management level including six months actual on the ground experience.

Neither of these goals really has much to do with the needed rebuilding of the Interstate.  But, in the background is a plan for a private off ramp from the Interstate to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.  The private off ramp is strikingly close to being a destructive highway route which was defeated forty years ago by Cambridge activists.  This private exit is an update of what was then called the “Inner Belt.”.

The lovely plans would devastate the last remaining animal habitat in this part of the Charles River, including the one remaining undestroyed part of the formerly mile long habitat of the 38 year resident Charles River White Geese.

2. The latest meeting.  MassDOT’s project.

On June 20, 2019, I attended the Advisory Group meeting on the Massachusetts Department of Transportation’s rebuilding of I90 (Massachusetts Turnpike) on the Boston side of the Charles River.

Here is an official photo of I90 showing Magazine Beach on the Cambridge Side, to the right.  This is one area in which the Cambridge City Council and the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation are in the process of massively destroying trees and animal habitat while the Cambridge City Council spouts non stop lies of environment sainthood.

Pretty much all of the highway running from the bottom up to the left is being torn down and rebuilt.  The highway next to it, Soldiers Field Road, is a state limited access boulevard which is being rebuilt as part of the I90 work.

To more efficiently use the area, I90 is being rebuilt at ground level with Soldiers Field Road and various train tracks above it.


3. The latest published plan possibly modified.

The latest thinking of MassDOT presented at the June 20, 2019 meeting was not passed out in hard copy and does not seem to be available on line yet.

Here is the version passed out in April cropped to the area most directly impacting the Charles River.

The area shown in the above photograph is the straight area running diagonally from the lower right between the bends in the highway.

4. The reality of the bizarre passenger proposal.

A, Passenger Service on the Grand Junction Railroad.

The passenger service which the bad guys are trying to sneak in after strongly losing in public discussions would follow the route of the Grand Junction railroad.  Here is a MassDOT map of the Grand Junction marked up by me to show the major streets which would be devastated by the Commuter Rail suddenly crossing those highways at grade..

Such addition of grade crossings on major city streets is more than a Century out of date.  A lot of money has been spent replacing grade crossing with overpasses and underpasses.

The connections to the I90 construction area are in the bottom left of this plan and the bottom right of the project plan.

B. A private and highly hated exit from I90 for the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Here is that area of the April 19 map of the project plan, blown up.

The Grand Junction Railroad connection to the I90 area is shown in the lower left of the Grand Junction map.   That connection is shown on the bottom right of the I90 plan.

One biggest part the bad guys are trying to sneak in is a rebuild of this railroad as it crosses the Charles River.  THIS WORK IS NEVER PUBLICLY MENTIONED.  THE WORK IS A POLITICAL PARIAH IN CAMBRIDGE.  People are proud of beating the Inner Belt 40 years ago along pretty much the same route.

Rebuilding that bridge is key to building the updated “Inner Belt.”

The updated Inner Belt / personal exit to MIT was first proposed by the area transit agency (the Massachusetts  Bay Transit Authority) in 2003 as part of a study with a nonsensical explanation.

The study proved that an updated Inner Belt could be built OVER THIS BRIDGE if the bridge were rebuilt.  It would connect to the bridge from I90 through ramps going eastbound (right) from the east bound ramps of I90, bottom right, looping up and connecting to the rebuilt bridge.  Connection would be made for traffic to I90 west in a fairly straight forward manner.  Given the space available, access to and from the West is the only possibility.

C. Summary.

At the June 20, 2019 meeting, the bad guys reenforced their fight for rebuilding of this bridge to the MassDOT presenter.  MassDOT has repeatedly fought to keep the I90 project restricted to work in Boston, the south / Boston side of the Charles River.  The Charles River is the dark gray area showing in these maps. 

The rebuttal of the speaker to a bad guy this time was the strongest, clearest communication of the situation I have seen.  What the bad guys try to sneak through as minor was described as a highly expensive project which would require separate approval.

SEPARATE APPROVAL WOULD REMOVE THE SECRECY IN THE CURRENT EFFORTS.

End of that dirty trick, under whatever euphemism used.

5. West Station under the latest MassDOT proposal.

The key part of the discussion involves “West Station,” another major change politically sneaked through as a necessary beauty, “no big thing.”

The relevant part of the reduced map crop in section 3 shows about a third of the way up on the right.

Here is the west station portion of the April 2019 plan.

Never mentioned in the fight for this PERSONAL station for Harvard on the east-west railroad is the close proximity of the rather new Boston Landing station.  Boston Landing is NOT THAT FAR OFF THE PLANS TO THE LEFT / West.

The Brown / Reddish structure in the middle of these plans in West Station.

The top two tracks connect to the Grand Junction and also to rail storage as part of the South Station Commuter Rail system.  Note how they narrow to one track in either direction.

The bottom two tracks would be above and below a platform in the middle of the east-west main line.

The change proposed on June 20 would run the last two tracks, without the platform, along the bottom of the construction area to allow maximum speed for through trains.  That would comply with the needs of suburban commuters and Western Massachusetts traffic.

A fifth track and platform would be added between these two tracks and the two tracks showing above them in the April plans.  This siding would allow passenger service to West Station.  The fifth track creates a terminal for shuttle service from Boston Landing Station, half a mile or so to the left of the area on the main map.

This change is major.  It makes excellent sense if you are running a railroad.  The service to and from the west needs to be as fast as possible to satisfy the needs of long distance rail transportation.

The change also reflects the reality of the situation.

MassDOT has been forced to provide a private station for Harvard.  But that station makes no operational sense as a major part of a railroad.  The Boston Landing station is so close that a second station in the area is silly.

The ridership projections are so low that, actually, neither station makes any operational sense, singly or combined.  But the politics are such that the project will include West Station, no matter how stupid.

West Station’s supposed greatness is its access to that new route through Cambridge.  But, they will have to get the money AND PUBLIC SUPPORT.  That route will not come for about a decade after the rest of the project, and the route is nonsensical.

MassDOT has PUBLICLY studied the route glorified by the bad guys.  MassDOT found that the route makes no sense for anybody outside of Cambridge / MIT’s Kendall Square development area, and (see below) a new rapid transit line could be more functional without being destructive like the nonsensical Ground Junction commuter rail.  Plus, of course, the Century out of date road crossings would make already bad traffic in Cambridge that much worse.  Very significantly the environmental outrages in the animal habitat on the Charles River are inexcusable.

6. A responsible alternative.  A rapid transit connection between BU Bridge / Commonwealth Avenue and Harvard Square.

This would provide the MEANINGFUL rapid transit connection which has been PROMISED and that is greatly needed by the North Allston neighborhood which abuts the project.  This is an area I have lived in (close to the proposed Franklin Street station), and I strongly agree with the frustrations of the current residents.

Green Line A would greatly reduce traffic on the overloaded Red Line rapid transit between Park Street and Harvard Station by being more convenient for people in Back Bay who need to get to Harvard Station and beyond.

Thus it would provide MIT and company improved service at Kendall / MIT on that portion of the Red Line in place of the commuter rail service their group is trying to sneak into the I90 rebuild out of the public view.

The rerouting of the I90 / Mass Pike rebuild so that I90 is on the ground with Soldiers Field Road above it could greatly facilitate Green Line A.  The configuration would allow putting Green Line A above the Mass. Pike between the BU Bridge and he future Harvard construction.

Common sense for the greater good.

Charles River: The Cambridge City Council’s SECOND SECRET initiative being initiated.

RE: Charles River:   The Cambridge City Council’s SECOND SECRET initiative being initiated.

1. Introduction.

I have been overwhelmed.  Here are photos of the Cambridge City Council’s second SECRET project at Magazine Beach taken in the last few days.

To put it in perspective, I am attaching the map provided by the City Council’s “Kind of activist” of Magazine Beach showing the previously SECRET funds allocation by, apparently, Cambridge and the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation.

For simplicity of use, I have divided her map into thirds, the western, middle and central portions.

Area 2 in the middle photo is apparently designated for massive deniable destruction.  Two trees have recently been destroyed.

The area above the designated areas in the first / left photo is of particular interest.  DCR and Cambridge destroyed two trees next to the MicroCenter building which were included in the destruction plans filed with the Cambridge Conservation Commission and destroyed two trees in front of the MicroCenter parking lot WHICH WERE NOT DISCLOSED TO THE CAMBRIDGE CONSERVATION COMMISSION.

Neither area is included in the current formerly secret segment, al though this group includes portions of the street, Magazine Street, which ends at the central part, and which was not included in the destruction report.

2. Photos from, approximately June 15, 2019.

3. Photos from, approximately June 24, 2019.

4. Photos and explanation from June 25, 2019.

The chopping has begin in earnest. They’re clearing much of the underbrush along the river’s edge, from in front of the old magazine over to the new deck. They also replaced the stones on the “kayak beach” with gravel. The cut brush is stacked up and a Bobcat is hauling it to the chipper. They seem to be taking 1-2” diameter small trees/brush. I would say about 25% of the total greenery has been removed so far all along the area.

Massive Tree Destruction and Funding Games, Coming Magazine Beach Destruction, part 5.

The level of dishonesty in the fight of the Cambridge City Council, the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation and their cheerleaders for destruction on the Charles River is outrageous.

The following letter was delivered to the Cambridge City Manager on June 10, 2019, and to the Cambridge City Clerk on the same day for delivery to the Cambridge City Council at its next meeting.  It is reformatted to fit this medium.

One of the samples of reality included in this letter was my personal encounters with the people funding the destruction lobby.  My encounter with the funders of the destruction lobby resulted in a response that more than 50% had been handed a bill of goods.

Is it any surprise that the Cambridge City Council and the Department of Conservation and Recreation are playing funding games to permit lies of sainthood by the Cambridge City Council?

The numbers are as follows:

The Cambridge City Council would appear to be running for reelection based on a claim to be defending the trees of the city.

A woman who is not running for reelection supported this nonsensical claim in debate claiming she did not want any trees destroyed.

My video on the destruction of hundreds of trees between the next two bridges east of Magazine Beach is posted at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTplCCEJP7o.  The City Council’s public “position” was to yell at circuses traveling on the public ways for animal abuse with total silence about the trees destruction and heartless animal abuse ongoing SIMULTENEOUSLY by Cambridge and the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation.

My publishing of the OFFICIAL FILED PLANS for destruction at Magazine Beach presented by me to the Cambridge City Council is posted at http://focrwg.com/agenda1.html.

As noted in the below letter, the official filed plans called for the destruction of 54 mostly excellent trees.  I document the increase to 56 shortly after filing of the plans by me, and the subsequent increase to 58.

But the Cambridge City Council will run for reelection based on yelling at the other guy for actions which are a pittance, when compared to the outrages on the Charles River.

All the incumbents running for reelection will keep the outrage which is environmental reality in Cambridge, MA, as secret as possible.

* * * * *

Gentlemen / Ladies:

Please excuse my silence in front of you during the past months.  On April 1, I suffered a very major injury which kept me inpatient for five weeks, and I really have not fully recovered since then.

I do note that on April 1, you received part 4 in this series, going into the reality behind your vote further cementing the division of funding between the Cambridge City Council and the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation.  The City Council gets to claim sainthood and the DCR does the dirty stuff.

It rather is distressing to see the first implementation of the division of funds has already occurred.

Here is the relevant part of the funding map first disclosed by the City Council’s “kind of activist” in support of this vote.

Area 1 is the area that the City Council gets to brag about.  Area 4 is the area that the City Council gets to claim lack of responsibility for IN THIS JOINT PROJECT, whose shared nature the City Council brags about when convenient.

The City Council and the DCR have increased Magazine Beach destruction to 58 from the previous 56.   The added destruction is ABOVE THE DIVIDING LINE across from and to the right of the building which was abandoned for 80 years.

Here are the latest excellent trees destroyed:  If any of you wish to, please point out where destruction of these trees was included in the destruction plans.

Here are the filed destruction plans for this area.  They are marked to show the presentation in my June 6, 2017 analysis presented to the Cambridge City Council.

I do not see this destruction disclosed.

Cambridge and the DCR have since destroyed two trees on the sidewalk in front of the MicroCenter Parking lot which were lovingly cared for by the owners.  That increased the 54 in the June 6, 2017 report to 56.

Here are those destroyed trees which were kept secret in the Cambridge Conservation Commission report.

This destruction shown above increases destruction at Magazine Beach to 58.

I spent a lot of time in the area of this latest destruction during festivities sponsored by the City Council’s “kind of activist” as a way of thanking folks providing funds to help the destruction she fights for WHILE KEEPING THE DESTRUCTION SECRET even from people footing the lobbying bill.

I talked to a lot of folks involved in the celebration.

Very clearly, at least half of the folks participating in the celebration of work at Magazine Beach by the DCR and the Cambridge City Council were getting told only of the politically responsible parts of the project. They had been told about the excellence of the politically responsible parts.

They were kept from knowledge about the truly reprehensible parts, including this increase of destruction from 56 to 58 trees in the area allocated by the funding games to the DCR..

This part of the park is heavily vegetated with large numbers of doomed, now excellent trees.

I remember observing the mulch shown in the picture at the top of page 2 [ed: above].  It had just been spread.  I assumed that dumping mulch around trees meant they were safe from the City Council / DCR depredations.

Once again, Cambridge and the DCR remind me of probably the most important thing to remember on the Charles River:

NEVER ASSUME “THEY” WOULD NEVER STOOP SO LOW!

The area where so many people who have been lied to were being fed is to the left of the 80 year vacant building in this area.

Here is a photo of the part the city council was bragging about in this latest SECRET vote.

The fine print would indicate that there appear to include yet another barrier to free animals access to the area where they have fed for most of the past 38 years.  The heartless animal abuse is, of course, never mentioned.

And here is a photo of the residents for most of the last 38 years and who are being further starved.

The photo was taken the day they learned they were being deliberately starved.

Sincerely,



Robert J. La Trémouille
Chair

Charles River: Little Guy’s Parking Lot and Trees Destruction, Coming Magazine Beach Destruction, parts 3 and 4.

Charles River:  Little Guy’s Parking Lot and Trees Destruction, Coming Magazine Beach Destruction, parts 3 and 4.

March 23 2019, Pulled after 5 hits, refiled April 9, 2019, 4:54 am

I. General Introduction.
1. Introduction.
2. Our June 6, 2017 analysis of destruction plans 3, overview.
3. The Little Guys’ Parking Lot.
4. Summary.
II. Part 3.  Destruction of the Little Guys’ Parking Lot, and all but one tree in it.
III. Massive Tree Destruction and Funding Games, Coming Magazine Beach Destruction, part 4.


I. General Introduction.

Once again, passing on a letter to the Cambridge City Council and the City Manager.

This started with part 3.  I caught a narrow glitch.  So put out Part 4.  The combination is the story.

So here comes the original, then the change.

II. Part 3.  Destruction of the Little Guys’ Parking Lot, and all but one tree in it.

Once again, passing on a letter to the Cambridge City Council and the City Manager.

These letters are developing into a replacement for evaluations posted on this blog.  The difference is that they get made part of the Cambridge, MA, official record in the process.

Letter addressed to the Cambridge City Council and City Manager, received on March 28, 2019 by the City Manager and, for the City Council by the City Clerk who will pass it on to the Cambridge City Council next Monday, April 1, 2019.

What it does is go much further into evaluation of the formerly SECRET funding plans of the Department of Conservation and Recreation and evaluates them as rather clearly more Fraud on the Cambridge Voters.

The nominal purpose is to pass on the pages of the Destruction plans of the DCR blessed by the Cambridge City Council for the lovely little guys’ parking lot in the middle of the Magazine Beach playing fields.

This destruction greatly gentrifies the facility by keeping away from it people whom the “right kind of people” might consider below the appropriate station for such a beautiful facility.  And, of course, in the process, achieving very major environmental destruction which the Cambridge City Council DOES NOT WANT TO KNOW ABOUT.

1. Introduction.
2. Our June 6, 2017 analysis of destruction plans 3, overview.
3. The Little Guys’ Parking Lot.
4. Summary.


Gentlemen / Ladies:

1. Introduction.

It is so very scary to recognize the very destructive reality behind the Cambridge City Council’s lovely claims of environmental sainthood.  This follows upon two letters presenting excerpts from my June 7, 2017 analysis of the Cambridge City Council’s April 24, 2017 order 1 blank check to the Department of Conservation and Recreation for its outrageous destruction plans at Magazine Beach.

* * * * * *

The Magazine Beach park.  The Cambridge City Council wants perhaps 30 trees in this park destroyed along with the little guys’ parking lot in the front facing Memorial Drive, including every tree but one in that parking lot.  Gentrification and massive environmental destruction.  This report is the little guys’ parking lot.  Magnificent trees behind the little guys’ parking lot, with associated funding fraud details, will be presented in the next report..

* * * * * *

My letter went over the plans for destruction and matched those plans to photos of targeted trees.  The Selected Relatively Recent Related Materials at the end of this letter provide a limited list of City Council communications, with the prior two communications in this series toward the end.

We have had a major change in the no longer SECRET knowledge about pending / imminent destruction, with the filing by the Cambridge City Council’s “kind of activist” of the DCR plans for division of moneys in the destruction at Magazine Beach to allow the Cambridge City Council’s nonsensically claims of innocence.

Here, once again, is the previously SECRET DCR plans for funding games.

We are having problems with translation of the original into blog view.  Sometimes the full map translates.  Sometimes, it does not.  So we are publishing first the full map.  Then we are publishing it in thirds right (generally west), middle (the park), left (generally east).

Looking over this outrage more closely, it would appear that the Cambridge City Council will be designated to pay for areas 1 and 2, to allow the voter fraud of claims of “innocence” with regard to massive and highly irresponsible tree destruction in areas 3 and 4.

What happens to the doomed trees in area 1 would appear to be still secret.  Will the Cambridge City Council pay for that destruction, this time claiming stupidity?  Will the DCR do it later?

Or have our publicizing this reprehensible proposal saved some excellence?

Compare, however, the line between areas 2 and 4 to the right of the pool.

There is nothing complicated about this line.  The DCR and the Cambridge City Council are NOT destroying the line of trees immediately to the right of the pool area.  The DCR and the Cambridge City Council ARE destroying the SECOND line of EXCELLENT trees to the right of the pool area.

The line between area 2 and area 4 is placed BETWEEN THE TWO ROWS OF TREES!

The area to the left of the line will be assigned to the Cambridge City Council funding AND WILL NOT BE DESTROYED.  The area to the right of the line will be assigned to DCR funding AND WILL BE DESTROYED.
Lying through funding, fraud on the voters.

My reference of compass directions in this report have been persuasively communicated to me as deficient by Phil Barber.  I have a problem in that I too often believe the self-proclaimed “experts” and it too often comes back to haunt me.  There is a convention by which maps commonly have NORTH at the top.  The “experts” in their maps of Magazine Beach, have NORTHEAST at the top.  I mistakenly believed them and missed OCCASIONAL tiny explanations in fine print.  So my compass references are frequently wrong.  Phil’s references are correct.  The top of ALL plans are northeast in reality.

2. Our June 6, 2017 analysis of destruction plans 3, overview.

This chart organizes our presentation of the Area 1 / 2 / 3 /4  fraud on the voters arrangement of funding.  It presents the now THICK Magazine Beach Park bounded on the north by Memorial Drive, on the south by the Charles River, generally on the east by the pedestrian overpass (and the area south of it is included) and on the west by the Swimming Pool area.

These pages present ONLY the little guys DOOMED parking lot, the area at the top left of this chart.  The beauty of this nearly totally doomed area is indisputable.  We will later present the truly massive and doomed trees below it which are being divided between areas 2 and 4 by the DCR to simplify the lie that the Cambridge City Council is behaving responsibly.

When viewing this excellent AND NEARLY TOTALLY DOOMED little park, one good comparison is the thick park nearest Harvard Square on the Cambridge Common destroyed by the Cambridge City Council.  Those trees included trees which were larger than THESE particular trees.

The trees behind these particular trees, the ones shown in the prior two reports, and many of those in coming reports are MUCH LARGER.

The Cambridge City Council is demonstrating its very true vileness.

3. The Little Guys’ Parking Lot.

4. Summary.

In a subsequent letter I will pick up with groupings which followed the above.  This current letter has presented  the destruction of the  Little Guys’ Parking Lot including all but one of the trees in it.  After running this series to the western (actually northern) extremity, I will return to the beginning of the June 6, 2017 letter.

Planned destruction of the Little Guys’ Parking Lot is an excellent example of gentrification because this is where the little guys’ park to picnic in this CURRENTLY excellent park.  So, in yet another field, the Cambridge City Council has only to look in a mirror to identify part of the problem.

I regret that there are so many erroneous plans in distribution with regard to apparent compass directions that I am rather forced to use the “expert’s”erroneous presentation of north to minimize confusion.

Reality again, not what is being pitched by the Cambridge City Council.

III. Massive Tree Destruction and Funding Games, Coming Magazine Beach Destruction, part 4.

Gentlemen / Ladies:

On Monday, April 1, 2019, I will be appearing in the shooting of part of a series TV show in central Massachusetts in my capacity as a SAG AFTRA performer.

It thus appears unlikely that I will be able to be in Cambridge City Hall on Monday.  Accordingly I will mail this communication in hard copy, and it probably will arrive on Monday.  Plus, I will scan this communication and send the resulting files as email attachments to the City Manager, City Clerk and City Council.  Emailing with be in two parts to be certain to avoid overloading your system.

There is a letter from me in the April 1, 2019, communications primarily concerned with the destruction of the excellent little guys’ parking lot in the thick Magazine Beach park.  This destruction is supported by the Cambridge City Council.  The letter includes introductory language concerning what amounts to voter fraud in the allocation of funds for this project.  I reaffirm that position.

The reason I am writing is that I have discovered a POSSIBLE error in the boundaries of the district arrangements.  These funding districts are designed to fool the voters.

While my June 6, 2017 letter is fully accurate, I had an error of boundaries in my implementation in my letter already in the communications.  My memory at the time of writing this latest letter had the lines of trees adjacent to the swimming pool reversed.

The key factor is the massive trees which the Cambridge City Council and the DCR are destroying which are generally east of the swimming pool proper and generally south of the DOOMED little guys’ parking lot and trees.

Additional factors are that

1. As is very much too normal, DCR plans are confusing, and

2. THE REALLY HORRIBLE STUFF IS KEPT AS SECRET AS POSSIBLE, combined with

3. SIMULTANEOUS NON STOP NONSENSICAL PRAISE OF THE PROJECT WHICH KEEPS THE DESTRUCTIVE STUFF SECRET.

I am not one of the tiny number of people fighting for AND PRAISING this outrage while keeping the bad stuff secret.

I am just a person trying to communicate the terrible stuff which is kept secret as best I can, and as best as I can figure out the obfuscations.

The key is with regard to the trees generally east of the swimming pool and generally south of the little guys’ parking lot.

That key is the two truly massive trees slated for destruction along with neighboring excellent trees not as large.

This part of the destruction plans is on page 4.  The two massive doomed trees are the EXTREMELY large circles.  The black and white version has  X’s in the circles to indicate destruction.  The colored version shows these doomed trees colored yellow with red circles.  Two less large trees are in the area of the two massive trees  It is my understanding that size of depiction is intended to be proportionate to tree size.

My confusion lay in the plans to destroy trees next to the swimming pool, the X’d out circles in the black and white, and colored circles WITHOUT RED CIRCLES next to the swimming pool.  I was thinking that this row of trees, rather than being the first row from the swimming pool was the second row.  The plans call for no destruction in the second row.  I reversed the rows.

The plans call for the destruction of these excellent trees with the DCR essentially admitting that it has no responsible justification for destroying them.

The red circles are an example of skilled fraud misusing normal words way beyond their normal meaning and, REALLY, beyond their meaning as jargon.  The fraudulently misused word is “decline.”

“Decline” means that the tree has reached its peak of excellence and is ONE DAY BEYOND ITS PEAK OF EXCELLENCE, NO MATTER HOW EXCELLENT IT CONTINUES TO BE.

Trees so marked may “only” have another fifty years to live, should they have a life span of one hundred years.

The position of right to destroy is outrageous, but that position is the DCR’s position with regard to these trees AND WITH REGARD TO OTHER MASSIVE TARGETED TREES in the Magazine Beach reservation.

The SECRET plan of the DCR for allocation of funding is truly impossible to interpret as to the exact line of admitted excellent trees generally east of the swimming pool which the DCR’s filed plans say the DCR and the Cambridge City Council intend to destroy.  I assumed that the City Council funding line included the first row of trees because that would fit the fraudulent funding games.  It is entirely possible that the City Council funding line includes none of these trees.  It is also possible that the DCR had a bout of conscience and decided to be responsible and not destroy these trees which the DCR admits are healthy trees.

This destruction would be similar to the reality with regard to perhaps a majorioty of the hundreds of threes destroyed by the DCR and Cambridge east of the BU Bridge in January 2016, and reflective, once again, of a disposition which renders the DCR unfit for its responsibilities on the Charles River.

So, in summary, in the letter already in the 4/1/19 communications, I tried to understand the DCR’s plans, but I got the exact boundary line wrong.

The key point is that the DCR and Cambridge City Council are playing funding games to shield the Cambridge City Council from well deserved responsibility for outrageous destruction.  And that the outrageous destruction includes TWO REALLY MASSIVE TREES in this area.

In any case, here are the previously SECRET DCR funding plan, and the relevant pages from the June 6, 2017 letter which the City Council does not want to know about.  These pages concern the area of the Magazine Beach Park generally south of the DOOMED little guys’ parking lot WITH ALL BUT ONE OF ITS TREES TO BE DESTROYED, and generally east of the swimming pool. The previously SECRET DCR funding plan.

The relevant pages from the June 6, 2017 letter.

I will be thinking of you in Central Massachusetts.

My exact hours on Monday are impossible to predict.  The last time I reported for a movie in Central Massachusetts, I was told at about 9 pm the prior evening that I would have to report for the gig at 4 am.  My work days have been as long as 16 hours, only exceeding 16 hours once.  10 to 13 hours is common.  We find out the end of the day when they tell us to go home.




Sincerely,



Robert J. La Trémouille
Chair

Selected Relatively Recent Related Materials

1. Multiple instances of large scale tree destruction at Fresh Pond by Cambridge Water Department.
Citations will be provided.

2. Destruction of 3.4+ acres of Silver Maple Forest at Alewife by Cambridge City Council and DCR
Citations will be provided.

3. Destruction of thick woods on Cambridge Common nearest Harvard Square by Cambridge City Council.
Citations will be provided.

4. The Destruction of Memorial Drive, January 2016, final cut (by Cambridge and the DCR, 30 minute video)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTplCCEJP7o

5. Trailer for #4, 5 minute video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0iEFypDt8k&t=18s

6. Nature and Beauty Ripped Out on the Charles River (Analysis of achievements by #1, international expert, 30 minute video)
https://youtu.be.com/dWyCdcWMuAA

7. City Council vote in praise and support of DCR planned destruction at Magazine Beach, April 24, 2017
http://cambridgema.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=1&ID=1782&Inline=True, page 309 and 310

8. 51 page analysis of DCR filed plans for Magazine Beach with OFFICIALLY FILED plan details and photos of target trees, June 6, 2017, provided twice to Cambridge City Council
http://focrwg.com/agenda1.html

9. Destruction at MicroCenter in implementation of City Council blank check (#7), increases supported destruction to 56 trees, August 7, 2017
http://cambridgema.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=1&ID=1825&Inline=True, pages 151 to 157

10. Multiple objections to destruction of Vellucci Park in Inman Square
Too many to individually cite

11. Analysis of City Council fake Tree Protections to Cambridge City Council, March 18, 2019
http://cambridgema.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=1&ID=2033&Inline=True, pages 141 to 143

12. Report of Large Scale City of Cambridge Tree Destruction at Huron Ave & Fresh Pond Pkwy, almost certainly Water Department.  Communication 3, 3/25/19
http://cambridgema.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=1&ID=2033&Inline=True, page 144

13. Response to Destruction achieved and planned by Cambridge City Council at Riverbank, Samples of reality at Magazine Beach #2, March 18, 2019.
http://cambridgema.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=1&ID=2033&Inline=True, pages 145 to 162


Sincerely,



Robert J. La Trémouille
Chair