Friday, February 18, 2011

Bad guys fighting for destruction.

The bridge over the Charles next to Harvard Square, the Anderson Bridge, is slated for repair.

The bad guys want major destruction, a small vehicle highway lining the Charles, destroying the environment next to the river and doing severe harm to the historical Charles River.

Comments are due on the project by March 4. For details on the projects as the state proposes, see the link:

Grand Junction, BU Bridge Repairs

The following is a letter I am sending to DOT Secretary Mullen in follow up to a meeting in Cambridge on the evening of February 17.

I have previously gone over the details of this proposal. Very interestingly, the state’s representatives, Ned Codd and Jefferson Smith rather clearly seemed to back down on reports we had been getting on their supposed determination to run commuter trains on the Grand Junction.

In particular, they picked up on the coming expansion of South Station with, accordingly, more room for Framingham/Worcester trains. They specifically stated that one of the basic assumptions of the current study is that South Station will be expanded.

Please be advised that I will yet report on the meeting of the Boston Conservation Commission on February 16.

The Boston Con Comm meeting was nice. It is such a relief to be able to work with good people. I am hoping to be able to make comparable comments about Mullen.


Secretary and CEO Jeff Mullen
Department of Transportation
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
10 Park Plaza
Boston, MA 02116

RE: Grand Junction, BU Bridge Repairs

Dear Mr. Mullen:

I attended a meeting last night with your representatives concerning the study of the use of the Grand Junction. This brings to a head as well, the situation with regard to the BU Bridge repairs.

You have inherited from the DCR some really destructive policies.

Heartless animal abuse is a standard DCR repertoire because the DCR has a goal of destroying all animal life on the Charles River basin.

The DCR implemented this goal with needlessly destructive actions in what was a beautiful nesting area of the Charles River White Geese on the north side of the Charles River just east of the BU Bridge.

It certainly was necessary to have access to the bridge for repairs. Those repairs are done. Access is no longer necessary. A major part of the DCR’s heartless destruction was the very much unnecessary use of the northern part of this area for staging.

Please return the nesting area to nature immediately.

Seed grass there identical to the grass which has successfully survived WITHOUT POISONS across from the Hyatt for the better part of a Century, and walk away. Keep control from your reprehensible predecessors (to expand on a quote from a civil rights judge talking about the closely related Cambridge City Manager).

With regard to commuter rail uses on the Grand Junction, as I said last night, any proposal to move Framingham/ Worcester trains to the Grand Junction is silly. With the coming destruction of the South Postal Annex and expansion of South Station, it makes no sense to move Framingham/Worcester commuters to this inferior route.

Notwithstanding that, this location is in wildlife use by the Charles River White Geese, with all the greater need because the reprehensible aspects of the BU Bridge work which you inherited have forced them even more onto the tracks.

These animals are beloved and valuable. The contempt for wildlife by the DCR is a manifestation of the incompetence of the key decision makers, not reality.

Please do not disturb or harm in any way these beautiful, valuable permanent residents. The undestroyed remnants of their mile long habitat include the railroad. The railroad has coexisted very nicely because of decent people running those trains. Those decent people have stood out dramatically in contrast to the incompetence and destructiveness at the DCR and the City of Cambridge. And the words of the Monteiro judge toward Cambridge (Malvina Monteiro v. City of Cambridge, now in Appeals Court), “reprehensible”, are an excellent description of both.

Thank you.


Robert J. La Trémouille