1. General.
2. Application to the Charles River.
3. General purpose of South Station Expansion.
4. Bicycle aspects.
5. Obtaining the Environmental Notification Form and filing comments.
1. General.
The Department of Transportation and the Massachusetts environmental secretary’s MEPA (Mass. Environmental Protection Act) office conducted a meeting in the office portion of South Station, Boston, MA, USA on April 1, 2013. This concerned the Environmental Notification Form being submitted with regard to this project.
Filing of this document, with opportunity for comment, is a first step in environmental notifications in this matter.
Succinctly, the project increases track capacity at South Station in Boston, MA by building new track facilities east of the current tracks. In the process, the current central mail processing facility in that location would be torn down and replaced by a new building further to the east in the South Boston Waterfront area.
Trackage would be squared off so that all tracks end at a concourse with access to the South Station lobby. The most recent addition of tracks 15 years ago was for the reconstruction of the Old Colony commuter rail lines to Plymouth / Kingston and to Middleboro / Lakeville. Those tracks currently end significantly before the other tracks in South Station.
2. Application to the Charles River.
The project, at first blush, is of major concern to the Charles River because of the passenger service proposed for the Grand Junction railroad which passes through / next to the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese. I have recently reported on the belligerently destructive use of the Destroyed Nesting Area for parking of personal cars and for a very loud building with regard to work being done on the Grand Junction’s Bridge over the Charles River very close to the destroyed nesting area.
MassDOT did a study of passenger service being sneakily pushed for the Grand Junction by the Cambridge Machine and their associates in Cambridge government.
MassDOT found that adding Grand Junction passenger service lacked substantive merit and should not be considered as long as South Station is expanded so as to allow room for the passenger service there.
The key is that Grand Junction passenger traffic could be considered if the expansion does not go forward.
The South Station Expansion proposal got more interesting and beneficial when it turned out that South Station currently has problems with storing trains during the day between runs and that expansion would worsen that problem. Three locations were suggested for layover storage of trains to resolve the problem.
The best suggestion is the Beacon Railroad Yards visible from Magazine Beach on the south side of the Charles River in the Allston neighborhood of Boston. Harvard University owns the Beacon Railroad Yards and the adjacent I90 (Mass. Pike) off ramp to Cambridge and the Brighton neighborhood of Boston. This property is larger than Boston’s Back Bay neighborhood. Harvard clearly sees it as the future home of Harvard Medical School.
The railroad is moving their yard to Worcester.
Harvard’s empire building looks very clearly like the root cause of all that environmental destruction on the Charles River.
Harvard’s ownership usage is subject to Massachusetts’ need of the Beacon Yards for transportation purposes. A layover yard for South Station is such a use. Use of Beacon Yard for South Station layover would put a severe cramp in Harvard’s empire building and give the Cambridge Machine less incentive to continue with its ongoing destruction on and near the Charles River.
Beacon Yards is about 4 miles distant from South Station along the railroad.
3. General purpose of South Station Expansion.
The immediate driving factor for South Station Expansion, and not really explained in the meeting, is the South Coast Commuter Rail project. This project would restore commuter rail to Fall River and New Bedford on the South Coast of Massachusetts. This service was killed with the expansion of the automobile highways 50 years ago.
To put it succinctly, this project is the logical follow on to the Old Colony restoration of 15 years ago. The state is now restoring service to communities more distant from Boston than those who most benefited from the Old Colony restoration.
The needs of Worcester are secondary to South Coast, but Worcester’s needs would also be resolved by the expansion.
It is part of the Patrick administration’s efforts to restore rail transportation throughout the state.
4. Bicycle aspects.
One of the many highly irresponsible aspects of welfare for contractors in highway projects in the Cambridge, MA, area is the moving of bicycles onto the sidewalks. Definitely exactly the wrong way to go if you want to expand bicycle commuting because these changes treat bicycles as not a mode of transportation worthy of respect.
The South Station Expansion project includes a proposal to reinstate Dorchester Avenue to full use.
The current arrangement of land going from west to east is South Station, Postal Annex, and then a stub of Dorchester Avenue which is now a private way for the Postal Service.
The main part of Dorchester Avenue is the main thoroughfare in Boston’s Dorchester Avenue neighborhood.
The proposal includes an option to reopen Dorchester Avenue as a public way and thus to resume direct access to the South Station part of the city from Dorchester.
The redesigned Dorchester Avenue makes sense for bicycle transportation. Bicycles would be in their own lane adjacent to motor vehicle traffic and would not be mistreated on the sidewalk as is the nonsense in Cambridge and related.
5. Obtaining the Environmental Notification Form and filing comments.
The simplest way to obtain the Environmental Form is to go to the project website, www.masdot.state.ma.us/southstationexpansion.
Comments may be sent by mail, fax or email until April 9, 2013 to:
Secretary Richard K. Sullivan, Jr.
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
MEPA Office
Attn: Holly Johnson, MEPA Analyst
Boston, MA 02114
FAX 617-625-1181
Email: Holly.S.Johnson@state.ma.us
Tuesday, April 02, 2013
Saturday, March 30, 2013
Harvard University’s Disappearing Elderly Housing temporarily resolved?
1. Favored buyer looks as good as can be expected.
2. Resolving the permanent housing issue?
3. Abbreviated summary.
1. Favored buyer looks as good as can be expected.
Thursday afternoon, March 28, 2013, I was again high above the eastern end of Harvard Square in Cambridge, MA, USA.
This was the meeting room at the top of the massive 2 Mount Auburn elderly complex which Harvard University is trying to sell.
It would appear that Harvard has negotiated a “purchase and sale” agreement with Homeowners’ Rehab, Inc., the Cambridge manager of subsidized housing which has been the buyer of choice from the point of view of Cambridge, MA, USA, and of the residents.
It was basically a pleasant gathering, a welcome change from the prior two meetings on this matter which I have attended. Many residents had reflexive hostile vibrations because of past grievances with Harvard / Harvard’s managers. HRI looked responsive. HRI has an excellent record in the field in Cambridge.
2. Resolving the permanent housing issue?
This meeting was chaired by Representative / Councillor Decker, as was the last meeting at 2 Mount Auburn. Also present was Councilor Reeves, who chaired the last meeting overall, which was conducted at Cambridge City Hall.
I tried to straighten out the issue that Decker had had, in her disagreement on with the Cambridge Housing Authority representative during the last meeting.
I pointed out that Decker had contended the property would be permanently guaranteed for affordable housing whereas the Cambridge Housing Authority had said 30 years would be the maximum guarantee.
The presence of HRI as the apparent purchaser greatly defused displeasure in the room.
I reported that Councilor Reeves had commented at his meeting that the permanent affordable housing guarantee was based on activities of Councilor / Representative Graham in 1973. I further reported that I had provided Reeves’ committee with the copy of the relevant Board of Zoning Appeal file and that the file was dated 1970. I reported that there was no guarantee of permanence in the BZA file.
Reeves apparently got his dates off by three years. He concurred with the 1970 date, but Decker was very much insistent that there is a guarantee of permanence based on the Graham discussions.
A lot of the key people discussing the matter, if not all, are unlikely to be around in 30 years (or whatever the formal guarantee winds up as). I would love to still be here then, to help out if necessary.
We will see, maybe. I do know I lack confidence in the Cambridge City people I was dealing with.
3. Abbreviated summary.
I was not around for the actual negotiations way back when. I was involved in public discussions not that much afterwards. The mentality of folks in the room when I was involved in discussions not that long later was that a lot of people considered the deal just another maneuver for Harvard to expand Harvard. That does not sound like a permanent guarantee had been agreed to. Then there were the games that Harvard played with parking zoning in the meantime. The changed distance allowed for accessory parking were clearly made to allow conversion to Harvard affiliated housing. That made it very clear that Harvard did not recognize any “permanent” guarantee. I very seriously doubt the accuracy of the claims of “permanence.”
My impression very clearly has been that 2 Mount Auburn was just another of the subsidized con games. Harvard and the Cambridge Machine tried the same con game in an attempt to destroy Corporal Burns Playground a few blocks away on the Charles River / Memorial Drive, so as to add half of Corporal Burns Playground to the Harvard empire.
The developer gets buildings much larger that it would otherwise, and paid for by the rents. In 30 years, the tenants are dumped on the street or juggled into the next generation of the con. People are used and abused.
I will not repeat my past analysis. Within limits, I am happy that HRI is in the process of being put in place. HRI is clearly the next best alternative to Cambridge taking the property by eminent domain. The latter, of course, would be done if Cambridge were the city it claims to be.
BUT the current principals of HRI will not be there in 30 years. And the normal situation in Cambridge is “activists” who are people who cannot recognize any reality other than what they have apparently been told is reality. The people pulling the strings of the “activists” are always hidden in the smoke. And the “activists” loudly proclaim reality to be whatever they are told is reality by the people who pull their strings, no matter how bizarre the proclaimed “reality”.
It would be nice if accurately identifying reality became politically correct in the City of Cambridge, MA, USA. But that will require replacement of a very bad situation with something reasonably resembling what the Cambridge Pols claim to be providing.
2. Resolving the permanent housing issue?
3. Abbreviated summary.
1. Favored buyer looks as good as can be expected.
Thursday afternoon, March 28, 2013, I was again high above the eastern end of Harvard Square in Cambridge, MA, USA.
This was the meeting room at the top of the massive 2 Mount Auburn elderly complex which Harvard University is trying to sell.
It would appear that Harvard has negotiated a “purchase and sale” agreement with Homeowners’ Rehab, Inc., the Cambridge manager of subsidized housing which has been the buyer of choice from the point of view of Cambridge, MA, USA, and of the residents.
It was basically a pleasant gathering, a welcome change from the prior two meetings on this matter which I have attended. Many residents had reflexive hostile vibrations because of past grievances with Harvard / Harvard’s managers. HRI looked responsive. HRI has an excellent record in the field in Cambridge.
2. Resolving the permanent housing issue?
This meeting was chaired by Representative / Councillor Decker, as was the last meeting at 2 Mount Auburn. Also present was Councilor Reeves, who chaired the last meeting overall, which was conducted at Cambridge City Hall.
I tried to straighten out the issue that Decker had had, in her disagreement on with the Cambridge Housing Authority representative during the last meeting.
I pointed out that Decker had contended the property would be permanently guaranteed for affordable housing whereas the Cambridge Housing Authority had said 30 years would be the maximum guarantee.
The presence of HRI as the apparent purchaser greatly defused displeasure in the room.
I reported that Councilor Reeves had commented at his meeting that the permanent affordable housing guarantee was based on activities of Councilor / Representative Graham in 1973. I further reported that I had provided Reeves’ committee with the copy of the relevant Board of Zoning Appeal file and that the file was dated 1970. I reported that there was no guarantee of permanence in the BZA file.
Reeves apparently got his dates off by three years. He concurred with the 1970 date, but Decker was very much insistent that there is a guarantee of permanence based on the Graham discussions.
A lot of the key people discussing the matter, if not all, are unlikely to be around in 30 years (or whatever the formal guarantee winds up as). I would love to still be here then, to help out if necessary.
We will see, maybe. I do know I lack confidence in the Cambridge City people I was dealing with.
3. Abbreviated summary.
I was not around for the actual negotiations way back when. I was involved in public discussions not that much afterwards. The mentality of folks in the room when I was involved in discussions not that long later was that a lot of people considered the deal just another maneuver for Harvard to expand Harvard. That does not sound like a permanent guarantee had been agreed to. Then there were the games that Harvard played with parking zoning in the meantime. The changed distance allowed for accessory parking were clearly made to allow conversion to Harvard affiliated housing. That made it very clear that Harvard did not recognize any “permanent” guarantee. I very seriously doubt the accuracy of the claims of “permanence.”
My impression very clearly has been that 2 Mount Auburn was just another of the subsidized con games. Harvard and the Cambridge Machine tried the same con game in an attempt to destroy Corporal Burns Playground a few blocks away on the Charles River / Memorial Drive, so as to add half of Corporal Burns Playground to the Harvard empire.
The developer gets buildings much larger that it would otherwise, and paid for by the rents. In 30 years, the tenants are dumped on the street or juggled into the next generation of the con. People are used and abused.
I will not repeat my past analysis. Within limits, I am happy that HRI is in the process of being put in place. HRI is clearly the next best alternative to Cambridge taking the property by eminent domain. The latter, of course, would be done if Cambridge were the city it claims to be.
BUT the current principals of HRI will not be there in 30 years. And the normal situation in Cambridge is “activists” who are people who cannot recognize any reality other than what they have apparently been told is reality. The people pulling the strings of the “activists” are always hidden in the smoke. And the “activists” loudly proclaim reality to be whatever they are told is reality by the people who pull their strings, no matter how bizarre the proclaimed “reality”.
It would be nice if accurately identifying reality became politically correct in the City of Cambridge, MA, USA. But that will require replacement of a very bad situation with something reasonably resembling what the Cambridge Pols claim to be providing.
Friday, March 29, 2013
Visit to environmental destruction, the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese
On March 29, 2013, I visited the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese, just east of the BU Bridge on the north side of the Charles River in Cambridge, MA, USA.
On my way to the environmental outrage, I noticed four white vehicles marked “Auson” under Memorial Drive where responsible workers park. There were two or three small boxes with peaked roofs up to a height of perhaps four feet. These boxes look like some sort of entomological (bug) operation, not apparently related to the rail workers implementing the Department of Conservation and Recreation’s animal destructive policies. Strange, I just checked their marked website and came up with zero.
While I observed the DNA, three privately owned vehicles joined about six already there plus one company marked vehicle. The riders exited the vehicles in a manner which showed no reasons to be parking there, except for laziness and contempt for valuable 32 year resident animals. One of the newcomers was behaving like a supervisor or an engineer carrying corresponding papers. The metal structure which had generated so much noise last time was silent this time. It appeared to have been moved a few feet closer to the river, an even more destructive location.
There were two other privately owned vehicles in the small parking lot next to the BU Bridge which was created during the “repairs.” The publicity of those “repairs”, of course, made no mention of creating a permanent parking lot. While the plans were responsibly implemented, as much as possible, by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation, they were drawn up by the destructive DCR.
I spoke with a woman who was walking by with a child. She had been looking over the side observing nests and the mother geese on them. She was well aware of the seriousness of the human activity so close to those nests.
A worker from the Charles River Urban Wilds Initiative was there feeding the Charles River White Geese. This is essential because Cambridge and the DCR have been deliberately starving these beautiful, valuable 32 year residents for years now.
What is the bragging of the Cambridge Machine activists? “How dare you object to my environmental destruction. I am exercising my rights as a bully and a heartless animal abuser.” The real words, of course, are much more hypocritical.
On my way to the environmental outrage, I noticed four white vehicles marked “Auson” under Memorial Drive where responsible workers park. There were two or three small boxes with peaked roofs up to a height of perhaps four feet. These boxes look like some sort of entomological (bug) operation, not apparently related to the rail workers implementing the Department of Conservation and Recreation’s animal destructive policies. Strange, I just checked their marked website and came up with zero.
While I observed the DNA, three privately owned vehicles joined about six already there plus one company marked vehicle. The riders exited the vehicles in a manner which showed no reasons to be parking there, except for laziness and contempt for valuable 32 year resident animals. One of the newcomers was behaving like a supervisor or an engineer carrying corresponding papers. The metal structure which had generated so much noise last time was silent this time. It appeared to have been moved a few feet closer to the river, an even more destructive location.
There were two other privately owned vehicles in the small parking lot next to the BU Bridge which was created during the “repairs.” The publicity of those “repairs”, of course, made no mention of creating a permanent parking lot. While the plans were responsibly implemented, as much as possible, by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation, they were drawn up by the destructive DCR.
I spoke with a woman who was walking by with a child. She had been looking over the side observing nests and the mother geese on them. She was well aware of the seriousness of the human activity so close to those nests.
A worker from the Charles River Urban Wilds Initiative was there feeding the Charles River White Geese. This is essential because Cambridge and the DCR have been deliberately starving these beautiful, valuable 32 year residents for years now.
What is the bragging of the Cambridge Machine activists? “How dare you object to my environmental destruction. I am exercising my rights as a bully and a heartless animal abuser.” The real words, of course, are much more hypocritical.
Cambridge, MA, USA Machine Accelerates Con Games. General reply proposed.
1. Introduction.
2. Letter: The environmental con games accelerate in Cambridge, MA, USA.
1. Introduction.
Yesterday, March 28, 2013, the Cambridge Chronicle published the third letter to the editor in four or five weeks expressing fake concern for the environment, yelling at the private developers at Alewife with no concern whatsoever about the mass destruction and animal pogrom which has started and is accelerating by the City of Cambridge and the Department of Conservation and Recreation.
The first two letters were by the woman who has been fighting for the public destruction for 15 years or more. Yesterday’s letter was from one of the other fake environmental groups.
My proposal for an op ed reflecting reality was most recently posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/03/alewife-destruction-animal-pogrom.html. The Chronicle editor is clearly concerned that I specifically identified this destructive woman. My providing the editor with a link to the Cambridge Chronicle publication of the woman’s letter praising Cambridge and the DCR’s environmental destruction at Alewife apparently did not sway the editor.
I have proposed the following more general Letter to the Editor.
There is a 400 word limit. I did not have space to include the totally unnecessary and, of course, destructive leg of their proposed highway along the Grand Junction. They are supporting running it south of Memorial Drive and through the Destroyed Nesting Area. Totally unnecessary, environmentally destructive, heartlessly abusive, a very large waste of money and a much longer route for the highway. If Cambridge, MA had a responsible city government, the highway proposal would take a much shorter path, connecting behind the building at Vassar and Memorial Drive to Vassar Street and then to Memorial Drive.
But Cambridge has a belligerently reprehensible city government kept in power by a massive Cambridge Machine running lying about that belligerently reprehensible city government.
One message of the Cambridge Machine:
*************
Don’t look at our massive environmental destruction. We are exercising our rights as bullies and heartless animal abusers and killers. It is politically incorrect to be nasty to bullies and heartless animal abusers in Cambridge, MA, USA. Besides, don’t we sound great yelling at the other guy!!!!
*************
A really rotten city government. A really rotten Cambridge Machine.
2. Letter: The environmental con games accelerate in Cambridge, MA, USA.
Editor
Cambridge Chronicle
The environmental con games accelerate in Cambridge.
Governor Patrick is apparently seeking bonds for the destruction of hundreds of trees on Memorial Drive between the BU and Longfellow Bridges. The lie supporting this was the euphemism “underpasses” and talk about the River Street, Western Avenue and Anderson Bridges.
The DCR / Commuter Rail is celebrating by ramping up the heartless abuse of the Charles River White Geese. The abuse of these beautiful animals has been used as following: “How dare you talk about our environmental destruction on the Charles. We are exercising our rights as bullies and heartless animal abusers.” This is a translation, of course.
For five weeks starting in December, the DCR’s friends used the geese’s nesting area east of the BU Bridge as a parking lot for cars that should be parked under Memorial Drive, where vehicles related to the BU Bridge project parked.
Now there are cars, a metal building and two portapotties in the most sensitive part of the Nesting Area. Sunday that metal building exuded loud noise in close proximity to nesting geese. The BU Bridge project put such buildings under Memorial Drive.
In January, the local “neighborhood association” discussed whether the environmental outrage at the Magazine Beach playing fields would be extended west of the playing fields. The fine print included part of the tree destruction project. The “neighborhood association” was then faced with the very real possibility that they would lose the vote. So they deferred action until the next “monthly” meeting. The “February” meeting is now scheduled for late April. After the bond vote in the legislature?
The city council is now yelling at private developers at Alewife and neglecting to mention their own totally needless destruction of irreplaceable woodland acres there, together with mass animal killing.
Alewife is facing its own deadline. The responsible place to put needed flood protection is under new buildings / parking lots near Alewife. But The Machine is stalling and the City Council is spouting nonsense. If buildings get built without coordination for flood protection with Cambridge, there will be no choice but to destroy perhaps the rest of the publicly owned area. Accomplished destruction will protect against a big rain storm.
And from 22 to more than a hundred trees are slated to be destroyed at Cambridge Common / Flagstaff Park.
And the Cambridge Machine influenced Sierra Club endorses City Councilors doing these terrible things?
2. Letter: The environmental con games accelerate in Cambridge, MA, USA.
1. Introduction.
Yesterday, March 28, 2013, the Cambridge Chronicle published the third letter to the editor in four or five weeks expressing fake concern for the environment, yelling at the private developers at Alewife with no concern whatsoever about the mass destruction and animal pogrom which has started and is accelerating by the City of Cambridge and the Department of Conservation and Recreation.
The first two letters were by the woman who has been fighting for the public destruction for 15 years or more. Yesterday’s letter was from one of the other fake environmental groups.
My proposal for an op ed reflecting reality was most recently posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/03/alewife-destruction-animal-pogrom.html. The Chronicle editor is clearly concerned that I specifically identified this destructive woman. My providing the editor with a link to the Cambridge Chronicle publication of the woman’s letter praising Cambridge and the DCR’s environmental destruction at Alewife apparently did not sway the editor.
I have proposed the following more general Letter to the Editor.
There is a 400 word limit. I did not have space to include the totally unnecessary and, of course, destructive leg of their proposed highway along the Grand Junction. They are supporting running it south of Memorial Drive and through the Destroyed Nesting Area. Totally unnecessary, environmentally destructive, heartlessly abusive, a very large waste of money and a much longer route for the highway. If Cambridge, MA had a responsible city government, the highway proposal would take a much shorter path, connecting behind the building at Vassar and Memorial Drive to Vassar Street and then to Memorial Drive.
But Cambridge has a belligerently reprehensible city government kept in power by a massive Cambridge Machine running lying about that belligerently reprehensible city government.
One message of the Cambridge Machine:
*************
Don’t look at our massive environmental destruction. We are exercising our rights as bullies and heartless animal abusers and killers. It is politically incorrect to be nasty to bullies and heartless animal abusers in Cambridge, MA, USA. Besides, don’t we sound great yelling at the other guy!!!!
*************
A really rotten city government. A really rotten Cambridge Machine.
2. Letter: The environmental con games accelerate in Cambridge, MA, USA.
Editor
Cambridge Chronicle
The environmental con games accelerate in Cambridge.
Governor Patrick is apparently seeking bonds for the destruction of hundreds of trees on Memorial Drive between the BU and Longfellow Bridges. The lie supporting this was the euphemism “underpasses” and talk about the River Street, Western Avenue and Anderson Bridges.
The DCR / Commuter Rail is celebrating by ramping up the heartless abuse of the Charles River White Geese. The abuse of these beautiful animals has been used as following: “How dare you talk about our environmental destruction on the Charles. We are exercising our rights as bullies and heartless animal abusers.” This is a translation, of course.
For five weeks starting in December, the DCR’s friends used the geese’s nesting area east of the BU Bridge as a parking lot for cars that should be parked under Memorial Drive, where vehicles related to the BU Bridge project parked.
Now there are cars, a metal building and two portapotties in the most sensitive part of the Nesting Area. Sunday that metal building exuded loud noise in close proximity to nesting geese. The BU Bridge project put such buildings under Memorial Drive.
In January, the local “neighborhood association” discussed whether the environmental outrage at the Magazine Beach playing fields would be extended west of the playing fields. The fine print included part of the tree destruction project. The “neighborhood association” was then faced with the very real possibility that they would lose the vote. So they deferred action until the next “monthly” meeting. The “February” meeting is now scheduled for late April. After the bond vote in the legislature?
The city council is now yelling at private developers at Alewife and neglecting to mention their own totally needless destruction of irreplaceable woodland acres there, together with mass animal killing.
Alewife is facing its own deadline. The responsible place to put needed flood protection is under new buildings / parking lots near Alewife. But The Machine is stalling and the City Council is spouting nonsense. If buildings get built without coordination for flood protection with Cambridge, there will be no choice but to destroy perhaps the rest of the publicly owned area. Accomplished destruction will protect against a big rain storm.
And from 22 to more than a hundred trees are slated to be destroyed at Cambridge Common / Flagstaff Park.
And the Cambridge Machine influenced Sierra Club endorses City Councilors doing these terrible things?
Wednesday, March 27, 2013
Charles River: Which is more destructive, Governor Patrick or the Blizzard of 2013? Day 409.
1. Introductory.
2. The results of the blizzard of 2013.
3. The results of the latest outrage.
4. Communication to the governor.
1. Introductory.
Governor Patrick has authorized seeking of bond money for the destruction of hundreds of trees on the Charles River between the BU and Longfellow Bridges and for further abuse of the Charles River White Geese.
In an action showing similar contempt for the environment and its animals, he has had outrageously irresponsible railroad workers destroying the most sensitive part of the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese by using it for parking.
Before Governor Patrick started overruling the responsible people at the Department of Transportation, MassDOT spent years working on the adjacent BU Bridge. The workers parked under Memorial Drive and had their office under Memorial Drive. The distance from work to parking was greater for most of the BU Bridge work than it is for the railroad workers who are destroying the Nesting Area with their cars rather than parking under Memorial Drive.
We communicated this outrage to Patrick and were acknowledged by a reply of indifference.
In Governor Patrick’s seeking of bonds for destruction of hundreds of trees on the Charles River, he is overruling a study done by a joint committee of MassDOT and the Department of Conservation and Recreation. DCR’s behavior on joint efforts with the City of Cambridge has been notable for outrageous environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse / killing combined with a pattern of flat out lies and lies of omission. The DCR’s long record says that the DCR has no ethics. My opinion of that report was that decent humans shamed a department without decency into a responsible decision.
But Governor Patrick has overruled responsible people.
I have posted the letter by which I snail mailed the tree destruction plans to Governor Patrick.
Given the record of the people he is dealing with, outright lies and lies of omission should be expected from the DCR to Patrick. Nevertheless, it is illuminating to see the return of the railroad workers to the nesting area of the Charles River White Geese.
The DCR’s goals for the Charles River Basin include killing off all resident animals, buried, of course in fine print and a secret definition. The DCR warps all actions on the Charles River it can get away with into killing off or abusing all animals which get in its way. At Alewife, Cambridge and the DCR are accomplishing a totally unnecessary mass destruction of acres of virgin woods together with mass animal killings.
A friend of the DCR, Representative / Senator Jarrett Barrios called for “humane treatment” for the Charles River White Geese in the Cambridge Chronicle in August 2000. When I sarcastically called for “humane treatment” for Barrios in a flier clearly communicating the situation, Barrios went on Cambridge Cable TV and accused me of proposing his “assassination.”
During my visit on March 24, I took a number of photographs and conducted the 409th day of visibilities at the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
2. The results of the blizzard of 2013.
I was at the Destroyed Nesting Area shortly after the Blizzard of 2013. Here are some photos.
[2013 / 03-14, Walgr, 1313 to 1511]
3. The results of the latest outrage.
On December 12, 2012, the railroad workers first started attacking the most sensitive part of the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese, that small part of their former mile long habitat which has not been destroyed to these 32 year, very popular, very valuable, residents of the Charles River.
I first published photos of the outrage at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/12/nesting-are-of-charles-river-white.html.
Please compare the photos below to the blizzard photos. Notice the location of the portapotties and of the metal building. These are the most sensitive areas of the Nesting Area and the areas most beloved to the Charles River White Geese. The metal building is a workshop, a very loud workshop. This was a Sunday. That workshop was very loud.
There was one portapotty the first time, at the far end of the nesting area in a clearly developed location, very close to where the workers should be parking.
Look, once again, at the photo of the truck leaving the Destroyed Nesting Area. The red structure in the background is Memorial Drive. Before Patrick started overruling the responsible people at MassDOT, MassDOT workers on the BU Bridge parked under Memorial Drive. This photo is taken from the BU Bridge. The wall protecting pedestrians is straight ahead on the left. The spot I am photographing from was a work site. It is not any further from Memorial Drive than is the work location for the railroad workers. And the BU Bridge workers had many further spots from which they worked.
The portapotty the first time was next to this wall.
The parking was under Memorial Drive. The operations building was under Memorial Drive straight ahead in the picture.
And geese are trying to nest next to this racket.
But Governor Patrick is overruling responsible people at MassDOT.
Compare these photos to the photos from the Blizzard of 2013. The location of the geese after the Blizzard is their favorite, most sensitive spot, under the big tree, exactly where the outrage is centered. The first two photos are from March 18, 2013, when they had just returned. The six following are from March 24, 2013.
[2013/ 03-26 CVS / 1511 to 2204]
The people in the last photo are outraged civilians. They are standing near the wall shown in the first picture of this group of photos. They are quite a bit closer to where the workers should be parking and should be doing their work than they are to the outrage, which is in the background. They are quite close to the former location of the one portapotty during the first outrage from Governor Patrick’s workers.
4. Communication to the governor.
I sent a link to this post to Governor Patrick at http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/ the following message:
**********
Dear Governor Patrick:
I have provided you by snail mail the DCR’s plans for the destruction of the hundreds of trees you are seeking bonds to destroy on the Charles River.
I have posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/12/nesting-are-of-charles-river-white.html photos of your latest outrage.
2. The results of the blizzard of 2013.
3. The results of the latest outrage.
4. Communication to the governor.
1. Introductory.
Governor Patrick has authorized seeking of bond money for the destruction of hundreds of trees on the Charles River between the BU and Longfellow Bridges and for further abuse of the Charles River White Geese.
In an action showing similar contempt for the environment and its animals, he has had outrageously irresponsible railroad workers destroying the most sensitive part of the Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese by using it for parking.
Before Governor Patrick started overruling the responsible people at the Department of Transportation, MassDOT spent years working on the adjacent BU Bridge. The workers parked under Memorial Drive and had their office under Memorial Drive. The distance from work to parking was greater for most of the BU Bridge work than it is for the railroad workers who are destroying the Nesting Area with their cars rather than parking under Memorial Drive.
We communicated this outrage to Patrick and were acknowledged by a reply of indifference.
In Governor Patrick’s seeking of bonds for destruction of hundreds of trees on the Charles River, he is overruling a study done by a joint committee of MassDOT and the Department of Conservation and Recreation. DCR’s behavior on joint efforts with the City of Cambridge has been notable for outrageous environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse / killing combined with a pattern of flat out lies and lies of omission. The DCR’s long record says that the DCR has no ethics. My opinion of that report was that decent humans shamed a department without decency into a responsible decision.
But Governor Patrick has overruled responsible people.
I have posted the letter by which I snail mailed the tree destruction plans to Governor Patrick.
Given the record of the people he is dealing with, outright lies and lies of omission should be expected from the DCR to Patrick. Nevertheless, it is illuminating to see the return of the railroad workers to the nesting area of the Charles River White Geese.
The DCR’s goals for the Charles River Basin include killing off all resident animals, buried, of course in fine print and a secret definition. The DCR warps all actions on the Charles River it can get away with into killing off or abusing all animals which get in its way. At Alewife, Cambridge and the DCR are accomplishing a totally unnecessary mass destruction of acres of virgin woods together with mass animal killings.
A friend of the DCR, Representative / Senator Jarrett Barrios called for “humane treatment” for the Charles River White Geese in the Cambridge Chronicle in August 2000. When I sarcastically called for “humane treatment” for Barrios in a flier clearly communicating the situation, Barrios went on Cambridge Cable TV and accused me of proposing his “assassination.”
During my visit on March 24, I took a number of photographs and conducted the 409th day of visibilities at the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
2. The results of the blizzard of 2013.
I was at the Destroyed Nesting Area shortly after the Blizzard of 2013. Here are some photos.
[2013 / 03-14, Walgr, 1313 to 1511]
3. The results of the latest outrage.
On December 12, 2012, the railroad workers first started attacking the most sensitive part of the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese, that small part of their former mile long habitat which has not been destroyed to these 32 year, very popular, very valuable, residents of the Charles River.
I first published photos of the outrage at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/12/nesting-are-of-charles-river-white.html.
Please compare the photos below to the blizzard photos. Notice the location of the portapotties and of the metal building. These are the most sensitive areas of the Nesting Area and the areas most beloved to the Charles River White Geese. The metal building is a workshop, a very loud workshop. This was a Sunday. That workshop was very loud.
There was one portapotty the first time, at the far end of the nesting area in a clearly developed location, very close to where the workers should be parking.
Look, once again, at the photo of the truck leaving the Destroyed Nesting Area. The red structure in the background is Memorial Drive. Before Patrick started overruling the responsible people at MassDOT, MassDOT workers on the BU Bridge parked under Memorial Drive. This photo is taken from the BU Bridge. The wall protecting pedestrians is straight ahead on the left. The spot I am photographing from was a work site. It is not any further from Memorial Drive than is the work location for the railroad workers. And the BU Bridge workers had many further spots from which they worked.
The portapotty the first time was next to this wall.
The parking was under Memorial Drive. The operations building was under Memorial Drive straight ahead in the picture.
And geese are trying to nest next to this racket.
But Governor Patrick is overruling responsible people at MassDOT.
Compare these photos to the photos from the Blizzard of 2013. The location of the geese after the Blizzard is their favorite, most sensitive spot, under the big tree, exactly where the outrage is centered. The first two photos are from March 18, 2013, when they had just returned. The six following are from March 24, 2013.
[2013/ 03-26 CVS / 1511 to 2204]
The people in the last photo are outraged civilians. They are standing near the wall shown in the first picture of this group of photos. They are quite a bit closer to where the workers should be parking and should be doing their work than they are to the outrage, which is in the background. They are quite close to the former location of the one portapotty during the first outrage from Governor Patrick’s workers.
4. Communication to the governor.
I sent a link to this post to Governor Patrick at http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/ the following message:
**********
Dear Governor Patrick:
I have provided you by snail mail the DCR’s plans for the destruction of the hundreds of trees you are seeking bonds to destroy on the Charles River.
I have posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/12/nesting-are-of-charles-river-white.html photos of your latest outrage.
Tuesday, March 26, 2013
Documentation to Governor Patrick: Mass Tree Destruction Bond Bill, Charles River
1. General.
2. Governor Patrick and Secretary Davy.
3. Cambridge, MA, USA City Council.
1. General.
Yesterday, March 25, 2013, I mailed the plans of the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation for destruction of hundreds of trees on Memorial Drive. This destruction is very clearly part of the bond bill which has been submitted to the legislature by Governor Deval Patrick of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, USA.
The standard routine of the people we are dealing with, and Patrick is dealing with, features flat out lies and lies of omission.
It is entirely possible that Patrick has been lied to.
His email form contact is http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
The following is the letter by which I sent these materials to Patrick and MassDOT Secretary Davy. MassDOT managers have been a saving grace in the outrageously destruction situation in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
Secretary Davy is a member of a habitat group. I recall that my written question to him at his MoveMass presentation was warped beyond meaning by the moderator, who “read” the question. I asked Davy how he comports his habitat group membership to the heartless destruction of animal habitat on the Charles River with the “underpass” assistance, along with (and not specifically mentioned in the question) associated greater heartless abuse of the Charles River White Geese. The chair warped the question into praise for Davy’s protection of the environment. Business as usual with the kind of people we deal with.
The following are, first, my transmittal to Governor Patrick and Secretary Davy; then the further transmittal to the Cambridge City Council. Patrick and Davy were each provided a copy of the Cambridge letter and about 15 pages of DCR plans for tree destruction.
2. Governor Patrick and Secretary Davy.
Gentlemen:
I have received the following notice from a group which falsely calls itself the Charles River “Conservancy.” The brackets constitute my modification in the name of accuracy. The comment is buried in a much longer communication.
As our legislative leaders prioritize investment decisions, now is the time to let them know that their constituents [oppose environmental destruction included in the Patrick budget]. Governor Patrick's proposed bond bill includes a $2 million line-item for construction of bridge underpasses on the Charles, as well as over $24 million for the paths.
Please be advised that there is a serious problem with flat out lies and lies of omission practiced by the DCR, Cambridge and their friends in their actions for environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse / killing.
This outrage is also exemplified in their ongoing destruction of the Alewife Reservation using a different fake group as front there.
Please note that your bond bill is for $2 million for bridge underpasses and $24 million “for the paths.”
That is one very major multiple of 12 going from what should be (and is not) a larger project to a smaller.
The reality is that the project includes usual heartless animal abuse plus the destruction of hundreds of trees between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge.
Enclosed are their tree destruction plans. Some of the smaller trees being destroyed are perhaps 50 years old. They are a magnificent grove of 105 trees at the Memorial drive split. Destruction targets approximately 80 to 85 of them.
The DCR previously sought Obama moneys for this outrage. The flat out lie at that time was that all of the targeted trees were diseased. That flat out lie was disproved by their filing with the Cambridge Conservation Commission.
The project would further decimate the habitat of the 32 year resident, very valuable and very popular gaggle of the Charles River White Geese. The DCR and Cambridge have been deliberately starving them through bizarre aspects of the Magazine Beach project, aspects which were achieved through flat out lies in their supposed master plan. They walled off Magazine Beach with a master plan calling for a lawn to the river. The key manager has emphasized their value by his non stop lying of “no intent to harm.” He has publicly bragged that he is starving them.
The secret fine print of the DCR plans call for killing off all animals in the Charles River Basin by their definition of “parkland.”
You reversed responsible members of your team by allowing space to be left open for the “underpasses” which did not mentioned the outrageous environmental destruction and continuing heartless animal abuse. I hope you will rejoin those responsible members.
3. Cambridge, MA, USA City Council.
City Clerk
City of Cambridge
795 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02139
Dear Donna:
Please transmit the enclosed to the Cambridge City Council in the Communications part of its next regular meeting.
This is a copy of my letter to the Governor and MassDOT objecting to their joining the Cambridge City Council in its environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse.
The attachment to the letter is a tree by tree presentation of the excellent trees the Cambridge City Council is destroying on Memorial Drive.
Very brief mention is made of the Cambridge City Council’s already accomplished and increasing mass destruction of irreplaceable woods and the killing of hundreds or more its animals of the Alewife Reservation as part of that bizarre project
I realize that the Cambridge City Council has little use for reality with regard to its environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse / killing. I happen to live in reality.
2. Governor Patrick and Secretary Davy.
3. Cambridge, MA, USA City Council.
1. General.
Yesterday, March 25, 2013, I mailed the plans of the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation for destruction of hundreds of trees on Memorial Drive. This destruction is very clearly part of the bond bill which has been submitted to the legislature by Governor Deval Patrick of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, USA.
The standard routine of the people we are dealing with, and Patrick is dealing with, features flat out lies and lies of omission.
It is entirely possible that Patrick has been lied to.
His email form contact is http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
The following is the letter by which I sent these materials to Patrick and MassDOT Secretary Davy. MassDOT managers have been a saving grace in the outrageously destruction situation in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
Secretary Davy is a member of a habitat group. I recall that my written question to him at his MoveMass presentation was warped beyond meaning by the moderator, who “read” the question. I asked Davy how he comports his habitat group membership to the heartless destruction of animal habitat on the Charles River with the “underpass” assistance, along with (and not specifically mentioned in the question) associated greater heartless abuse of the Charles River White Geese. The chair warped the question into praise for Davy’s protection of the environment. Business as usual with the kind of people we deal with.
The following are, first, my transmittal to Governor Patrick and Secretary Davy; then the further transmittal to the Cambridge City Council. Patrick and Davy were each provided a copy of the Cambridge letter and about 15 pages of DCR plans for tree destruction.
2. Governor Patrick and Secretary Davy.
Gentlemen:
I have received the following notice from a group which falsely calls itself the Charles River “Conservancy.” The brackets constitute my modification in the name of accuracy. The comment is buried in a much longer communication.
As our legislative leaders prioritize investment decisions, now is the time to let them know that their constituents [oppose environmental destruction included in the Patrick budget]. Governor Patrick's proposed bond bill includes a $2 million line-item for construction of bridge underpasses on the Charles, as well as over $24 million for the paths.
Please be advised that there is a serious problem with flat out lies and lies of omission practiced by the DCR, Cambridge and their friends in their actions for environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse / killing.
This outrage is also exemplified in their ongoing destruction of the Alewife Reservation using a different fake group as front there.
Please note that your bond bill is for $2 million for bridge underpasses and $24 million “for the paths.”
That is one very major multiple of 12 going from what should be (and is not) a larger project to a smaller.
The reality is that the project includes usual heartless animal abuse plus the destruction of hundreds of trees between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge.
Enclosed are their tree destruction plans. Some of the smaller trees being destroyed are perhaps 50 years old. They are a magnificent grove of 105 trees at the Memorial drive split. Destruction targets approximately 80 to 85 of them.
The DCR previously sought Obama moneys for this outrage. The flat out lie at that time was that all of the targeted trees were diseased. That flat out lie was disproved by their filing with the Cambridge Conservation Commission.
The project would further decimate the habitat of the 32 year resident, very valuable and very popular gaggle of the Charles River White Geese. The DCR and Cambridge have been deliberately starving them through bizarre aspects of the Magazine Beach project, aspects which were achieved through flat out lies in their supposed master plan. They walled off Magazine Beach with a master plan calling for a lawn to the river. The key manager has emphasized their value by his non stop lying of “no intent to harm.” He has publicly bragged that he is starving them.
The secret fine print of the DCR plans call for killing off all animals in the Charles River Basin by their definition of “parkland.”
You reversed responsible members of your team by allowing space to be left open for the “underpasses” which did not mentioned the outrageous environmental destruction and continuing heartless animal abuse. I hope you will rejoin those responsible members.
3. Cambridge, MA, USA City Council.
City Clerk
City of Cambridge
795 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02139
Dear Donna:
Please transmit the enclosed to the Cambridge City Council in the Communications part of its next regular meeting.
This is a copy of my letter to the Governor and MassDOT objecting to their joining the Cambridge City Council in its environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse.
The attachment to the letter is a tree by tree presentation of the excellent trees the Cambridge City Council is destroying on Memorial Drive.
Very brief mention is made of the Cambridge City Council’s already accomplished and increasing mass destruction of irreplaceable woods and the killing of hundreds or more its animals of the Alewife Reservation as part of that bizarre project
I realize that the Cambridge City Council has little use for reality with regard to its environmental destruction and heartless animal abuse / killing. I happen to live in reality.
Sunday, March 24, 2013
Railroad Workers make their outrage worse at the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
At the beginning of the year, I reported on railroad workers working on the Grand Junction Bridge and using the Destroyed Nesting Area as a parking lot. That lasted five weeks.
Recently, Shashi and I reported on their irresponsible return.
Today, March 24, 2013, I was at the Nesting Area of the 32 year resident Charles River White Geese on the north side of the Charles River, in Cambridge, MA, USA, bounded on the west by the BU Bridge, on the north by an on ramp to Memorial Drive and on the east by the Grand Junction railroad tracks.
There were about six vehicles in the environmentally sensitive part of the Destroyed Nesting Area, none with corporate markings. These are the type of vehicles which were parked under the nearby Memorial Drive, where responsible people park, the workers on the BU Bridge project.
The portapotties in the environmentally sensitive area have doubled.
A fairly large metal workroom of the type which could be a truck carrier of shipments has been dumped under the largest tree, the most important part of the Destroyed Nesting Area.
The metal workroom is being used as a very noisy workshop. Not the slightest concern is shown for the needs of the animal residents.
This type of work area was placed under Memorial Drive by responsible people, but the responsible people were not making such ungodly noise.
Female Charles River White Geese are doing their best to nest within range of that ungodly racket. They are barred from most of their 32 year habitat by a bizarre wall barring access to the banks of the Charles consisting of introduced bushes which have been left to grow and grow. Similar plantings now occupy half to two-thirds of the Destroyed Nesting Area.
Massachusetts has an irresponsible state government, multiplied by the fact that they are fellow travelers with an equally reprehensible city government. Both do non stop lying that they are environmental saints.
Nobody below the governor is fit to talk to. His contact URL is http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
Recently, Shashi and I reported on their irresponsible return.
Today, March 24, 2013, I was at the Nesting Area of the 32 year resident Charles River White Geese on the north side of the Charles River, in Cambridge, MA, USA, bounded on the west by the BU Bridge, on the north by an on ramp to Memorial Drive and on the east by the Grand Junction railroad tracks.
There were about six vehicles in the environmentally sensitive part of the Destroyed Nesting Area, none with corporate markings. These are the type of vehicles which were parked under the nearby Memorial Drive, where responsible people park, the workers on the BU Bridge project.
The portapotties in the environmentally sensitive area have doubled.
A fairly large metal workroom of the type which could be a truck carrier of shipments has been dumped under the largest tree, the most important part of the Destroyed Nesting Area.
The metal workroom is being used as a very noisy workshop. Not the slightest concern is shown for the needs of the animal residents.
This type of work area was placed under Memorial Drive by responsible people, but the responsible people were not making such ungodly noise.
Female Charles River White Geese are doing their best to nest within range of that ungodly racket. They are barred from most of their 32 year habitat by a bizarre wall barring access to the banks of the Charles consisting of introduced bushes which have been left to grow and grow. Similar plantings now occupy half to two-thirds of the Destroyed Nesting Area.
Massachusetts has an irresponsible state government, multiplied by the fact that they are fellow travelers with an equally reprehensible city government. Both do non stop lying that they are environmental saints.
Nobody below the governor is fit to talk to. His contact URL is http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
Saturday, March 23, 2013
Fake Neighborhood Association trying to get destruction on the Charles by preventing input. Suggested response.
1. Standard Machine Tactics.
2. Announcement of the fake “Conservancy.”
3. The obvious interpretation.
4. Suggested action.
1. Standard Machine Tactics.
The Cambridge Machine in Cambridge, MA, USAis a typical company union.
The game is, at minimum, to prevent positive action, and if they can get away with it, reenforce destructive behavior.
In January this fake group tried to ram through approval for expansion of environmental destruction from Magazine Beach on the Charles River to the west, expanding the outrage at Magazine Beach which they have spent years lying does not exist.
They were faced with a highly restive meeting in which they could not ram through the irresponsible initiative.
Things were deferred to the next monthly meeting.
No monthly meeting was conducted in February.
No monthly meeting was conducted in March.
They announced a monthly meeting in the beginning of April. Then put it off to the end of the month.
2. Announcement of the fake “Conservancy.”
Yesterday, the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy” announced that Governor Patrick is seeking bond authorization for massive destruction on the Charles River, as follows (substituting responsible language in the brackets):
As our legislative leaders prioritize investment decisions, now is the time to let them know that their constituents [oppose environmental destruction included in the Patrick budget]. Governor Patrick's proposed bond bill includes a $2 million line-item for construction of bridge underpasses on the Charles, as well as over $24 million for the paths.
3. The obvious interpretation.
I posted my analysis of the governor’s actions at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/03/governor-patrick-seeks-transportation.html.
This irresponsible highway was included in the January package which could not get the votes.
The last thing the Cambridge Machine is interested in is fair play.
The fake neighborhood association is deliberately preventing a vote so that nothing will interfere with funds from what is now appearing to be an extremely irresponsible governor.
An extremely irresponsible governor, unless the governor has been lied to. And the situation on the Charles River and at Alewife has been notable for bad faith including outright lies and lies of omission.
4. Suggested action.
I am in the process of giving the governor the 15 page plans for destruction of much more than a hundred excellent trees between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge. These are the ones the DCR lied were all diseased when they sought Obama moneys to destroy them. Then they put in the records of the Cambridge Conservation Commission the exact opposite with regard to the condition of the targeted trees.
If you would like to communicate with the governor of Massachusetts about how the local fake neighborhood association is working to prevent public input, his email form is at http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
Including the heartless and accelerating animal abuse of the Charles River White Geese, the poisons dumped on Magazine Beach to keep alive introduced sickly grass in place of healthy grass which lasted the better part of the last Century, the walling off of Magazine Beach from the Charles River, the decrease in size of the playing fields to drain off the poisons, the closing of the boat docks, the ongoing extension of the bush wall to the last habitat of the Charles River White Geese, the use of the most sensitive part of their last refuge for parking with responsible parking readily available, etc. would help.
Putting things in perspective with the mass animal killings and bizarre environmental destruction at Alewife would make sense as well.
There is so much rot going on that communications could get very long. Concise would probably communicate more, if well written.
Remember, the last thing you should assume about the Cambridge Machine, the City of Cambridge, and their friends in state government is “They would never stoop so low.” They have proved that wrong so many times.
2. Announcement of the fake “Conservancy.”
3. The obvious interpretation.
4. Suggested action.
1. Standard Machine Tactics.
The Cambridge Machine in Cambridge, MA, USAis a typical company union.
The game is, at minimum, to prevent positive action, and if they can get away with it, reenforce destructive behavior.
In January this fake group tried to ram through approval for expansion of environmental destruction from Magazine Beach on the Charles River to the west, expanding the outrage at Magazine Beach which they have spent years lying does not exist.
They were faced with a highly restive meeting in which they could not ram through the irresponsible initiative.
Things were deferred to the next monthly meeting.
No monthly meeting was conducted in February.
No monthly meeting was conducted in March.
They announced a monthly meeting in the beginning of April. Then put it off to the end of the month.
2. Announcement of the fake “Conservancy.”
Yesterday, the falsely named Charles River “Conservancy” announced that Governor Patrick is seeking bond authorization for massive destruction on the Charles River, as follows (substituting responsible language in the brackets):
As our legislative leaders prioritize investment decisions, now is the time to let them know that their constituents [oppose environmental destruction included in the Patrick budget]. Governor Patrick's proposed bond bill includes a $2 million line-item for construction of bridge underpasses on the Charles, as well as over $24 million for the paths.
3. The obvious interpretation.
I posted my analysis of the governor’s actions at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/03/governor-patrick-seeks-transportation.html.
This irresponsible highway was included in the January package which could not get the votes.
The last thing the Cambridge Machine is interested in is fair play.
The fake neighborhood association is deliberately preventing a vote so that nothing will interfere with funds from what is now appearing to be an extremely irresponsible governor.
An extremely irresponsible governor, unless the governor has been lied to. And the situation on the Charles River and at Alewife has been notable for bad faith including outright lies and lies of omission.
4. Suggested action.
I am in the process of giving the governor the 15 page plans for destruction of much more than a hundred excellent trees between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge. These are the ones the DCR lied were all diseased when they sought Obama moneys to destroy them. Then they put in the records of the Cambridge Conservation Commission the exact opposite with regard to the condition of the targeted trees.
If you would like to communicate with the governor of Massachusetts about how the local fake neighborhood association is working to prevent public input, his email form is at http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
Including the heartless and accelerating animal abuse of the Charles River White Geese, the poisons dumped on Magazine Beach to keep alive introduced sickly grass in place of healthy grass which lasted the better part of the last Century, the walling off of Magazine Beach from the Charles River, the decrease in size of the playing fields to drain off the poisons, the closing of the boat docks, the ongoing extension of the bush wall to the last habitat of the Charles River White Geese, the use of the most sensitive part of their last refuge for parking with responsible parking readily available, etc. would help.
Putting things in perspective with the mass animal killings and bizarre environmental destruction at Alewife would make sense as well.
There is so much rot going on that communications could get very long. Concise would probably communicate more, if well written.
Remember, the last thing you should assume about the Cambridge Machine, the City of Cambridge, and their friends in state government is “They would never stoop so low.” They have proved that wrong so many times.
Friday, March 22, 2013
Governor Patrick seeks transportation money for environmental destruction, including trees and animal habitat
1. Announcement by falsely named Charles River “Conservancy.”
2. Reality.
1. Announcement by falsely named Charles River “Conservancy.”
The falsely named Charles River Conservancy includes the following comment in their March 2013 newsletter. They are trying to sneak in truly outrageous destruction by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts on the Charles River through the usual lies of omission.
I have edited out irresponsible language and replaced it with responsible language noted in the brackets:
**********
As our legislative leaders prioritize investment decisions, now is the time to let them know that their constituents [oppose environmental destruction included in the Patrick budget]. Governor Patrick's proposed bond bill includes a $2 million line-item for construction of bridge underpasses on the Charles, as well as over $24 million for the paths.
**********
2. Reality.
The rottenness of the people fighting for destruction of our environment has reached a new low.
“Underpasses” is outrageously misleading as it is. These people have casually added the real problem as if it were an afterthought.
The game is construction of highways in the Charles River and on its banks, highly destructive to the environment and to the residential animals including the Charles River White Geese.
Additionally, the proposed highway would (and never mentioned, of course):
A. Be built under the BU Bridge and through the formerly wild Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese, causing major harm.
B. Would destroy hundreds of excellent trees between the BU and Longfellow Bridges. Longfellow is the second bridge to the east.
The DCR has previously tried to get money to destroy these trees from Obama moneys. They lied that all the trees were diseased.
This reprehensible proposal seeks destruction in the name of paths associated with underpasses a mile or more to the west of the trees being destroyed.
Just another tactic of lying from really rotten people.
2. Reality.
1. Announcement by falsely named Charles River “Conservancy.”
The falsely named Charles River Conservancy includes the following comment in their March 2013 newsletter. They are trying to sneak in truly outrageous destruction by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts on the Charles River through the usual lies of omission.
I have edited out irresponsible language and replaced it with responsible language noted in the brackets:
**********
As our legislative leaders prioritize investment decisions, now is the time to let them know that their constituents [oppose environmental destruction included in the Patrick budget]. Governor Patrick's proposed bond bill includes a $2 million line-item for construction of bridge underpasses on the Charles, as well as over $24 million for the paths.
**********
2. Reality.
The rottenness of the people fighting for destruction of our environment has reached a new low.
“Underpasses” is outrageously misleading as it is. These people have casually added the real problem as if it were an afterthought.
The game is construction of highways in the Charles River and on its banks, highly destructive to the environment and to the residential animals including the Charles River White Geese.
Additionally, the proposed highway would (and never mentioned, of course):
A. Be built under the BU Bridge and through the formerly wild Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese, causing major harm.
B. Would destroy hundreds of excellent trees between the BU and Longfellow Bridges. Longfellow is the second bridge to the east.
The DCR has previously tried to get money to destroy these trees from Obama moneys. They lied that all the trees were diseased.
This reprehensible proposal seeks destruction in the name of paths associated with underpasses a mile or more to the west of the trees being destroyed.
Just another tactic of lying from really rotten people.
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
Harvard University’s Disappearing Elderly Housing: Cambridge (MA, USA) City Council Input?
1. Introduction, apparently incorrect City Council Understanding, and clearly incorrect Harvard position.
2. Origination from Councilor / Representative Graham’s Activities in 1973?
3. Harvard’s Management of the Building was strictly philanthropic?
1. Introduction, apparently incorrect City Council Understanding, and clearly incorrect Harvard position.
I have previously published several reports on Harvard University’s disappearing elderly housing at 2 Mt. Auburn Street at the eastern extremity of Harvard Square in Cambridge, MA, USA.
My prior reports stemmed from a meeting of a committee chaired by Councilor / Representative Decker in the building. Today, March 20, 2013, I attended a meeting by Councilor Reeve’s committee at Cambridge City Hall.
The Cambridge, MA, USA, City Council voted for a motion in January 2013 concerning the building. That motion included a statement that, based on agreements made with the city during the approvals for the building, the building is permanently designated for subsidized housing. This was the statement made by Decker in the prior meeting. She was contradicted by the Cambridge Housing Authority and Harvard University who stated that the most that could be guaranteed would be an additional 30 years.
Although the comment in the motion was in the form of a statement of law, my subsequent review of the document with the City Clerk’s office communicated to me very clearly that the City Council motion does not refer to any communicated opinion by the City Solicitor.
Councilor Reeves made an apparently incorrect statement from the chair which may have had relation to the supposed permanent guarantee. He said that the building stemmed from a sit in conducted by former Councilor / Representative Graham in 1973.
Also stated during the formal part of the meeting essentially was that Harvard provided this building out of the goodness of Harvard’s heart but that, since affordable / elderly housing is not part of Harvard’s mission, Harvard was selling the building.
I had not intended to talk at this meeting, but after those two points were made, I felt compelled to share my knowledge with the city council and with the tenants who were present.
2. Origination from Councilor / Representative Graham’s Activities in 1973?
I am in the process of researching this issue. The research is still ongoing, but I have quite clearly established, I think, the approval situation.
Until I spoke with one of the residents, my understanding of the situation would fit Councilor Reeve’s comment that the building stemmed from former Councilor / Representative Graham’s activities in 1973.. The trouble is that I was corrected on the matter by a tenant activist who said the variance was in 1970, so I checked the paperwork.
I was wrong in my understanding and Councilor Reeves was also apparently incorrect. The big difference, however, is that Reeve’s comment could be part of the allegation that the housing was guaranteed on a permanent basis.
I happened to have the variance files with me and, by agreement with the committee and the City Clerk, the City Clerk’s office made a copy of my files for the committee’s record.
3. Harvard’s Management of the Building was strictly philanthropic?
My opinion is that Harvard intended to convert the building from elderly housing to housing for Harvard affiliates and that they changed their mind because of changes in Harvard holdings of property.
I have significant experience in the area of the 2 Mount Auburn building. I devoted an entire blog report to my record. \
In front of the committee meeting, facing a time limit for comments, I restricted my experience to two matters.
At the Rent Control Board, I saved 10 Mt. Auburn Street, the historical building at the opposite end of the city block where 2 Mt. Auburn stands. I wrote the zoning change which changed the zoning of that block from the zoning of the core part of Harvard Square to the zoning of the adjoining neighborhood. There had been mention of the Inn at Harvard from the floor, so I pointed out that my zoning change also restricted the size of the Inn at Harvard. Harvard wanted that building to be 62% larger and was prevented from building it at that size by the zoning vote by the then City Council.
I pointed out to the committee that Harvard had used a technique in converting rent control housing to affiliate housing which they could have been prepared to take for 2 Mount Auburn.
I pointed out that conversion to affiliate housing had been in violation of the zoning because affiliate housing would require more parking than was possible under the zoning. I pointed out that the provision had been relaxed by the Cambridge City Council. The old zoning required parking for affiliate housing to be located within a distance of about two relatively small blocks, no further than, approximately, the nearby Surrey Street. The zoning change allowed Harvard to provide parking for 2 Mount Auburn Street in the massive garage under their recent Cowperthwaite Street development. That certainly looks to me like preparation for conversion to affiliate housing.
Since then, Harvard has purchased the I90 (Mass. Pike) exit to Cambridge and Brighton, the related portion of the Mass. Pike, and the local railroad yard, an area equal to Boston’s Back Bay neighborhood or so. This is all across the Charles River in Boston’s Allston neighborhood.
It is my opinion that Harvard is selling 2 Mt. Auburn because they have decided it makes more sense to put affiliate housing in their new addition to their empire in Allston and that they figured they would rather have the money from 2 Mount Auburn’s sale.
2. Origination from Councilor / Representative Graham’s Activities in 1973?
3. Harvard’s Management of the Building was strictly philanthropic?
1. Introduction, apparently incorrect City Council Understanding, and clearly incorrect Harvard position.
I have previously published several reports on Harvard University’s disappearing elderly housing at 2 Mt. Auburn Street at the eastern extremity of Harvard Square in Cambridge, MA, USA.
My prior reports stemmed from a meeting of a committee chaired by Councilor / Representative Decker in the building. Today, March 20, 2013, I attended a meeting by Councilor Reeve’s committee at Cambridge City Hall.
The Cambridge, MA, USA, City Council voted for a motion in January 2013 concerning the building. That motion included a statement that, based on agreements made with the city during the approvals for the building, the building is permanently designated for subsidized housing. This was the statement made by Decker in the prior meeting. She was contradicted by the Cambridge Housing Authority and Harvard University who stated that the most that could be guaranteed would be an additional 30 years.
Although the comment in the motion was in the form of a statement of law, my subsequent review of the document with the City Clerk’s office communicated to me very clearly that the City Council motion does not refer to any communicated opinion by the City Solicitor.
Councilor Reeves made an apparently incorrect statement from the chair which may have had relation to the supposed permanent guarantee. He said that the building stemmed from a sit in conducted by former Councilor / Representative Graham in 1973.
Also stated during the formal part of the meeting essentially was that Harvard provided this building out of the goodness of Harvard’s heart but that, since affordable / elderly housing is not part of Harvard’s mission, Harvard was selling the building.
I had not intended to talk at this meeting, but after those two points were made, I felt compelled to share my knowledge with the city council and with the tenants who were present.
2. Origination from Councilor / Representative Graham’s Activities in 1973?
I am in the process of researching this issue. The research is still ongoing, but I have quite clearly established, I think, the approval situation.
Until I spoke with one of the residents, my understanding of the situation would fit Councilor Reeve’s comment that the building stemmed from former Councilor / Representative Graham’s activities in 1973.. The trouble is that I was corrected on the matter by a tenant activist who said the variance was in 1970, so I checked the paperwork.
I was wrong in my understanding and Councilor Reeves was also apparently incorrect. The big difference, however, is that Reeve’s comment could be part of the allegation that the housing was guaranteed on a permanent basis.
I happened to have the variance files with me and, by agreement with the committee and the City Clerk, the City Clerk’s office made a copy of my files for the committee’s record.
3. Harvard’s Management of the Building was strictly philanthropic?
My opinion is that Harvard intended to convert the building from elderly housing to housing for Harvard affiliates and that they changed their mind because of changes in Harvard holdings of property.
I have significant experience in the area of the 2 Mount Auburn building. I devoted an entire blog report to my record. \
In front of the committee meeting, facing a time limit for comments, I restricted my experience to two matters.
At the Rent Control Board, I saved 10 Mt. Auburn Street, the historical building at the opposite end of the city block where 2 Mt. Auburn stands. I wrote the zoning change which changed the zoning of that block from the zoning of the core part of Harvard Square to the zoning of the adjoining neighborhood. There had been mention of the Inn at Harvard from the floor, so I pointed out that my zoning change also restricted the size of the Inn at Harvard. Harvard wanted that building to be 62% larger and was prevented from building it at that size by the zoning vote by the then City Council.
I pointed out to the committee that Harvard had used a technique in converting rent control housing to affiliate housing which they could have been prepared to take for 2 Mount Auburn.
I pointed out that conversion to affiliate housing had been in violation of the zoning because affiliate housing would require more parking than was possible under the zoning. I pointed out that the provision had been relaxed by the Cambridge City Council. The old zoning required parking for affiliate housing to be located within a distance of about two relatively small blocks, no further than, approximately, the nearby Surrey Street. The zoning change allowed Harvard to provide parking for 2 Mount Auburn Street in the massive garage under their recent Cowperthwaite Street development. That certainly looks to me like preparation for conversion to affiliate housing.
Since then, Harvard has purchased the I90 (Mass. Pike) exit to Cambridge and Brighton, the related portion of the Mass. Pike, and the local railroad yard, an area equal to Boston’s Back Bay neighborhood or so. This is all across the Charles River in Boston’s Allston neighborhood.
It is my opinion that Harvard is selling 2 Mt. Auburn because they have decided it makes more sense to put affiliate housing in their new addition to their empire in Allston and that they figured they would rather have the money from 2 Mount Auburn’s sale.
Monday, March 18, 2013
Destroyed Nesting Area: Resumption of Outrage Confirmed.
Following up on Shashi’s report, I was at the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese this morning.
This formerly wild meadow is located on the Cambridge, MA, USA (north) side of the Charles River, immediately east of the BU Bridge. It is separated from Memorial Drive by an on ramp. Before the irresponsible state agency and its friends started destroying, this meadow was home to a wide variety of free animals including many species of birds.
I saw six vehicles parked in the most environmentally sensitive part of the DNA, three had company markings, three did not. No vehicles were parked under Memorial Drive, in striking contrast to the workers on the BU Bridge project, normal for the destructive railroad workers. No vehicles were parked in the parking area near the entrance which was created as part of the BU Bridge project. In the past the railroaders had one vehicle in this one vehicle space.
The portapotty which formerly was next to the parking area had been moved to the most important part of the environmentally sensitive area, under the biggest tree.
A rail operated construction vehicle with crane was on the Grand Junction tracks, at the northern end of the portion next to the DNA. It was far from the Grand Junction Railroad bridge which has been the subject of the construction work. Planks ran most of the extent of the rail bridge between the tracks, protecting workers from falling into the river between the railroad ties.
When I got there, the Charles River White Geese were divided into many, probably family, groupings throughout the DNA and even onto the tracks.
As I was leaving, most of the groups were coming together in their favorite spot, under that big tree, in spite of the irresponsible vehicles parked in this environmentally important spot.
One of the company vehicles left, leaving two company vehicles and three privately owned vehicles.
The Cambridge City Council has since voted support for a new highway to bisect this environmentally sensitive area running from the north. The governor has overruled responsible bureaucrats and laid the ground work for another irresponsible highway running east and west. Cambridge and the state bureaucrats seem closer to more mass animal killings at Alewife because their agents are stalling things enough that the responsible alternative is rapidly disappearing. Tree destruction, of course, will be massive.
This formerly wild meadow is located on the Cambridge, MA, USA (north) side of the Charles River, immediately east of the BU Bridge. It is separated from Memorial Drive by an on ramp. Before the irresponsible state agency and its friends started destroying, this meadow was home to a wide variety of free animals including many species of birds.
I saw six vehicles parked in the most environmentally sensitive part of the DNA, three had company markings, three did not. No vehicles were parked under Memorial Drive, in striking contrast to the workers on the BU Bridge project, normal for the destructive railroad workers. No vehicles were parked in the parking area near the entrance which was created as part of the BU Bridge project. In the past the railroaders had one vehicle in this one vehicle space.
The portapotty which formerly was next to the parking area had been moved to the most important part of the environmentally sensitive area, under the biggest tree.
A rail operated construction vehicle with crane was on the Grand Junction tracks, at the northern end of the portion next to the DNA. It was far from the Grand Junction Railroad bridge which has been the subject of the construction work. Planks ran most of the extent of the rail bridge between the tracks, protecting workers from falling into the river between the railroad ties.
When I got there, the Charles River White Geese were divided into many, probably family, groupings throughout the DNA and even onto the tracks.
As I was leaving, most of the groups were coming together in their favorite spot, under that big tree, in spite of the irresponsible vehicles parked in this environmentally important spot.
One of the company vehicles left, leaving two company vehicles and three privately owned vehicles.
The Cambridge City Council has since voted support for a new highway to bisect this environmentally sensitive area running from the north. The governor has overruled responsible bureaucrats and laid the ground work for another irresponsible highway running east and west. Cambridge and the state bureaucrats seem closer to more mass animal killings at Alewife because their agents are stalling things enough that the responsible alternative is rapidly disappearing. Tree destruction, of course, will be massive.
Nesting Area Destruction on Sunday.
1. Introduction.
2. Shashi’s report.
1. Introduction.
The following report is from Shashi who would love to have help feeding. It was sent Sunday evening.
The trouble is that the reprehensible government of the City of Cambridge has voted for an outrageous highway on the Grand Junction and through the nesting area. I hope this is not it.
That combined with the fake neighborhood association “waking up” could be ominous.
The fake neighborhood association had a meeting in January discussing increased Charles River destruction in which they could not get a rubber stamp vote. They said they would discuss it at their next monthly meeting. No February meeting. No March meeting. April meeting first scheduled for early in the month, deferred to the end.
Perhaps the rotters are avoiding taking responsibility or being used to stand up to outrages from Cambridge and the state?
A really rotten situation.
2. Shashi’s report.
Hi Bob
I hope you are doing well. I received an entire trader joes bag of good beagels soft buns and sandwich bread from a nice person. They were given by a private individual.
I took the food to feed the geese and their nesting site was filled with huge pickup trucks some 12 or so huge pickup trucks.
When I went with my bag of food the geese usually all excited would greet me at the gravel path.
This time I think they were nervous and scared with the constant presence of huge trucks and workmen literally right in the midst of the poor verses nesting area that they did not venture past where thr trucks are all parked.
I went down to their area and was able to feed as many geese as I could all the beagels soft buns and the few loaves of submarine bread.
It is so difficult for these poor creatures. Practically there is very little or no vegetation for them to be able to build or retain their nests. They seem really nervous with the continued presence of huge trucks which number in no less than 10 or 12 just on a Sunday.
I am hoping that this good Samaritan will donate food for the geese in the future. I also hope that in few months the repair work will end.
Kind Regards
Shashi
2. Shashi’s report.
1. Introduction.
The following report is from Shashi who would love to have help feeding. It was sent Sunday evening.
The trouble is that the reprehensible government of the City of Cambridge has voted for an outrageous highway on the Grand Junction and through the nesting area. I hope this is not it.
That combined with the fake neighborhood association “waking up” could be ominous.
The fake neighborhood association had a meeting in January discussing increased Charles River destruction in which they could not get a rubber stamp vote. They said they would discuss it at their next monthly meeting. No February meeting. No March meeting. April meeting first scheduled for early in the month, deferred to the end.
Perhaps the rotters are avoiding taking responsibility or being used to stand up to outrages from Cambridge and the state?
A really rotten situation.
2. Shashi’s report.
Hi Bob
I hope you are doing well. I received an entire trader joes bag of good beagels soft buns and sandwich bread from a nice person. They were given by a private individual.
I took the food to feed the geese and their nesting site was filled with huge pickup trucks some 12 or so huge pickup trucks.
When I went with my bag of food the geese usually all excited would greet me at the gravel path.
This time I think they were nervous and scared with the constant presence of huge trucks and workmen literally right in the midst of the poor verses nesting area that they did not venture past where thr trucks are all parked.
I went down to their area and was able to feed as many geese as I could all the beagels soft buns and the few loaves of submarine bread.
It is so difficult for these poor creatures. Practically there is very little or no vegetation for them to be able to build or retain their nests. They seem really nervous with the continued presence of huge trucks which number in no less than 10 or 12 just on a Sunday.
I am hoping that this good Samaritan will donate food for the geese in the future. I also hope that in few months the repair work will end.
Kind Regards
Shashi
Sunday, March 17, 2013
Harvard’s Disappearing Elderly Housing - Why? Tax credit expired?
1. Introductory.
2. Good point.
3. Response.
1. Introductory.
I left the topic of Harvard’s disappearing elderly housing with the intention of doing some more research.
Doing my research caused me to be down for a few days.
I have gotten the following well thought out opinion on the reason for the maneuvering.
It is a good point and helps me get back in without the need for finishing the extensive research I was in the middle of. The only reason I am not identifying the source is that I have had people send me suggestions who then would be downright shocked if I printed the idea with their name attached, thinking they were sending just a friendly idea.
I have suggested to the author that I would be pleased to identify the author should the author so wish. In the meantime, it is a good point.
2. Good point.
Tax credits were available 20 or so years ago to developers of new low-rent buildings. I think the 20-yr life of that tax break is ending. Expiring-use is the term used to describe the situation. Benefits of owning such a building disappear and uncertainty about the future is created for the tenants. Although Harvard is nonprofit they may have been able to sell the annual tax credits to others.
This is my unverified guess about the situation...
3. Response.
There could very possibly be some tax angles of this sort maneuvered into the transaction.
The variance was granted on October 5, 1970. It was a modification to a prior variance.
The entity receiving the variance was identified as “Putnam Square Apartments, Inc., by Thomas W. Cornu, Treasurer.”
Under the variance, this building was allowed to have about 50% more floor space than it would have been allowed in Harvard Square, a few blocks away. The zoning was the same as Harvard Square proper until we changed it to neighborhood zoning in the 1989 Natalie Ward (East Harvard Square) petition.
My first exposure to the nuances of this property came few years after the 1970 variance when everybody in the room seemed to agree that this was the typical disappearing affordable housing allowed under the various games in style that week.
The neighbors were insistent that the construction was by a straw and that Harvard was the real owner. The owners insisted they were owners in reality.
A few years later, Harvard suddenly became the owner.
My informed estimate is that this was a con by which Harvard was creating housing for people affiliated with the school and that Harvard did not then need the housing. So Harvard played the games and got a massive building and an arrangement by which Harvard would eventually have housing for affiliates at no real cost to Harvard.
My opinion is that Harvard’s purchase of the I90 (Mass. Pike) exit to Cambridge / Brighton provided Harvard with such a massive area for future development that Harvard figured this property was worth more to it selling the property than as future affiliate housing. In the past decade or so, fine print in parking requirements of the zoning have been changed by Decker and company to ease conversion to affiliate housing rather than continued use as elderly housing.
2. Good point.
3. Response.
1. Introductory.
I left the topic of Harvard’s disappearing elderly housing with the intention of doing some more research.
Doing my research caused me to be down for a few days.
I have gotten the following well thought out opinion on the reason for the maneuvering.
It is a good point and helps me get back in without the need for finishing the extensive research I was in the middle of. The only reason I am not identifying the source is that I have had people send me suggestions who then would be downright shocked if I printed the idea with their name attached, thinking they were sending just a friendly idea.
I have suggested to the author that I would be pleased to identify the author should the author so wish. In the meantime, it is a good point.
2. Good point.
Tax credits were available 20 or so years ago to developers of new low-rent buildings. I think the 20-yr life of that tax break is ending. Expiring-use is the term used to describe the situation. Benefits of owning such a building disappear and uncertainty about the future is created for the tenants. Although Harvard is nonprofit they may have been able to sell the annual tax credits to others.
This is my unverified guess about the situation...
3. Response.
There could very possibly be some tax angles of this sort maneuvered into the transaction.
The variance was granted on October 5, 1970. It was a modification to a prior variance.
The entity receiving the variance was identified as “Putnam Square Apartments, Inc., by Thomas W. Cornu, Treasurer.”
Under the variance, this building was allowed to have about 50% more floor space than it would have been allowed in Harvard Square, a few blocks away. The zoning was the same as Harvard Square proper until we changed it to neighborhood zoning in the 1989 Natalie Ward (East Harvard Square) petition.
My first exposure to the nuances of this property came few years after the 1970 variance when everybody in the room seemed to agree that this was the typical disappearing affordable housing allowed under the various games in style that week.
The neighbors were insistent that the construction was by a straw and that Harvard was the real owner. The owners insisted they were owners in reality.
A few years later, Harvard suddenly became the owner.
My informed estimate is that this was a con by which Harvard was creating housing for people affiliated with the school and that Harvard did not then need the housing. So Harvard played the games and got a massive building and an arrangement by which Harvard would eventually have housing for affiliates at no real cost to Harvard.
My opinion is that Harvard’s purchase of the I90 (Mass. Pike) exit to Cambridge / Brighton provided Harvard with such a massive area for future development that Harvard figured this property was worth more to it selling the property than as future affiliate housing. In the past decade or so, fine print in parking requirements of the zoning have been changed by Decker and company to ease conversion to affiliate housing rather than continued use as elderly housing.
Alewife Destruction, Animal Pogrom, Cambridge (MA,USA) Chronicle
On March 2, 2013, I posted a copy of an proposed oped sent to the Cambridge Chronicle concerning pending destruction at Alewife.
The oped has not been printed.
Below is another copy of the oped, along with the transmittal letter to the Cambridge Chronicle.
Note that at Alewife, the destroyers lie that they are protecting the environment.
On the Charles River, they brag they are heartless animal abusers and tell people that their belligerent animal abuse excuses their belligerent environmental destruction.
Cambridge, MA, USA, has a very sick Machine controlling its politics. They combine this bragging with non stop lies that they are holier than thou.
The photos previously provided to the Cambridge Chronicle concerning Alewife were reprinted here in the last couple of weeks.
*********
3/2/13
Editor
Cambridge Chronicle
The following is proposed as an oped defending Alewife. This commentary is shorter than the con games you have printed by or supporting people fighting for the destruction of Alewife. And I am still willing to provide photos of phase 1 of the destruction of Alewife. This oped is considerable smaller that the two full page photo spreads which have been printed supporting the supporters of destruction.
**********
The “Defenders” of Alewife are that much closer to destroying Alewife.
In October - November 2011, Cambridge and the Department of Conservation and Recreation destroyed acres of the irreplaceable, ancient, Alewife woodlands. They conducted a mass pogrom of animals whose families had lived there for centuries.
Monday, February 25, these destructive people came that much closer to probable total destruction of the irreplaceable Alewife woodlands.
You see, friends of these governments have been saying the destruction was “needed” to protect North Cambridge from flooding. These governments’ half truths supported these nonsensical claims. The half truths said that the governments were providing protection against the worst possible storm in any two year period. But the area has seen two 50 years storms in the past 20 years, and 100 year protection should be provided.
There were and continue to be alternatives to destroying Alewife for flood protection. There are two properties on either part of CambridgePark Drive next to the needless destruction at Alewife which could easily have flood protection constructed as part of the projects. Running to Alewife Brook Parkway along the railroad right of way from there is a massive parking lot under which the rest of the needed flood protection can be provided.
There is no need to destroy Alewife.
But, in the pages of the Cambridge Chronicle, the founder of a “Friends” group which claims to be defending Alewife has bragged of the destruction of acres of Alewife for that Two Year flood protection.
This “Friend” of Alewife has for the past 15 years told people to tilt at windmills fighting long shot fights against private developers. She tells people not to look at the public destruction. This “friend” of Alewife does not tell people she supports destruction of the Alewife reservation by the public developers. She does not tell people that her friends should have easily been able to enter into joint projects with the developers in these three parcels instead of destroying Alewife.
At minimum, they have the power of eminent domain.
There is a “neighborhood association” which tells people to yell at the developers.
Neither the “Friends” nor the “Neighborhood Association” has publicly called on people to tell the public agencies to behave responsibly. The “Friends” group, if you read her letter in the Cambridge Chronicle, is on the wrong side. The “Neighborhood Association” shares the common trait of Cambridge Machine organizations: get people to do exactly the wrong thing, and reelect their friends on the Cambridge City Council.
The project on the south side of Cambridge ParkDrive has started construction. The project on the north side of Cambridge ParkDrive is going through reviews. Neither is working with the City of Cambridge or the DCR to provide flood protection needed by North Cambridge as part of their project.
Monday night, February 25, a developer announced to the Cambridge Conservation Commission a third project for the massive parking lot running along the railroad right of way.
This is the same developer who is in the ground in the condo project on the South Side of Cambridge ParkDrive, next door to his new project. Both of his projects include flood protection underneath. All a responsible government needs to do is build bigger flood protection under the three projects.
The two fake “protectors” fit a pattern in Cambridge politics. Both are part of the Cambridge Machine. The Cambridge Machine has a long record of its front groups achieving much less than they claim to stand for and, frequently, achieving exactly the opposite of what they claim to stand for.
What is unusual is for one of the fake “protectors” to admit in the pages of the Cambridge Chronicle that her “friends” organization is a fraud.
It is too late to build under the one project which is in the ground.
It is not too late to build under the other two projects.
All it takes is a city government which is not lying when it claims to be pro environment.
All it takes is a city government which is not hiding behind fake “protectors,” and which does its duty and provides meaningful flood protection under the two remaining buildings in the process.
Alewife can be saved. Will it be?
The oped has not been printed.
Below is another copy of the oped, along with the transmittal letter to the Cambridge Chronicle.
Note that at Alewife, the destroyers lie that they are protecting the environment.
On the Charles River, they brag they are heartless animal abusers and tell people that their belligerent animal abuse excuses their belligerent environmental destruction.
Cambridge, MA, USA, has a very sick Machine controlling its politics. They combine this bragging with non stop lies that they are holier than thou.
The photos previously provided to the Cambridge Chronicle concerning Alewife were reprinted here in the last couple of weeks.
*********
3/2/13
Editor
Cambridge Chronicle
The following is proposed as an oped defending Alewife. This commentary is shorter than the con games you have printed by or supporting people fighting for the destruction of Alewife. And I am still willing to provide photos of phase 1 of the destruction of Alewife. This oped is considerable smaller that the two full page photo spreads which have been printed supporting the supporters of destruction.
**********
The “Defenders” of Alewife are that much closer to destroying Alewife.
In October - November 2011, Cambridge and the Department of Conservation and Recreation destroyed acres of the irreplaceable, ancient, Alewife woodlands. They conducted a mass pogrom of animals whose families had lived there for centuries.
Monday, February 25, these destructive people came that much closer to probable total destruction of the irreplaceable Alewife woodlands.
You see, friends of these governments have been saying the destruction was “needed” to protect North Cambridge from flooding. These governments’ half truths supported these nonsensical claims. The half truths said that the governments were providing protection against the worst possible storm in any two year period. But the area has seen two 50 years storms in the past 20 years, and 100 year protection should be provided.
There were and continue to be alternatives to destroying Alewife for flood protection. There are two properties on either part of CambridgePark Drive next to the needless destruction at Alewife which could easily have flood protection constructed as part of the projects. Running to Alewife Brook Parkway along the railroad right of way from there is a massive parking lot under which the rest of the needed flood protection can be provided.
There is no need to destroy Alewife.
But, in the pages of the Cambridge Chronicle, the founder of a “Friends” group which claims to be defending Alewife has bragged of the destruction of acres of Alewife for that Two Year flood protection.
This “Friend” of Alewife has for the past 15 years told people to tilt at windmills fighting long shot fights against private developers. She tells people not to look at the public destruction. This “friend” of Alewife does not tell people she supports destruction of the Alewife reservation by the public developers. She does not tell people that her friends should have easily been able to enter into joint projects with the developers in these three parcels instead of destroying Alewife.
At minimum, they have the power of eminent domain.
There is a “neighborhood association” which tells people to yell at the developers.
Neither the “Friends” nor the “Neighborhood Association” has publicly called on people to tell the public agencies to behave responsibly. The “Friends” group, if you read her letter in the Cambridge Chronicle, is on the wrong side. The “Neighborhood Association” shares the common trait of Cambridge Machine organizations: get people to do exactly the wrong thing, and reelect their friends on the Cambridge City Council.
The project on the south side of Cambridge ParkDrive has started construction. The project on the north side of Cambridge ParkDrive is going through reviews. Neither is working with the City of Cambridge or the DCR to provide flood protection needed by North Cambridge as part of their project.
Monday night, February 25, a developer announced to the Cambridge Conservation Commission a third project for the massive parking lot running along the railroad right of way.
This is the same developer who is in the ground in the condo project on the South Side of Cambridge ParkDrive, next door to his new project. Both of his projects include flood protection underneath. All a responsible government needs to do is build bigger flood protection under the three projects.
The two fake “protectors” fit a pattern in Cambridge politics. Both are part of the Cambridge Machine. The Cambridge Machine has a long record of its front groups achieving much less than they claim to stand for and, frequently, achieving exactly the opposite of what they claim to stand for.
What is unusual is for one of the fake “protectors” to admit in the pages of the Cambridge Chronicle that her “friends” organization is a fraud.
It is too late to build under the one project which is in the ground.
It is not too late to build under the other two projects.
All it takes is a city government which is not lying when it claims to be pro environment.
All it takes is a city government which is not hiding behind fake “protectors,” and which does its duty and provides meaningful flood protection under the two remaining buildings in the process.
Alewife can be saved. Will it be?
Wednesday, March 13, 2013
Harvard’s Disappearing Affordable Housing, the Charles River, and the Cambridge City Council
1. Introduction, Charles River.
2. State Representative / City Councilor Participation., Decker v. the Adults in the Room.
3. Tactics refreshed. Women’s Rights. Animal rights.
4. Response of decent human beings to the morality of Cambridge.
5. Summary.
6. The Adults in the Room.
1. Introduction, Charles River.
This is the third of four reports which stem out of a meeting concerning the future of Harvard University’s massive elderly building at 2 Mount Auburn Street, at the extreme eastern end of East Harvard Square in Cambridge, MA.
My first report was a general report. My second went into my experiences and the good I have done in this part of the world. This report will go into the Cambridge City Council impact. The next report will go into an analysis of the apparent legalities and of the Cambridge City Solicitor.
Ever since I started working on the increasing outrage on the Charles River, it has been amazing just how broad the impact of the situation is.
Harvard is selling the elderly units, it would appear, because Harvard’s massive purchases of transportation property have made this elderly housing building of no value to Harvard for expansion of Harvard affiliated housing. The massive purchase of the I90 (Mass. Turnpike) Cambridge / Brighton exit, the highway, and the rail yards gives Harvard so much room to play with that Harvard no longer needs this building.
2. State Representative / City Councilor Participation., Decker v. the Adults in the Room.
It was striking contrasting the comments of Decker to those of the adults in the room.
Decker insisted that the building was permanently protected for the use by the elderly, and that Cambridge would sue and sue and sue to ensure that.
The adults in the room, the Cambridge Housing Authority representative and Harvard University, insisted that the greatest further guarantee possible for the residents would be 30 years.
3. Tactics refreshed. Women’s Rights. Animal rights.
One of the big lies which come out of Cambridge City Councilors, particularly Decker, is that they are pro women’s rights.
Less than a week before this meeting, Decker put on a show at the nearby Cambridge College telling women what their rights are. Does not that make her pro Women’s Rights?
This is the usual cynical lie coming out the Cambridge City Council and the Cambridge Machine.
Decker has a very real and very rotten record on women’s rights: Malvina Monteiro, Malvina Monteiro, Malvina Monteiro.
The Cambridge City Manager destroyed the life of Malvina Monteiro because she had the nerve to filed a women’s rights / civil rights complaint.
The standard lie of the fake groups on the destruction of the environment is the same as Decker’s lie on women’s rights: don’t look at my record, look at how great I sound yelling at the other guy.
And Decker’s sue, sue, sue mentality is very strongly reminiscent of Monteiro. A Globe columnist commented that Cambridge had fought that woman beyond the point of all common sense.
What Decker did to Monteiro was the tactics of a bully. These tactics were used by the Cambridge Machine in their fight to destroy Corporal Burns Playground. Their strongest argument was that they were beating up the little guy, the working class folk who were trying to save their playground.
This is also the sick argument for all the destruction at Magazine Beach: don’t look at their dumping of poisons on the banks of the Charles River; don’t look at their walling off Magazine Beach from the Charles River; don’t look at the decrease in size of the playing fields to drain off the poisons; don’t look at their destruction of perfectly good grass to put in sickly stuff which needs poisons to survive; don’t look at the magnificence of the irreplaceable gaggle of the Charles River White Geese, loved by decent human beings.
Don’t look at the fact that ALL of the outrages have been achieved through lies of omission and flat out lies.
Look at the fact that they are heartlessly abusing the Charles River White Geese. The Charles River White Geese are the little guy and they as bullies have every right to heartlessly abuse beautiful, valuable animals.
Part of the sickness of Decker and her friends on the Cambridge City Council was shown when a woman was raped and murdered at the Destroyed Nesting Area. This happened where the murderer had apparently been beating to death nesting mother geese, clearly emboldened by the mistreatment of these beautiful animals by city, state and friends.
Decker and her friends had been begged by decent people to do something about the goose killings. Decker and her friends responded with the silence of the guilty. And when the obvious happened, when their copycat graduated to a human being, Decker and her friends spent an hour talking about the rape and the murder.
In their hour discussion, Decker and her friends on the Cambridge City Council just did not want to know where that murder happened apparently, that it happened where the nut had apparently been killing mother geese, to their silent blessing.
And when the reprehensible Councilor Davis mentioned the location, she swallowed her words, looked around guiltily, and returned to the nonsense from Decker and company.
4. Response of decent human beings to the morality of Cambridge.
Decker and her friends’ contempt for reality is based on living in a protective world in which a rotten organization runs around praising them no matter how vile the real record.
Trial judge and jury and appeals court panel reviewed Cambridge’s destruction of the life of Malvina Monteiro because she filed a women’s rights / civil rights complaint.
Trial judge and jury and appeals court panel expressed the disgust that decent people have when dealing with a situation such as that in the City of Cambridge.
The jury awarded $1.1 million real damages and $3.5 million PENAL damages. They awarded penal damages more than three times the size of the actual damages, an essentially unheard of multiple. The jury expressed very strong contempt for Cambridge, and this is very much normal to people independently exposed to the Cambridge outrage. The trial judge wrote an excellent opinion.
The appeals court panel show their contempt for the rotten situation in Cambridge by refusing to dignify their appeal with a formal opinion.
They explicitly and very clearly condemned the Cambridge City Manager.
5. Summary.
Exact zero members of the Cambridge City Council have initiated action which would be appropriate in the Monteiro situation. Exactly zero members of the Cambridge City Council have sought to fire the Cambridge City Manager because he has been found by judge, jury and appeals court panel to be truly rotten.
And Decker’s response? The usual nonsense.
She puts on a show on how she would stand up to the other guy and keeps her rottenness secret.
And she tells the folks at 2 Mt. Auburn that she would sue and sue and sue, the typical bully, the defendant in the Monteiro case. Cambridge is the big guy.
Monteiro was the little guy. She got the tactics of bullies. Whoever buys 2 Mt. Auburn will be smaller than Cambridge, so Cambridge will gets its way with the tactics of bullies, according to the promises of Decker.
6. The Adults in the Room.
And the adults in the room said she does not have a case.
2. State Representative / City Councilor Participation., Decker v. the Adults in the Room.
3. Tactics refreshed. Women’s Rights. Animal rights.
4. Response of decent human beings to the morality of Cambridge.
5. Summary.
6. The Adults in the Room.
1. Introduction, Charles River.
This is the third of four reports which stem out of a meeting concerning the future of Harvard University’s massive elderly building at 2 Mount Auburn Street, at the extreme eastern end of East Harvard Square in Cambridge, MA.
My first report was a general report. My second went into my experiences and the good I have done in this part of the world. This report will go into the Cambridge City Council impact. The next report will go into an analysis of the apparent legalities and of the Cambridge City Solicitor.
Ever since I started working on the increasing outrage on the Charles River, it has been amazing just how broad the impact of the situation is.
Harvard is selling the elderly units, it would appear, because Harvard’s massive purchases of transportation property have made this elderly housing building of no value to Harvard for expansion of Harvard affiliated housing. The massive purchase of the I90 (Mass. Turnpike) Cambridge / Brighton exit, the highway, and the rail yards gives Harvard so much room to play with that Harvard no longer needs this building.
2. State Representative / City Councilor Participation., Decker v. the Adults in the Room.
It was striking contrasting the comments of Decker to those of the adults in the room.
Decker insisted that the building was permanently protected for the use by the elderly, and that Cambridge would sue and sue and sue to ensure that.
The adults in the room, the Cambridge Housing Authority representative and Harvard University, insisted that the greatest further guarantee possible for the residents would be 30 years.
3. Tactics refreshed. Women’s Rights. Animal rights.
One of the big lies which come out of Cambridge City Councilors, particularly Decker, is that they are pro women’s rights.
Less than a week before this meeting, Decker put on a show at the nearby Cambridge College telling women what their rights are. Does not that make her pro Women’s Rights?
This is the usual cynical lie coming out the Cambridge City Council and the Cambridge Machine.
Decker has a very real and very rotten record on women’s rights: Malvina Monteiro, Malvina Monteiro, Malvina Monteiro.
The Cambridge City Manager destroyed the life of Malvina Monteiro because she had the nerve to filed a women’s rights / civil rights complaint.
The standard lie of the fake groups on the destruction of the environment is the same as Decker’s lie on women’s rights: don’t look at my record, look at how great I sound yelling at the other guy.
And Decker’s sue, sue, sue mentality is very strongly reminiscent of Monteiro. A Globe columnist commented that Cambridge had fought that woman beyond the point of all common sense.
What Decker did to Monteiro was the tactics of a bully. These tactics were used by the Cambridge Machine in their fight to destroy Corporal Burns Playground. Their strongest argument was that they were beating up the little guy, the working class folk who were trying to save their playground.
This is also the sick argument for all the destruction at Magazine Beach: don’t look at their dumping of poisons on the banks of the Charles River; don’t look at their walling off Magazine Beach from the Charles River; don’t look at the decrease in size of the playing fields to drain off the poisons; don’t look at their destruction of perfectly good grass to put in sickly stuff which needs poisons to survive; don’t look at the magnificence of the irreplaceable gaggle of the Charles River White Geese, loved by decent human beings.
Don’t look at the fact that ALL of the outrages have been achieved through lies of omission and flat out lies.
Look at the fact that they are heartlessly abusing the Charles River White Geese. The Charles River White Geese are the little guy and they as bullies have every right to heartlessly abuse beautiful, valuable animals.
Part of the sickness of Decker and her friends on the Cambridge City Council was shown when a woman was raped and murdered at the Destroyed Nesting Area. This happened where the murderer had apparently been beating to death nesting mother geese, clearly emboldened by the mistreatment of these beautiful animals by city, state and friends.
Decker and her friends had been begged by decent people to do something about the goose killings. Decker and her friends responded with the silence of the guilty. And when the obvious happened, when their copycat graduated to a human being, Decker and her friends spent an hour talking about the rape and the murder.
In their hour discussion, Decker and her friends on the Cambridge City Council just did not want to know where that murder happened apparently, that it happened where the nut had apparently been killing mother geese, to their silent blessing.
And when the reprehensible Councilor Davis mentioned the location, she swallowed her words, looked around guiltily, and returned to the nonsense from Decker and company.
4. Response of decent human beings to the morality of Cambridge.
Decker and her friends’ contempt for reality is based on living in a protective world in which a rotten organization runs around praising them no matter how vile the real record.
Trial judge and jury and appeals court panel reviewed Cambridge’s destruction of the life of Malvina Monteiro because she filed a women’s rights / civil rights complaint.
Trial judge and jury and appeals court panel expressed the disgust that decent people have when dealing with a situation such as that in the City of Cambridge.
The jury awarded $1.1 million real damages and $3.5 million PENAL damages. They awarded penal damages more than three times the size of the actual damages, an essentially unheard of multiple. The jury expressed very strong contempt for Cambridge, and this is very much normal to people independently exposed to the Cambridge outrage. The trial judge wrote an excellent opinion.
The appeals court panel show their contempt for the rotten situation in Cambridge by refusing to dignify their appeal with a formal opinion.
They explicitly and very clearly condemned the Cambridge City Manager.
5. Summary.
Exact zero members of the Cambridge City Council have initiated action which would be appropriate in the Monteiro situation. Exactly zero members of the Cambridge City Council have sought to fire the Cambridge City Manager because he has been found by judge, jury and appeals court panel to be truly rotten.
And Decker’s response? The usual nonsense.
She puts on a show on how she would stand up to the other guy and keeps her rottenness secret.
And she tells the folks at 2 Mt. Auburn that she would sue and sue and sue, the typical bully, the defendant in the Monteiro case. Cambridge is the big guy.
Monteiro was the little guy. She got the tactics of bullies. Whoever buys 2 Mt. Auburn will be smaller than Cambridge, so Cambridge will gets its way with the tactics of bullies, according to the promises of Decker.
6. The Adults in the Room.
And the adults in the room said she does not have a case.
Sunday, March 10, 2013
More detail on the Alewife Outrage, Cambridge, MA, USA
The fake “neighborhood association” has released a new plan of the area next to the Alewife reservation where flood storage should be if Cambridge, MA had a responsible government. If the irresponsible government did not have these fake groups telling people to look at everything else, the city government which should be taking the underground areas by eminent domain and developing flood storage as part of the coming buildings.
Instead, with the Cambridge Machine’s invaluable assistance, it looks like the entire Alewife Reservation could be destroyed and its animals whose families have resided there for Centuries killed.
First, here is a map of the overall area as part of the plans for the project at 160 CambridgePark Drive which should be built in coordination with flood storage.
The trees in the area marked “Alewife Brook Reservation” have been destroyed. To be more exact, the area of destruction is as wide as the letters but shifted slightly left.
The yellow structure just above the wide grey stretch running right and left is the 160 CambridgePark Drive project. The wide grey area is the railroad right of way. The thin grey area just above the project is CambridgePark Drive.
The building between 160 CambridgePark Drive and the destroyed area is the next stage of condo development. This is not in the ground. It should be developed with flood storage below it.
To the right of the yellow 160 CambridgePark Drive is a massive parking lot extending to Alewife Brook Parkway and getting very deep toward Fresh Pond Parkway.
Here are photos of the current destruction.
The 2d stage condo construction is to the right of the camera in the destruction photos.
The massive trees in the background used to fill the area of destruction. They, except for token undestroyed trees, will very likely be destroyed if flood storage is not responsibly provided under the nearby properties.
The is the former status of 160 CambridgePark Drive.
Here is the plan just released by the fake “neighborhood association”.
The nearest part of the second stage condo project is shown as the flat building at the top left of this plan. It will be a lot larger than that one building.
160 CambridgePark Drive before construction is at the left. The building next to it is shown in the photo of prior conditions.
Stage 3 condos, 130 CambridgePark Drive, will go in the middle bottom. The massive parking lots to the right of stage 3 will not be touched by this latest building, but you are going very far in the destruction.
The reality is that the developer of 160 and 130, Richard McKinnon, is building flood storage under both buildings.
If Cambridge had a responsible city government and did not have these fake groups running protection for it, McKinnon’s flood storage would be deeper and would be everywhere under the parking lots and under the phase 2 and 3 condos. It is too late for phase 1.
But Cambridge has a very destructive city government which stays in power because of lies put and con games by The Cambridge Machine and its front organizations.
So, instead of responsible protection against flooding, Cambridge, MA, USA is on its way to apparent total destruction of the Alewife reservation with mass killings of animals whose families have resided there for Centuries.
And it is all hidden by a bunch of lies.
Instead, with the Cambridge Machine’s invaluable assistance, it looks like the entire Alewife Reservation could be destroyed and its animals whose families have resided there for Centuries killed.
First, here is a map of the overall area as part of the plans for the project at 160 CambridgePark Drive which should be built in coordination with flood storage.
The trees in the area marked “Alewife Brook Reservation” have been destroyed. To be more exact, the area of destruction is as wide as the letters but shifted slightly left.
The yellow structure just above the wide grey stretch running right and left is the 160 CambridgePark Drive project. The wide grey area is the railroad right of way. The thin grey area just above the project is CambridgePark Drive.
The building between 160 CambridgePark Drive and the destroyed area is the next stage of condo development. This is not in the ground. It should be developed with flood storage below it.
To the right of the yellow 160 CambridgePark Drive is a massive parking lot extending to Alewife Brook Parkway and getting very deep toward Fresh Pond Parkway.
Here are photos of the current destruction.
The 2d stage condo construction is to the right of the camera in the destruction photos.
The massive trees in the background used to fill the area of destruction. They, except for token undestroyed trees, will very likely be destroyed if flood storage is not responsibly provided under the nearby properties.
The is the former status of 160 CambridgePark Drive.
Here is the plan just released by the fake “neighborhood association”.
The nearest part of the second stage condo project is shown as the flat building at the top left of this plan. It will be a lot larger than that one building.
160 CambridgePark Drive before construction is at the left. The building next to it is shown in the photo of prior conditions.
Stage 3 condos, 130 CambridgePark Drive, will go in the middle bottom. The massive parking lots to the right of stage 3 will not be touched by this latest building, but you are going very far in the destruction.
The reality is that the developer of 160 and 130, Richard McKinnon, is building flood storage under both buildings.
If Cambridge had a responsible city government and did not have these fake groups running protection for it, McKinnon’s flood storage would be deeper and would be everywhere under the parking lots and under the phase 2 and 3 condos. It is too late for phase 1.
But Cambridge has a very destructive city government which stays in power because of lies put and con games by The Cambridge Machine and its front organizations.
So, instead of responsible protection against flooding, Cambridge, MA, USA is on its way to apparent total destruction of the Alewife reservation with mass killings of animals whose families have resided there for Centuries.
And it is all hidden by a bunch of lies.
Saturday, March 09, 2013
Harvard’s disappearing senior housing, my experience in the immediate area.
1. 2 Mt. Auburn in the context of the latest Harvard empire building.
A. General.
B. Banks / Cowperthwaite development.
C. The Western Avenue / Memorial Drive portion.
D. Summary, impact on 2 Mount Auburn Street.
2. 10 Mount Auburn Street.
A. A responsible victory.
B. The Cambridge Machine’s Immediate Counter.
C. The Cambridge Machine changes the zoning one year later.
3. Corporal Burns Playground.
4. The East Harvard Square (Natalie Ward) Petition.
5. Guffey Park.
6. The La Trémouille petition.
7. The Cambridge Public Library and High School.
8. Summary.
The following is an abbreviated report on my activities in the area of 2 Mount Auburn Street.
1. 2 Mt. Auburn in the context of the latest Harvard empire building.
A. General.
The elderly housing property Harvard University is selling is 2 Mount Auburn Street.
2 Mt. Auburn, as the bird flies, is only a few blocks from the Charles River.
B. Banks / Cowperthwaite development.
2 Mt. Auburn, is one block from one of two of Harvard’s biggest recent developments, construction of Harvard related student and faculty housing of one sort or another over a stretch of about two solid blocks (if you do not count one dead end street). The furthest part of the project going south from 2 Mt. Auburn Street is on Cowperthwaite Street.
That building is less a small block from the Charles River, between the 2d full sized bridge west of the BU Bridge (the Western Avenue bridge) and the third full sized bridge west of the BU Bridge, the Anderson Bridge. The Anderson Bridge connects Harvard Square and Harvard Business School. A few feet from Cowperthwaite Street is a pedestrian bridge physically connecting the B School to Cambridge and Harvard University proper.
The Cowperthwaite Street building is also a very large building, legalized by yet another con game. The Cambridge Machine took control of neighbors who were trying to protect their neighborhood. These poor folks were told that the only way to write a zoning petition is to join in meeting after meeting with the developer and with other enemies of the neighborhood interests. The “required procedures” were made up on the fly in an outrageous abuse of well meaning people.
The resulting zoning petition was written by the Cambridge Development Department with the unexplained fine print which is altogether too normal in such petitions. The zoning which resulted was called the “Neighborhood Petition.” It was so irresponsible that Harvard University, the targeted developer could not swallow it. Harvard wrote a less irresponsible petition and presented it.
The Cowperthwaite Street building contains massive amounts of underground parking, rather clearly intended to include sufficient parking to make conversion of 2 Mt. Auburn from elderly to university affiliate.
The first block south of Mt. Auburn Street contains new Harvard affiliate housing, vaguely neighborhood scale properties, in reality about 50% larger than they should be, but people got conned.
C. The Western Avenue / Memorial Drive portion.
The second part of the recent development is about three blocks to the east of Cowperthaite Street.
A modern building only a few feet from Memorial Drive and a short block west of Western Avenue is most visible part of the related second grouping of the developments. And, within a block of Western Avenue and within the same distance from Memorial Drive and the Charles River are more buildings which are part of this massive project.
Games and dirty tricks were played by the Cambridge Machine to deliver to Harvard these related developments.
D. Summary, impact on 2 Mount Auburn Street.
Fine print stuck in the zoning ordinance during the mid 00's changed Harvard’s parking requirements to allow use of the massive garage under the Cowperthwaite building to support Harvard related people being moved into 2 Mt. Auburn Street. That language put Harvard in a position, as it has in other examples of “protected” housing, to move its people into 2 Mt. Auburn Street as residents moved out.
2. 10 Mount Auburn Street.
A. A responsible victory.
I saved the historical building at the corner of Mt. Auburn Street and Banks Street which is the eastern boundary of the Cowperthwaite - Mt. Auburn properties, 10 Mt. Auburn, two buildings west of 2 Mt. Auburn.
Harvard wanted a modern building on the 10 Mt. Auburn Street corner. I forced the continuation of an historical building on the corner and, perhaps, forced Harvard into building that new affiliate housing in the block nearest Mt. Auburn Street so that it resembled this residential part of Cambridge, even though it was about 50% larger than it should be..
The actual forum was the Rent Control Board. The Rent Control Board found one Rent Controlled unit in this three story historical double three family. The Rent Control Board prohibited destruction of this unit in accordance with provisions of the “Removal Ordinance” which was designed to protect rent controlled units.
B. The Cambridge Machine’s Immediate Counter.
The Cambridge Machine created its own “neighborhood association” over the 10 Mount Auburn project. The architect who created the “neighborhood association” has since become clearly one of the core members of The Cambridge Machine.
He immediately put the 10 Mount Auburn project to a vote in his hand created “neighborhood association”. Harvard’s project lost.
So the architect redrew the boundaries of his “neighborhood association”. One he had his “neighborhood association“ gerrymandered to his perfection, he won the revote.
C. The Cambridge Machine changes the zoning one year later.
The Cambridge Machine, the year after I saved 10 Mount Auburn achieved the first of its long series of very destructive upzonings which they lied were providing greater protections. All the outrages were written by the Cambridge Development Department with members or front organizations of The Cambridge Machine fronting for the City of Cambridge. In this instance, the “Harvard Square Defense Fund” did the dirty work.
The upzoning killed yard requirements at the whim of Cambridge’s City Manager appointees, the Planning Board, The Cambridge Machine gave Harvard its desired monster building attached to 10 Mount Auburn Street. The Cambridge Machine also destroyed a grouping of three historical buildings between the North Side of Mt. Auburn Street and the south side of Arrow Street, the small street to the north.
The monster building that wound up on the north side of Mount Auburn was publicly lied to be a theater. The reality is that half of the first floor has a bar with a dance floor and seating on two sides left and right of the dance floor. Across from the bar is a stage so insignificant that it is necessary to go around the partition which separates the bar / dance / stage area from the area behind the petition to get back stage. You have to walk on the dance floor in the process. Dressing rooms were non existent when I played this small cabaret. The performers changed behind a collection of drapes.
3. Corporal Burns Playground.
Two blocks south of the Cowperthwaite project is a heavily treed playground which extends from Banks Street to the Charles River / Memorial Drive. This is Corporal Burns Playground. It is heavily used by long time residents of the neighborhood gaining access by various routes.
Harvard had once before tried to destroy this playground for its benefit. It tried again using the usual fake affordable housing con. As with 2 Mount Auburn, it promised to build affordable housing which would be protected for a period and then, as with 2 Mount Auburn, the needy could be thrown out and Harvard move in.
The actual organization against the destruction consisted of long time residents, working class type people. The Cambridge Machine, of course, fought for the destruction, sniffing that the working class types were biased against the poor.
I was the only “upper” type of person talking against this outrage. I probably swung the vote in Cambridge City Council because The Cambridge Machine’s total argument amounted to the Cambridge Machine’s bullying the little guy, and class baiting. My opposition proved that class baiting a lie.
4. The East Harvard Square (Natalie Ward) Petition.
A zoning change initiated by a group I advised resulted in the block containing 2 Mt. Auburn Street and the historical building being rezoned like the adjacent neighborhood instead of like Harvard Square proper.
We also downzoned a significant part of the area impacted to a residential zoning best described by looking at the Inn at Harvard. That zoning ran from Harvard Street or a midline below Harvard Street and Mass. Ave. on the north. It was bounded on the east by the residential Remington Street. On the south it was bounded by Arrow Street. Several lots between Arrow and Mt. Auburn wound up with office zoning at a density comparable to the residential.
This is the zoning change which forced the Inn at Harvard in East Harvard Square on Harvard as it is instead of 72% larger and built to the lot line, as Harvard wanted.
An L shape collection of properties a block from Harvard Square proper was rezoned like the neighborhood to protect Harvard fraternities which fit the residential density. The bulk of this is behind Holyoke Center, Harvard’s very much oversized administration building. Harvard calls their fraternities “houses”.
The deal we had reached protected all the side streets between Holyoke Center and almost to the Inn at Harvard by undoing the Cambridge Machine’s upzoning. We protected residential uses and ground floor open space in apposition to the Machine’s beloved retail and destruction of open space and first floor housing.
The person being presented to the world as an environmental saint by the fake Cambridgeport environmental group killed this last provision. He sicced a bunch of robots on my clients and bullied them into totally uncompensated concessions. The key lie: “You have made your deal with the City Council. Now you must negotiate with the Planning Board.”
And Harvard is now selling 2 Mt. Auburn Street.
5. Guffey Park.
As is normal with my zoning petitions, the Natalie Ward petition was opposed by the Cambridge City Manager’s people.
The Natalie Ward petition protected the historical triangle bounded by Massachusetts Avenue, Arrow Street, and Bow Street. That triangle is overwhelming residential with limited retail. We zoned the triangle strictly for residential use.
Less than two week after the City Council overwhelmingly passed the Natalie Ward petition, the Cambridge City Manager destroyed a tiny, humble park at the corner of Massachusetts Avenue and Arrow Street, about a block from 2 Mt. Auburn Street. His purpose was to allow the expansion of a tiny restaurant in that end of the adjacent historical building.
Under the Natalie Ward petition which had just passed, the city council had prohibited the expansion of that restaurant.
I objected. I publicized.
The city manager was forced to apologize to the city council, with a vengeance.
The City Manager put in a replacement park which, to put it mildly, is gold plated. It currently provides ornamentation to the building containing the cabaret which was lied to be a theater building.
The park was named by the only City Councilor to oppose the Natalie Ward Petition after some friends of mine who lived near it, Mildred and Walter Guffey. They were active in the Natalie Ward Petition.
The “Guffey Park” sign has disappeared.
6. The La Trémouille petition.
This zoning petition ran westward on the south side of Massachusetts Avenue to the second building east of 2 Mount Auburn Street. On the north side of Massachusetts Avenue, it ran to the next street to the east of the square on which 2 Mount Auburn Street stands.
The square which 2 Mount Auburn Street bounds on which has Massachusetts Avenue running through it. In reality, proceeding west on Massachusetts Avenue puts you on Mt. Auburn Street. There is a street to the north from the intersection, Trowbridge Street. Between Mt. Auburn Street and Trowbridge Street is the western extension of Massachusetts Avenue, going into Harvard Square. To the south from the intersection is Putnam Avenue, which faces the eastern side of 2 Mt. Auburn Street.
One street to the south of Massachusetts Avenue ending at Putnam Avenue is Green Street. My zoning petition ran to Putnam Avenue on the north side of Green Street.
I have gone into the outrages associated with this petition in great detail elsewhere. As usual, the Cambridge Machine indulged in belligerently irresponsible behavior.
7. The Cambridge Public Library and High School.
Two blocks to the north of Massachusetts Avenue is Broadway. On the north side of Broadway is the Cambridge Public Library and High School.
Probably the first activity of the Cambridge Machine was to destroy the excellent park behind the Public Library for irresponsible High School construction. These hundred plus year old trees were so thick that sunlight could not reach the ground. There were about thirty of them. I obtained a preliminary injunction on appeal against the destruction, next to impossible. We lost the trees because the judge, as a “matter of fact” found the park not to be a park. The key point was an odd piece of outside comment in a trust decision which wiped out key points of trust law without meaningfully evaluating the issue. The Supreme Judicial Court reversed these odd outside points about ten years later. I needed that park finding to appeal the error of trust law.
The key lie in this project was that Cambridge was providing a “park” in the location where a former high school building had stood which should have been rebuilt in place. It was obvious landbanking.
The judge’s opinion bragged about all the saplings being planted in the fake park.
So the City of Cambridge did the obvious. They constructed a new library building in place of a significant part of the “park” and destroyed all those trees.
The person being flaunted as an environmental saint by the fake Cambridgeport environmental group was key in the destruction of the magnificent century old park. When Cambridge stabbed him in the back by destroying his blood money, Cambridge treated him with the disdain appropriate for such a person.
8. Summary.
When I wrote the La Trémouille Petition, I lived a block and a half north of this intersection of Massachusetts Avenue, Mount Auburn Street and Putnam Avenue. I lived just off Trowbridge Street, and about half a block south of the Public Library.
I know the turf and I am deeply concerned about the future of the area and of 2 Mount Auburn Street.
A. General.
B. Banks / Cowperthwaite development.
C. The Western Avenue / Memorial Drive portion.
D. Summary, impact on 2 Mount Auburn Street.
2. 10 Mount Auburn Street.
A. A responsible victory.
B. The Cambridge Machine’s Immediate Counter.
C. The Cambridge Machine changes the zoning one year later.
3. Corporal Burns Playground.
4. The East Harvard Square (Natalie Ward) Petition.
5. Guffey Park.
6. The La Trémouille petition.
7. The Cambridge Public Library and High School.
8. Summary.
The following is an abbreviated report on my activities in the area of 2 Mount Auburn Street.
1. 2 Mt. Auburn in the context of the latest Harvard empire building.
A. General.
The elderly housing property Harvard University is selling is 2 Mount Auburn Street.
2 Mt. Auburn, as the bird flies, is only a few blocks from the Charles River.
B. Banks / Cowperthwaite development.
2 Mt. Auburn, is one block from one of two of Harvard’s biggest recent developments, construction of Harvard related student and faculty housing of one sort or another over a stretch of about two solid blocks (if you do not count one dead end street). The furthest part of the project going south from 2 Mt. Auburn Street is on Cowperthwaite Street.
That building is less a small block from the Charles River, between the 2d full sized bridge west of the BU Bridge (the Western Avenue bridge) and the third full sized bridge west of the BU Bridge, the Anderson Bridge. The Anderson Bridge connects Harvard Square and Harvard Business School. A few feet from Cowperthwaite Street is a pedestrian bridge physically connecting the B School to Cambridge and Harvard University proper.
The Cowperthwaite Street building is also a very large building, legalized by yet another con game. The Cambridge Machine took control of neighbors who were trying to protect their neighborhood. These poor folks were told that the only way to write a zoning petition is to join in meeting after meeting with the developer and with other enemies of the neighborhood interests. The “required procedures” were made up on the fly in an outrageous abuse of well meaning people.
The resulting zoning petition was written by the Cambridge Development Department with the unexplained fine print which is altogether too normal in such petitions. The zoning which resulted was called the “Neighborhood Petition.” It was so irresponsible that Harvard University, the targeted developer could not swallow it. Harvard wrote a less irresponsible petition and presented it.
The Cowperthwaite Street building contains massive amounts of underground parking, rather clearly intended to include sufficient parking to make conversion of 2 Mt. Auburn from elderly to university affiliate.
The first block south of Mt. Auburn Street contains new Harvard affiliate housing, vaguely neighborhood scale properties, in reality about 50% larger than they should be, but people got conned.
C. The Western Avenue / Memorial Drive portion.
The second part of the recent development is about three blocks to the east of Cowperthaite Street.
A modern building only a few feet from Memorial Drive and a short block west of Western Avenue is most visible part of the related second grouping of the developments. And, within a block of Western Avenue and within the same distance from Memorial Drive and the Charles River are more buildings which are part of this massive project.
Games and dirty tricks were played by the Cambridge Machine to deliver to Harvard these related developments.
D. Summary, impact on 2 Mount Auburn Street.
Fine print stuck in the zoning ordinance during the mid 00's changed Harvard’s parking requirements to allow use of the massive garage under the Cowperthwaite building to support Harvard related people being moved into 2 Mt. Auburn Street. That language put Harvard in a position, as it has in other examples of “protected” housing, to move its people into 2 Mt. Auburn Street as residents moved out.
2. 10 Mount Auburn Street.
A. A responsible victory.
I saved the historical building at the corner of Mt. Auburn Street and Banks Street which is the eastern boundary of the Cowperthwaite - Mt. Auburn properties, 10 Mt. Auburn, two buildings west of 2 Mt. Auburn.
Harvard wanted a modern building on the 10 Mt. Auburn Street corner. I forced the continuation of an historical building on the corner and, perhaps, forced Harvard into building that new affiliate housing in the block nearest Mt. Auburn Street so that it resembled this residential part of Cambridge, even though it was about 50% larger than it should be..
The actual forum was the Rent Control Board. The Rent Control Board found one Rent Controlled unit in this three story historical double three family. The Rent Control Board prohibited destruction of this unit in accordance with provisions of the “Removal Ordinance” which was designed to protect rent controlled units.
B. The Cambridge Machine’s Immediate Counter.
The Cambridge Machine created its own “neighborhood association” over the 10 Mount Auburn project. The architect who created the “neighborhood association” has since become clearly one of the core members of The Cambridge Machine.
He immediately put the 10 Mount Auburn project to a vote in his hand created “neighborhood association”. Harvard’s project lost.
So the architect redrew the boundaries of his “neighborhood association”. One he had his “neighborhood association“ gerrymandered to his perfection, he won the revote.
C. The Cambridge Machine changes the zoning one year later.
The Cambridge Machine, the year after I saved 10 Mount Auburn achieved the first of its long series of very destructive upzonings which they lied were providing greater protections. All the outrages were written by the Cambridge Development Department with members or front organizations of The Cambridge Machine fronting for the City of Cambridge. In this instance, the “Harvard Square Defense Fund” did the dirty work.
The upzoning killed yard requirements at the whim of Cambridge’s City Manager appointees, the Planning Board, The Cambridge Machine gave Harvard its desired monster building attached to 10 Mount Auburn Street. The Cambridge Machine also destroyed a grouping of three historical buildings between the North Side of Mt. Auburn Street and the south side of Arrow Street, the small street to the north.
The monster building that wound up on the north side of Mount Auburn was publicly lied to be a theater. The reality is that half of the first floor has a bar with a dance floor and seating on two sides left and right of the dance floor. Across from the bar is a stage so insignificant that it is necessary to go around the partition which separates the bar / dance / stage area from the area behind the petition to get back stage. You have to walk on the dance floor in the process. Dressing rooms were non existent when I played this small cabaret. The performers changed behind a collection of drapes.
3. Corporal Burns Playground.
Two blocks south of the Cowperthwaite project is a heavily treed playground which extends from Banks Street to the Charles River / Memorial Drive. This is Corporal Burns Playground. It is heavily used by long time residents of the neighborhood gaining access by various routes.
Harvard had once before tried to destroy this playground for its benefit. It tried again using the usual fake affordable housing con. As with 2 Mount Auburn, it promised to build affordable housing which would be protected for a period and then, as with 2 Mount Auburn, the needy could be thrown out and Harvard move in.
The actual organization against the destruction consisted of long time residents, working class type people. The Cambridge Machine, of course, fought for the destruction, sniffing that the working class types were biased against the poor.
I was the only “upper” type of person talking against this outrage. I probably swung the vote in Cambridge City Council because The Cambridge Machine’s total argument amounted to the Cambridge Machine’s bullying the little guy, and class baiting. My opposition proved that class baiting a lie.
4. The East Harvard Square (Natalie Ward) Petition.
A zoning change initiated by a group I advised resulted in the block containing 2 Mt. Auburn Street and the historical building being rezoned like the adjacent neighborhood instead of like Harvard Square proper.
We also downzoned a significant part of the area impacted to a residential zoning best described by looking at the Inn at Harvard. That zoning ran from Harvard Street or a midline below Harvard Street and Mass. Ave. on the north. It was bounded on the east by the residential Remington Street. On the south it was bounded by Arrow Street. Several lots between Arrow and Mt. Auburn wound up with office zoning at a density comparable to the residential.
This is the zoning change which forced the Inn at Harvard in East Harvard Square on Harvard as it is instead of 72% larger and built to the lot line, as Harvard wanted.
An L shape collection of properties a block from Harvard Square proper was rezoned like the neighborhood to protect Harvard fraternities which fit the residential density. The bulk of this is behind Holyoke Center, Harvard’s very much oversized administration building. Harvard calls their fraternities “houses”.
The deal we had reached protected all the side streets between Holyoke Center and almost to the Inn at Harvard by undoing the Cambridge Machine’s upzoning. We protected residential uses and ground floor open space in apposition to the Machine’s beloved retail and destruction of open space and first floor housing.
The person being presented to the world as an environmental saint by the fake Cambridgeport environmental group killed this last provision. He sicced a bunch of robots on my clients and bullied them into totally uncompensated concessions. The key lie: “You have made your deal with the City Council. Now you must negotiate with the Planning Board.”
And Harvard is now selling 2 Mt. Auburn Street.
5. Guffey Park.
As is normal with my zoning petitions, the Natalie Ward petition was opposed by the Cambridge City Manager’s people.
The Natalie Ward petition protected the historical triangle bounded by Massachusetts Avenue, Arrow Street, and Bow Street. That triangle is overwhelming residential with limited retail. We zoned the triangle strictly for residential use.
Less than two week after the City Council overwhelmingly passed the Natalie Ward petition, the Cambridge City Manager destroyed a tiny, humble park at the corner of Massachusetts Avenue and Arrow Street, about a block from 2 Mt. Auburn Street. His purpose was to allow the expansion of a tiny restaurant in that end of the adjacent historical building.
Under the Natalie Ward petition which had just passed, the city council had prohibited the expansion of that restaurant.
I objected. I publicized.
The city manager was forced to apologize to the city council, with a vengeance.
The City Manager put in a replacement park which, to put it mildly, is gold plated. It currently provides ornamentation to the building containing the cabaret which was lied to be a theater building.
The park was named by the only City Councilor to oppose the Natalie Ward Petition after some friends of mine who lived near it, Mildred and Walter Guffey. They were active in the Natalie Ward Petition.
The “Guffey Park” sign has disappeared.
6. The La Trémouille petition.
This zoning petition ran westward on the south side of Massachusetts Avenue to the second building east of 2 Mount Auburn Street. On the north side of Massachusetts Avenue, it ran to the next street to the east of the square on which 2 Mount Auburn Street stands.
The square which 2 Mount Auburn Street bounds on which has Massachusetts Avenue running through it. In reality, proceeding west on Massachusetts Avenue puts you on Mt. Auburn Street. There is a street to the north from the intersection, Trowbridge Street. Between Mt. Auburn Street and Trowbridge Street is the western extension of Massachusetts Avenue, going into Harvard Square. To the south from the intersection is Putnam Avenue, which faces the eastern side of 2 Mt. Auburn Street.
One street to the south of Massachusetts Avenue ending at Putnam Avenue is Green Street. My zoning petition ran to Putnam Avenue on the north side of Green Street.
I have gone into the outrages associated with this petition in great detail elsewhere. As usual, the Cambridge Machine indulged in belligerently irresponsible behavior.
7. The Cambridge Public Library and High School.
Two blocks to the north of Massachusetts Avenue is Broadway. On the north side of Broadway is the Cambridge Public Library and High School.
Probably the first activity of the Cambridge Machine was to destroy the excellent park behind the Public Library for irresponsible High School construction. These hundred plus year old trees were so thick that sunlight could not reach the ground. There were about thirty of them. I obtained a preliminary injunction on appeal against the destruction, next to impossible. We lost the trees because the judge, as a “matter of fact” found the park not to be a park. The key point was an odd piece of outside comment in a trust decision which wiped out key points of trust law without meaningfully evaluating the issue. The Supreme Judicial Court reversed these odd outside points about ten years later. I needed that park finding to appeal the error of trust law.
The key lie in this project was that Cambridge was providing a “park” in the location where a former high school building had stood which should have been rebuilt in place. It was obvious landbanking.
The judge’s opinion bragged about all the saplings being planted in the fake park.
So the City of Cambridge did the obvious. They constructed a new library building in place of a significant part of the “park” and destroyed all those trees.
The person being flaunted as an environmental saint by the fake Cambridgeport environmental group was key in the destruction of the magnificent century old park. When Cambridge stabbed him in the back by destroying his blood money, Cambridge treated him with the disdain appropriate for such a person.
8. Summary.
When I wrote the La Trémouille Petition, I lived a block and a half north of this intersection of Massachusetts Avenue, Mount Auburn Street and Putnam Avenue. I lived just off Trowbridge Street, and about half a block south of the Public Library.
I know the turf and I am deeply concerned about the future of the area and of 2 Mount Auburn Street.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)