1. Report.
2. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
1. Report.
This an open letter to people who may have received yet another bizarre communication from the Cambridge Machine in response to my series of reports concerning MassDOT's plans to continue its outrageous destruction on the Cambridge end of the Longfellow Bridge, near Kendall Square.
MassDOT has destroyed an excellent grove of trees above the Red Line at the Cambridge end of the Longfellow Bridge over the Charles River. This is the second bridge to the east of the BU Bridge over the Charles River.
MassDOT has moved one excellent tree from the excellent grove lining the ramp from Memorial Drive to the Longfellow Bridge heading to Boston. MassDOT has promised to destroy and move the rest of that excellent grove starting Monday, July 8, 2013.
When you are dealing with the Cambridge Machine, reality is the rotten stuff rammed through as fast as possible in as corrupt a manner as is necessary.
Reality was the corrupt tactics in the fake vote a meeting or so ago when the Cambridge Machine fraudulently put its organization on record in support of destruction of hundreds of trees between the BU Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge.
That is the secret fine print in the fine print all of which was kept as secret as possible. The less extreme destruction was also kept as secret as possible.
This is normal behavior with the Cambridge Machine.
Thus, it comes as no surprise to see a Cambridge Machine member with a strikingly bad record suddenly get religion and put out a lovely email which tells people to do nothing until after the July 10 meeting concerning the Longfellow Bridge outrage, and which email gives bizarre “reasons” for the destruction which bear no resemblance to anything MassDOT has put out.
The same person loudly called herself an expert on Alewife and told people nothing was going to be destroyed while it was still possible to prevent the wasteful destruction of acres of Alewife.
Reality is as I have described in my reports and the links included therein. The most recent report is at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/07/to-governor-patrick-longfellow-bridge.html.
You want to see the reality which this fraudulent actor claimed would not be done, look at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2012/02/cambridge-pols-destroy-alewife-photo.html. This is what the, oh so pious, writer said would not happen.
I have gone over reality. MassDOT has promised to start further destruction on Monday, July 8, 2013, and to conduct a meeting on July 10, 2013, apparently after the destruction is accomplished. The reasons for the destruction are nonsensical.
I have stood up to too many lies from the Cambridge Machine.
I have stood up to too much corrupt behavior from the Cambridge Machine.
“They would never stoop so low,” is the biggest lie on the Charles River.
You want to believe a woman who was part of that corrupt “vote,” you are way beneath respect.
You want to believe a woman who spouted that outrageous lie to help the destruction of Alewife, you are way beneath respect.
Most people live in reality.
2. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
State environmental people, DES Hotline: ESF.Hotline@state.ma.us.
MassDOT Accelerated Bridges Program: 857-368-8904 or Stephanie.Boundy@state.ma.us
All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.
Cambridge, MA, USA city councilors: Council@cambridgema.gov.
Plus the links provided in the above email.
**********
For people listening to Boston Sierra Club endorsements of environmentally destructive members of the Cambridge City Council, you should be aware that
(1) using the world’s definition of “environmentalism,” there are no environmentally responsible members of the Cambridge City Council, and
(2) there are Cambridge Machine activists very visible and apparently very active in the Boston Sierra Club.
If you are talking to a person associated with the Boston Sierra Club, do a credibility check. Ask if they are familiar with the “Urban Ring” rapid transit proposal. This is a subway proposal designed to link the existing subway spokes. I have been working on it since 1985. Cambridge raised the project in a comment to an environmental Impact Statement in the last month or so.
If the Boston Sierra Club “expert” answers “yes,” that he / she is familiar with the Urban Ring rapid transit proposal, ask how many rail options there are. If the answer is “one,” you are getting the flat out lie put out by the City of Cambridge.
Cambridge’s flat out lie is that, of the TWO rail options, the only one that exists is the environmentally destructive streetcar option which the City of Cambridge supports. This option would be highly destructive to the environment near the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
The reality is that THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS SUBSIDIZED THE OTHER OPTION, the responsible Orange Line / heavy rail option, the Kenmore crossing. The state legislature has subsidized the expansion of Yawkey Station as part of the massive Fenway Park area project which has gotten recent press.
Cambridge’s nonsensical proposal would move Yawkey Station three blocks. The Cambridge proposal would not work without moving Yawkey Station. The Kenmore Crossing uses the now subsidized and being expanded Yawkey Station as part of a brilliant megastation.
You should immediately respond to such nonsense from a Sierra Club “expert” by having nothing more to do with this person. Whether the person is stupid or venal is irrelevant, the person has no credibility and is not worthy of your time.
It is frequently difficult to pin these irresponsible people down in general. The deviant behavior in my test is extreme. They are pious in their demands that, if you are politically correct and pro environment, you have to rubber stamp them. Please do not waste your time arguing about destruction they can wiggle around.
Turn your back on them and walk away fast.
Friday, July 05, 2013
Thursday, July 04, 2013
To Governor Patrick: Longfellow Bridge, Charles River, Cambridge, MA, USA: Destruction Expands, Excrement gets Deeper.
1. Communication.
2. Complaint to the governor.
3. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
1. Communication.
The situation on the Cambridge End of the Longfellow Bridge over the Charles River is getting more and more irresponsible.
The state has wastefully destroyed an excellent grove of trees at the Cambridge end of the bridge above the Red Line subway.
The state has moved the first tree of the excellent grove on the ramp from Memorial Drive to the Longfellow Bridge toward Boston.
The state has announced its first public meeting in Cambridge on the project for July 10, 2013, mentioning none of the destruction in the announcement.
We have exchanged emails with the key planner. The key planner tells us that she has given public notice and that her destructiveness is the responsibility of the public. The public should have kept her from doing this.
So she has proven her lovely words to be so much nonsense by scheduling the first Cambridge meeting on the project for after the completion, it would appear, of the total destruction.
This is a brief summary of many reports on this blog.
2. Complaint to the governor.
July 4, 2013 at 4:25 pm, I left the following message on the governor’s email form.
RE: Longfellow Bridge: Irresponsible Destruction, Silly Excuses.
Governor Patrick:
Your Longfellow Bridge project is strikingly destructive of the environment while rather strongly playing irresponsible games.
The plan needlessly targets for destruction two excellent groves of trees at the Cambridge end of the Longfellow Bridge.
An excellent example of your administrations irresponsible handling of this outrage is the latest announcement for a “public meeting” on the matter, posted at http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/InformationCenter/WeeklyNewsletters/RoadtoReformNewsletter06282013.aspx.
Under this announcement, you are conducting your first “public meeting” in Cambridge, in which both of the irresponsible destruction of groves of trees is occurring. The announcement specifies exactly ZERO instances of tree destruction.
To make things worse, you have already accomplished the wasteful destruction of the excellent grove of trees above the red line subway at the Kendall end of the bridge. But you are only scheduling your first public meeting now for July 10, long after the destruction, destruction which is not mentioned in your announcement of the meeting.
This destruction is totally unnecessary. You can easily cross the median to change Boston bound traffic from the Boston bound direction to the Cambridge bound direction without destruction. You can rearrangement traffic by detours. Instead, you have destroyed irreplaceable trees.
I have reported the destruction at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/first-kendall-square-destruction.html.
You are targeting the magnificent grove of trees on the ramp from Memorial Drive to the Longfellow Bridge heading toward Boston. You already started destruction, as reported by me at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/kendall-longfellow-cambridge-ma-usa.html.
This was a silly transplantation. We have been informed that real destruction will start on July 8. Your FIRST “public hearing” in Cambridge is scheduled for July 10, probably after you have done all the destruction.
You are destroying this excellent, mature grove for a of silly project which seems more amenable to welfare for contractors than for any public need. It is outrageous.
The overwhelming explanation of your organizer for your irresponsible destruction is that somewhere buried in fine print, the public has been informed. Translation: How dare you fail to keep me from doing this terrible thing.
But, as I said, the notice for the way to late FIRST Cambridge “public hearing” makes no mention of either of these totally unnecessary outrages.
And notice does not change irresponsible, wasteful destruction to anything other than irresponsible wasteful destruction.
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts is dealing with very irresponsible people, the City of Cambridge. You are developing the stench of these people.
Shame on your irresponsible destruction. Shame on your irresponsible explanations.
3. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
State environmental people, DES Hotline: ESF.Hotline@state.ma.us.
MassDOT Accelerated Bridges Program: 857-368-8904 or Stephanie.Boundy@state.ma.us
All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.
Cambridge, MA, USA city councilors: Council@cambridgema.gov.
Plus the links provided in the above email.
**********
For people listening to Boston Sierra Club endorsements of environmentally destructive members of the Cambridge City Council, you should be aware that
(1) using the world’s definition of “environmentalism,” there are no environmentally responsible members of the Cambridge City Council, and
(2) there are Cambridge Machine activists very visible and apparently very active in the Boston Sierra Club.
If you are talking to a person associated with the Boston Sierra Club, do a credibility check. Ask if they are familiar with the “Urban Ring” rapid transit proposal. This is a subway proposal designed to link the existing subway spokes. I have been working on it since 1985. Cambridge raised the project in a comment to an environmental Impact Statement in the last month or so.
If the Boston Sierra Club “expert” answers “yes,” that he / she is familiar with the Urban Ring rapid transit proposal, ask how many rail options there are. If the answer is “one,” you are getting the flat out lie put out by the City of Cambridge.
Cambridge’s flat out lie is that, of the TWO rail options, the only one that exists is the environmentally destructive streetcar option which the City of Cambridge supports. This option would be highly destructive to the environment near the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
The reality is that THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS SUBSIDIZED THE OTHER OPTION, the responsible Orange Line / heavy rail option, the Kenmore crossing. The state legislature has subsidized the expansion of Yawkey Station as part of the massive Fenway Park area project which has gotten recent press.
Cambridge’s nonsensical proposal would move Yawkey Station three blocks. The Cambridge proposal would not work without moving Yawkey Station. The Kenmore Crossing uses the now subsidized and being expanded Yawkey Station as part of a brilliant megastation.
You should immediately respond to such nonsense from a Sierra Club “expert” by having nothing more to do with this person. Whether the person is stupid or venal is irrelevant, the person has no credibility and is not worthy of your time.
It is frequently difficult to pin these irresponsible people down in general. The deviant behavior in my test is extreme. They are pious in their demands that, if you are politically correct and pro environment, you have to rubber stamp them. Please do not waste your time arguing about destruction they can wiggle around.
Turn your back on them and walk away fast.
2. Complaint to the governor.
3. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
1. Communication.
The situation on the Cambridge End of the Longfellow Bridge over the Charles River is getting more and more irresponsible.
The state has wastefully destroyed an excellent grove of trees at the Cambridge end of the bridge above the Red Line subway.
The state has moved the first tree of the excellent grove on the ramp from Memorial Drive to the Longfellow Bridge toward Boston.
The state has announced its first public meeting in Cambridge on the project for July 10, 2013, mentioning none of the destruction in the announcement.
We have exchanged emails with the key planner. The key planner tells us that she has given public notice and that her destructiveness is the responsibility of the public. The public should have kept her from doing this.
So she has proven her lovely words to be so much nonsense by scheduling the first Cambridge meeting on the project for after the completion, it would appear, of the total destruction.
This is a brief summary of many reports on this blog.
2. Complaint to the governor.
July 4, 2013 at 4:25 pm, I left the following message on the governor’s email form.
RE: Longfellow Bridge: Irresponsible Destruction, Silly Excuses.
Governor Patrick:
Your Longfellow Bridge project is strikingly destructive of the environment while rather strongly playing irresponsible games.
The plan needlessly targets for destruction two excellent groves of trees at the Cambridge end of the Longfellow Bridge.
An excellent example of your administrations irresponsible handling of this outrage is the latest announcement for a “public meeting” on the matter, posted at http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/InformationCenter/WeeklyNewsletters/RoadtoReformNewsletter06282013.aspx.
Under this announcement, you are conducting your first “public meeting” in Cambridge, in which both of the irresponsible destruction of groves of trees is occurring. The announcement specifies exactly ZERO instances of tree destruction.
To make things worse, you have already accomplished the wasteful destruction of the excellent grove of trees above the red line subway at the Kendall end of the bridge. But you are only scheduling your first public meeting now for July 10, long after the destruction, destruction which is not mentioned in your announcement of the meeting.
This destruction is totally unnecessary. You can easily cross the median to change Boston bound traffic from the Boston bound direction to the Cambridge bound direction without destruction. You can rearrangement traffic by detours. Instead, you have destroyed irreplaceable trees.
I have reported the destruction at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/first-kendall-square-destruction.html.
You are targeting the magnificent grove of trees on the ramp from Memorial Drive to the Longfellow Bridge heading toward Boston. You already started destruction, as reported by me at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/kendall-longfellow-cambridge-ma-usa.html.
This was a silly transplantation. We have been informed that real destruction will start on July 8. Your FIRST “public hearing” in Cambridge is scheduled for July 10, probably after you have done all the destruction.
You are destroying this excellent, mature grove for a of silly project which seems more amenable to welfare for contractors than for any public need. It is outrageous.
The overwhelming explanation of your organizer for your irresponsible destruction is that somewhere buried in fine print, the public has been informed. Translation: How dare you fail to keep me from doing this terrible thing.
But, as I said, the notice for the way to late FIRST Cambridge “public hearing” makes no mention of either of these totally unnecessary outrages.
And notice does not change irresponsible, wasteful destruction to anything other than irresponsible wasteful destruction.
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts is dealing with very irresponsible people, the City of Cambridge. You are developing the stench of these people.
Shame on your irresponsible destruction. Shame on your irresponsible explanations.
3. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
State environmental people, DES Hotline: ESF.Hotline@state.ma.us.
MassDOT Accelerated Bridges Program: 857-368-8904 or Stephanie.Boundy@state.ma.us
All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.
Cambridge, MA, USA city councilors: Council@cambridgema.gov.
Plus the links provided in the above email.
**********
For people listening to Boston Sierra Club endorsements of environmentally destructive members of the Cambridge City Council, you should be aware that
(1) using the world’s definition of “environmentalism,” there are no environmentally responsible members of the Cambridge City Council, and
(2) there are Cambridge Machine activists very visible and apparently very active in the Boston Sierra Club.
If you are talking to a person associated with the Boston Sierra Club, do a credibility check. Ask if they are familiar with the “Urban Ring” rapid transit proposal. This is a subway proposal designed to link the existing subway spokes. I have been working on it since 1985. Cambridge raised the project in a comment to an environmental Impact Statement in the last month or so.
If the Boston Sierra Club “expert” answers “yes,” that he / she is familiar with the Urban Ring rapid transit proposal, ask how many rail options there are. If the answer is “one,” you are getting the flat out lie put out by the City of Cambridge.
Cambridge’s flat out lie is that, of the TWO rail options, the only one that exists is the environmentally destructive streetcar option which the City of Cambridge supports. This option would be highly destructive to the environment near the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
The reality is that THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS SUBSIDIZED THE OTHER OPTION, the responsible Orange Line / heavy rail option, the Kenmore crossing. The state legislature has subsidized the expansion of Yawkey Station as part of the massive Fenway Park area project which has gotten recent press.
Cambridge’s nonsensical proposal would move Yawkey Station three blocks. The Cambridge proposal would not work without moving Yawkey Station. The Kenmore Crossing uses the now subsidized and being expanded Yawkey Station as part of a brilliant megastation.
You should immediately respond to such nonsense from a Sierra Club “expert” by having nothing more to do with this person. Whether the person is stupid or venal is irrelevant, the person has no credibility and is not worthy of your time.
It is frequently difficult to pin these irresponsible people down in general. The deviant behavior in my test is extreme. They are pious in their demands that, if you are politically correct and pro environment, you have to rubber stamp them. Please do not waste your time arguing about destruction they can wiggle around.
Turn your back on them and walk away fast.
Wednesday, July 03, 2013
City Manager Healy Retires — A Response, Cambridge, MA, USA
1. Posting and response.
2. Editor response.
1. Posting and response.
My comment on the retirement of Cambridge, MA, USA City Manager Robert Healy is posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/07/cambridge-ma-usa-city-manager-retires.html.
I appreciate the following response:
**************
Really, Bob, I know you despise the council, but Healy has been the untouchable heart of darkness in Cambridge politics for decades. This is HUGE beyond measure. This is the death of the heart of the rusty old machine, mark my words.
You just made my morning, as a former Cantabridgian.
Profound thanks!
2. Editor response.
My constant harping on the City Council, without mentioning Healy as much, comes from my opinion that Healy has been beneath bothering with.
Over many years, I have achieved more zoning changes than anybody else not employed by the City of Cambridge.
I have used the Zoning Ordinance as a tool for environmental activism by which the ordinary citizen can force a vote of the Cambridge City Council.
It is highly unlikely that Healy’s appointees or his friendly “activists” meaningfully supported any of my initiatives. It is very clear that the people controlling the fake groups have been the biggest problem in the most important initiatives, the three winning petitions which downzoned about 90% of Massachusetts Avenue in Cambridge between Harvard and Central Squares, plus adjoining properties.
A very big difference between my zoning initiatives and those written by the City Manager’s people has been that mine have done what I say they would do.
The current outrages are just an extension of the destruction achieved by the Cambridge City Manager’s team over the years, commonly with the controllers of the fake groups lying about which side they were on.
The Cambridge City Council, supposedly, is responsible to the voters of the City of Cambridge. The dishonesties which the fake groups use to protect this extremely bad government entity from the voters have expanded greatly in recent years, along with the magnitude of the destruction.
The matters on which I have condemned the Cambridge City Council are all controlled by the Cambridge City Council. The final vote comes from the Cambridge City Council. They, and the fake groups, just do not want the voters to know the depth of the misbehavior of the Cambridge City Council.
One of the biggest lies tends to be: that is not Cambridge, it is [insert agency name], but the agencies run everything past the City of Cambridge. The City Council conducts foreign policy, and its minions say people should not discuss the destruction of the City of Cambridge with them?
Just another standard corrupt tactic from an organization which really amounts to corruption since the “activists” lie that they are independent and even worse, lie that they meaningfully represent somebody other than the City of Cambridge.
It is always folly to attempt to psychoanalyze each and every member of the Cambridge Machine. It is irrelevant. The reality is their actions and their unthinking devotion to a really destructive government, whether they think they are doing so or not. That is the purpose of company unions, fool well meaning people into destroying what the well meaning people think they stand for, either through action or inaction.
It is definitely possible, but highly unlikely, that all these destructive individuals are well meaning fools controlled by a very, very tiny number of people in the background. Whether they are knaves or fools is totally irrelevant. What is relevant is the reality of their actions.
The corrupt tactics used by the fake neighborhood association in seeking the expansion of destruction at Magazine Beach, including destruction of hundreds of trees, shows exactly where these fraudulent groups are really coming from. And those corrupt tactics are hardly novel from the fake groups. I could go on and on about the record of the fake groups, but I have been chastised for being too wordy.
2. Editor response.
1. Posting and response.
My comment on the retirement of Cambridge, MA, USA City Manager Robert Healy is posted at http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/07/cambridge-ma-usa-city-manager-retires.html.
I appreciate the following response:
**************
Really, Bob, I know you despise the council, but Healy has been the untouchable heart of darkness in Cambridge politics for decades. This is HUGE beyond measure. This is the death of the heart of the rusty old machine, mark my words.
You just made my morning, as a former Cantabridgian.
Profound thanks!
2. Editor response.
My constant harping on the City Council, without mentioning Healy as much, comes from my opinion that Healy has been beneath bothering with.
Over many years, I have achieved more zoning changes than anybody else not employed by the City of Cambridge.
I have used the Zoning Ordinance as a tool for environmental activism by which the ordinary citizen can force a vote of the Cambridge City Council.
It is highly unlikely that Healy’s appointees or his friendly “activists” meaningfully supported any of my initiatives. It is very clear that the people controlling the fake groups have been the biggest problem in the most important initiatives, the three winning petitions which downzoned about 90% of Massachusetts Avenue in Cambridge between Harvard and Central Squares, plus adjoining properties.
A very big difference between my zoning initiatives and those written by the City Manager’s people has been that mine have done what I say they would do.
The current outrages are just an extension of the destruction achieved by the Cambridge City Manager’s team over the years, commonly with the controllers of the fake groups lying about which side they were on.
The Cambridge City Council, supposedly, is responsible to the voters of the City of Cambridge. The dishonesties which the fake groups use to protect this extremely bad government entity from the voters have expanded greatly in recent years, along with the magnitude of the destruction.
The matters on which I have condemned the Cambridge City Council are all controlled by the Cambridge City Council. The final vote comes from the Cambridge City Council. They, and the fake groups, just do not want the voters to know the depth of the misbehavior of the Cambridge City Council.
One of the biggest lies tends to be: that is not Cambridge, it is [insert agency name], but the agencies run everything past the City of Cambridge. The City Council conducts foreign policy, and its minions say people should not discuss the destruction of the City of Cambridge with them?
Just another standard corrupt tactic from an organization which really amounts to corruption since the “activists” lie that they are independent and even worse, lie that they meaningfully represent somebody other than the City of Cambridge.
It is always folly to attempt to psychoanalyze each and every member of the Cambridge Machine. It is irrelevant. The reality is their actions and their unthinking devotion to a really destructive government, whether they think they are doing so or not. That is the purpose of company unions, fool well meaning people into destroying what the well meaning people think they stand for, either through action or inaction.
It is definitely possible, but highly unlikely, that all these destructive individuals are well meaning fools controlled by a very, very tiny number of people in the background. Whether they are knaves or fools is totally irrelevant. What is relevant is the reality of their actions.
The corrupt tactics used by the fake neighborhood association in seeking the expansion of destruction at Magazine Beach, including destruction of hundreds of trees, shows exactly where these fraudulent groups are really coming from. And those corrupt tactics are hardly novel from the fake groups. I could go on and on about the record of the fake groups, but I have been chastised for being too wordy.
Tuesday, July 02, 2013
More Details on the “Protection” Provided by the State in the Longfellow Bridge Destruction, Charles River, Cambridge, MA, USA.
1. Introduction.
2. Mishka email.
3. State reply.
4. Mishka’s Analysis.
5. Editor, public announcement.
6. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
1. Introduction.
We have done a lot on the environmental outrage which is part of the Longfellow Bridge project.
The following exchange of emails and Mishka’s analysis are pretty self explanatory.
2. Mishka email.
Sent Friday, June 28, 2013, 1:44 pm
***********
To: Boundy, Stephanie (DOT)
Subject: more on Trees near Longfellow Bridge
Dear Stephanie,
I looked more into the situation with trees near Longfellow Bridge.
With regard to the trees scheduled for removal after July 4, I believe that the project should hold a public hearing under Chapter 87 Section 3, both for legal reasons and for better public relations.
The legal side is that Chapter 87 Section 3, in particular, requires to hold a meeting such that a notice of such a meeting among other things is placed "upon the tree at least seven days before such hearing". I don't believe any notices of the possibly relevant meetings were posted on the affected trees yet, so I think there is a strong chance that the project is not yet in compliance with the law in this sense.
The public relations aspect of this is more involved.
On one hand people do notice and appreciate your efforts to protect a number of trees in the area.
So this is a positive side, and that's very good.
On the other hand, there is significant public discontent because of the two factors. One, people who attended a number of those meetings say that the subject of the trees was not raised at all. So they are ready to challenge the project's assertion that "the tree protection and removal plan has been presented at numerous public meetings and hearings during the previous phase of the project".
I am sure that the paperwork was filed, but whether this translated to a discussion available to the public and open to the public input specifically on the trees is another matter. That's why the law requires a separate meeting, with the notice posted on the affected trees.
This is specifically to avoid the situation, when there is an appearance of a discussion, but not enough chance for the actually meaningful discussion.
The second factor complicating the public relation aspect of this is the removal of the pines on June 19, 2013 just north of the MBTA's Kendall station portal.
It is true that the required meetings on that removal did take place, so from the legal viewpoint everything was done correctly in that case. But looking back at that event, the removal does not look reasonable. The officially stated reason is that "the trees must be removed to allow the contractor to install jersey barriers across the median to shift traffic traveling to Boston (on the upstream side of the bridge) to the downstream side". What is difficult to understand is why the jersey barriers location could not have been moved 20 meters to the west (north) from the portal along the Main Street. Moving it just 20 meters would seem to make no difference for the traffic, but would have preserved the trees. If there were deep reasons preventing this solution, those reasons were not comminucated well.
This second factor makes people want to scrutinize the asserion that "every effort has been made to minimize the number of impacted trees through careful design". This assertion might be correct, but people currently believe this was not the case for June 19 tree removal, and they would like to have a chance to scrutinize whether this assertion (of minimal impact) is correct in this case.
So, to summarize the public relation aspect, I believe that without a Chapter 87 Section 3 hearing which should be held somewhere in Cambridge before the actual tree removal, and should be advertized by, among other things, posting notices on the affected trees themselves at least seven days beforesuch hearings, the chance of negative publicity and bad press is quite high at this point.
In conclusion I'd like to say that I appreciate your efforts at tree protection, and please let me know, if a Chapter 87 Section 3 hearing would be scheduled in this case.
3. State reply.
July 2, 2013, 4:29 pm
I am following up on your inquiry regarding the Longfellow Bridge Rehabilitation Project. I have confirmed with MassDOT and DCR Counsel that public shade trees along DCR boulevards are not subject to M.G.L. c. 87 since they do not fall under the definition of "public shade trees", thus not requiring the oversight of the local tree warden or a local public hearing prior to removal.
As indicated in my prior email, the tree protection and removal plan has been presented at numerous public meetings and hearings during the previous phase of the project, including general public information meetings and hearings for the Environmental Assessment, Environmental Notification Form and Notices of Intent. MassDOT has also coordinated extensively with the Department of Conservation and Recreation in preparing the plan and understands the value residents and visitors place on trees. Every effort has been made to minimize the number of impacted trees through careful design. A landscape architect and a certified arborist are part of the project team.
If you need any additional information, please do not hesitate to reach out to MassDOT.
Best,
Stephanie
4. Mishka’s Analysis.
July 2, 2013, 4:45 pm
Subject: These people pretend that these are not "public shade trees"
This is their standard trick, to claim that trees which from a layman viewpoint seem to obviously fall under the definition of public shade trees somehow are not public shade trees.
If one just reads the law, they seem to be quite in the wrong.
5. Editor, public announcement.
I previously gave a link to the announcement, at long last, of the first “public hearing” on this destruction in Cambridge where all the destruction is taking place.
Their public announcement is posted at http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/InformationCenter/WeeklyNewsletters/RoadtoReformNewsletter06282013.aspx.
With all the lovely words about “public” announcements of destruction, there is exactly ZERO statement of destruction of trees in this announcement.
6. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
State environmental people, DES Hotline: ESF.Hotline@state.ma.us.
MassDOT Accelerated Bridges Program: 857-368-8904 or Stephanie.Boundy@state.ma.us
All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.
Cambridge, MA, USA city councilors: Council@cambridgema.gov.
**********
For people listening to Boston Sierra Club endorsements of environmentally destructive members of the Cambridge City Council, you should be aware that
(1) using the world’s definition of “environmentalism,” there are no environmentally responsible members of the Cambridge City Council, and
(2) there are Cambridge Machine activists very visible and apparently very active in the Boston Sierra Club.
If you are talking to a person associated with the Boston Sierra Club, do a credibility check. Ask if they are familiar with the “Urban Ring” rapid transit proposal. This is a subway proposal designed to link the existing subway spokes. I have been working on it since 1985. Cambridge raised the project in a comment to an environmental Impact Statement in the last month or so.
If the Boston Sierra Club “expert” answers “yes,” that he / she is familiar with the Urban Ring rapid transit proposal, ask how many rail options there are. If the answer is “one,” you are getting the flat out lie put out by the City of Cambridge.
Cambridge’s flat out lie is that, of the TWO rail options, the only one that exists is the environmentally destructive streetcar option which the City of Cambridge supports. This option would be highly destructive to the environment near the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
The reality is that THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS SUBSIDIZED THE OTHER OPTION, the responsible Orange Line / heavy rail option, the Kenmore crossing. The state legislature has subsidized the expansion of Yawkey Station as part of the massive Fenway Park area project which has gotten recent press.
Cambridge’s nonsensical proposal would move Yawkey Station three blocks. The Cambridge proposal would not work without moving Yawkey Station. The Kenmore Crossing uses the now subsidized and being expanded Yawkey Station as part of a brilliant megastation.
You should immediately respond to such nonsense from a Sierra Club “expert” by having nothing more to do with this person. Whether the person is stupid or venal is irrelevant, the person has no credibility and is not worthy of your time.
It is frequently difficult to pin these irresponsible people down in general. The deviant behavior in my test is extreme. They are pious in their demands that, if you are politically correct and pro environment, you have to rubber stamp them. Please do not waste your time arguing about destruction they can wiggle around.
Turn your back on them and walk away fast.
2. Mishka email.
3. State reply.
4. Mishka’s Analysis.
5. Editor, public announcement.
6. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
1. Introduction.
We have done a lot on the environmental outrage which is part of the Longfellow Bridge project.
The following exchange of emails and Mishka’s analysis are pretty self explanatory.
2. Mishka email.
Sent Friday, June 28, 2013, 1:44 pm
***********
To: Boundy, Stephanie (DOT)
Subject: more on Trees near Longfellow Bridge
Dear Stephanie,
I looked more into the situation with trees near Longfellow Bridge.
With regard to the trees scheduled for removal after July 4, I believe that the project should hold a public hearing under Chapter 87 Section 3, both for legal reasons and for better public relations.
The legal side is that Chapter 87 Section 3, in particular, requires to hold a meeting such that a notice of such a meeting among other things is placed "upon the tree at least seven days before such hearing". I don't believe any notices of the possibly relevant meetings were posted on the affected trees yet, so I think there is a strong chance that the project is not yet in compliance with the law in this sense.
The public relations aspect of this is more involved.
On one hand people do notice and appreciate your efforts to protect a number of trees in the area.
So this is a positive side, and that's very good.
On the other hand, there is significant public discontent because of the two factors. One, people who attended a number of those meetings say that the subject of the trees was not raised at all. So they are ready to challenge the project's assertion that "the tree protection and removal plan has been presented at numerous public meetings and hearings during the previous phase of the project".
I am sure that the paperwork was filed, but whether this translated to a discussion available to the public and open to the public input specifically on the trees is another matter. That's why the law requires a separate meeting, with the notice posted on the affected trees.
This is specifically to avoid the situation, when there is an appearance of a discussion, but not enough chance for the actually meaningful discussion.
The second factor complicating the public relation aspect of this is the removal of the pines on June 19, 2013 just north of the MBTA's Kendall station portal.
It is true that the required meetings on that removal did take place, so from the legal viewpoint everything was done correctly in that case. But looking back at that event, the removal does not look reasonable. The officially stated reason is that "the trees must be removed to allow the contractor to install jersey barriers across the median to shift traffic traveling to Boston (on the upstream side of the bridge) to the downstream side". What is difficult to understand is why the jersey barriers location could not have been moved 20 meters to the west (north) from the portal along the Main Street. Moving it just 20 meters would seem to make no difference for the traffic, but would have preserved the trees. If there were deep reasons preventing this solution, those reasons were not comminucated well.
This second factor makes people want to scrutinize the asserion that "every effort has been made to minimize the number of impacted trees through careful design". This assertion might be correct, but people currently believe this was not the case for June 19 tree removal, and they would like to have a chance to scrutinize whether this assertion (of minimal impact) is correct in this case.
So, to summarize the public relation aspect, I believe that without a Chapter 87 Section 3 hearing which should be held somewhere in Cambridge before the actual tree removal, and should be advertized by, among other things, posting notices on the affected trees themselves at least seven days beforesuch hearings, the chance of negative publicity and bad press is quite high at this point.
In conclusion I'd like to say that I appreciate your efforts at tree protection, and please let me know, if a Chapter 87 Section 3 hearing would be scheduled in this case.
3. State reply.
July 2, 2013, 4:29 pm
I am following up on your inquiry regarding the Longfellow Bridge Rehabilitation Project. I have confirmed with MassDOT and DCR Counsel that public shade trees along DCR boulevards are not subject to M.G.L. c. 87 since they do not fall under the definition of "public shade trees", thus not requiring the oversight of the local tree warden or a local public hearing prior to removal.
As indicated in my prior email, the tree protection and removal plan has been presented at numerous public meetings and hearings during the previous phase of the project, including general public information meetings and hearings for the Environmental Assessment, Environmental Notification Form and Notices of Intent. MassDOT has also coordinated extensively with the Department of Conservation and Recreation in preparing the plan and understands the value residents and visitors place on trees. Every effort has been made to minimize the number of impacted trees through careful design. A landscape architect and a certified arborist are part of the project team.
If you need any additional information, please do not hesitate to reach out to MassDOT.
Best,
Stephanie
4. Mishka’s Analysis.
July 2, 2013, 4:45 pm
Subject: These people pretend that these are not "public shade trees"
This is their standard trick, to claim that trees which from a layman viewpoint seem to obviously fall under the definition of public shade trees somehow are not public shade trees.
If one just reads the law, they seem to be quite in the wrong.
5. Editor, public announcement.
I previously gave a link to the announcement, at long last, of the first “public hearing” on this destruction in Cambridge where all the destruction is taking place.
Their public announcement is posted at http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/InformationCenter/WeeklyNewsletters/RoadtoReformNewsletter06282013.aspx.
With all the lovely words about “public” announcements of destruction, there is exactly ZERO statement of destruction of trees in this announcement.
6. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
State environmental people, DES Hotline: ESF.Hotline@state.ma.us.
MassDOT Accelerated Bridges Program: 857-368-8904 or Stephanie.Boundy@state.ma.us
All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.
Cambridge, MA, USA city councilors: Council@cambridgema.gov.
**********
For people listening to Boston Sierra Club endorsements of environmentally destructive members of the Cambridge City Council, you should be aware that
(1) using the world’s definition of “environmentalism,” there are no environmentally responsible members of the Cambridge City Council, and
(2) there are Cambridge Machine activists very visible and apparently very active in the Boston Sierra Club.
If you are talking to a person associated with the Boston Sierra Club, do a credibility check. Ask if they are familiar with the “Urban Ring” rapid transit proposal. This is a subway proposal designed to link the existing subway spokes. I have been working on it since 1985. Cambridge raised the project in a comment to an environmental Impact Statement in the last month or so.
If the Boston Sierra Club “expert” answers “yes,” that he / she is familiar with the Urban Ring rapid transit proposal, ask how many rail options there are. If the answer is “one,” you are getting the flat out lie put out by the City of Cambridge.
Cambridge’s flat out lie is that, of the TWO rail options, the only one that exists is the environmentally destructive streetcar option which the City of Cambridge supports. This option would be highly destructive to the environment near the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
The reality is that THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS SUBSIDIZED THE OTHER OPTION, the responsible Orange Line / heavy rail option, the Kenmore crossing. The state legislature has subsidized the expansion of Yawkey Station as part of the massive Fenway Park area project which has gotten recent press.
Cambridge’s nonsensical proposal would move Yawkey Station three blocks. The Cambridge proposal would not work without moving Yawkey Station. The Kenmore Crossing uses the now subsidized and being expanded Yawkey Station as part of a brilliant megastation.
You should immediately respond to such nonsense from a Sierra Club “expert” by having nothing more to do with this person. Whether the person is stupid or venal is irrelevant, the person has no credibility and is not worthy of your time.
It is frequently difficult to pin these irresponsible people down in general. The deviant behavior in my test is extreme. They are pious in their demands that, if you are politically correct and pro environment, you have to rubber stamp them. Please do not waste your time arguing about destruction they can wiggle around.
Turn your back on them and walk away fast.
Cambridge, MA, USA City Manager Retires — So What!
1. City Manager Healy Reported Retiring.
2. So What! One defining moment.
3. The fake group system.
4. Will the new City Manager be better?
1. City Manager Healy Reported Retiring.
Boston.com / Boston Globe announces that Cambridge City Manager Robert Healy was retiring last Sunday, June 30, 2013. http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2013/06/28/after-years-cambridge-city-manager-tenure-nears-end/MMEzJl8ga5liZgROTpy9XI/story.html.
2. So What! One defining moment.
Malvina Monteiro, Malvina Monteiro, Malvina Monteiro.
The Monteiro v. Cambridge case involved judge, jury and appeals court sending a very clear message to the Cambridge City Council, and, as is normal in the City of Cambridge, the Cambridge City Council simply “could not understand” the obvious.
Healy destroyed the life of the head of his Police Review Board, Malvina Monteiro, a black Cape Verdean woman. Judge, jury and appeals court say he did that in retaliation because she filed a civil rights / women’s complaint. I will not go over the analysis yet again.
The clear communication of judge, jury and appeals court was extreme malfeasance in office. They gave the city council clear direction and clear justification to fire the Cambridge City Manager without golden parachute and possibly without pension.
Exactly zero members voted for or made any public attempt whatsoever to meaningfully implement the court orders.
The total non action of the Cambridge City Council on firing the Cambridge City Manager after the issue of firing had been strongly established in decisions up to the appeals court says everything.
The very terrible situation in the City of Cambridge, MA is very much to the pleasure of an extremely bad city council. I realize that 1½ members were not around for the real problem, but you had a city manager who has been declared a pariah up to the appeals court. Even the subsequent members share the filth. In any case, the votes to destroy on the Cambridge Common and irresponsible bike highway routes say all that needs to be said.
3. The fake group system.
The fake groups with very real connections to the City Manager’s people date back to the original City Manager in this ongoing and expanding environmental outrage. The Cambridge City Manager wanted to destroy 23 or so hundred plus year old trees as part of a totally unneeded rearrangement of the city high school. The timing of rebuilding was such that the rebuilding could have occurred in place on top of buildings being replaced.
Dah Dah, a new group announced itself, declared itself above everything and fought for the destruction. Leaders of that group, during its existence, have indulged in corrupt behavior comparable with the recent outrage of the fake group in Cambridgeport.
Over the 40+ years, the biggest change in the fake groups has been the faces and possible questions as to whether new leaders are responsible individuals.
The first thing the Sullivan - Healy regime did was to destroy those excellent trees.
The last achievements of Healy were
A. Massive destruction and animal kills at Alewife which seem to be ready for a very great expansion, with two fake groups leading the way as good company unions by telling folks to look at everything else.
B. The vote of all nine irresponsible city councilors to destroy 22 excellent trees on the Cambridge Common, most because the block the view.
C. The ongoing destruction at Kendall / Longfellow.
D. The ongoing outrages on the Charles River with the corrupt behavior of one or two fake groups.
E. Plans for two bizarre bike highways with massive destruction on the Charles, destruction, of course, kept as secret as possible, but “not negotiable.”
4. Will the new City Manager be better?
The replacement was key in all the destruction where the City of Cambridge has been visible. And I have not mentioned the ongoing destruction at Fresh Pond.
The stench at Kendall / Longfellow is just one example of where an outrage is something which simply fits a very bad city government which always has its filthy hands in the ongoings. It is inconceivable that this wasteful destruction is independent of the City of Cambridge.
2. So What! One defining moment.
3. The fake group system.
4. Will the new City Manager be better?
1. City Manager Healy Reported Retiring.
Boston.com / Boston Globe announces that Cambridge City Manager Robert Healy was retiring last Sunday, June 30, 2013. http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2013/06/28/after-years-cambridge-city-manager-tenure-nears-end/MMEzJl8ga5liZgROTpy9XI/story.html.
2. So What! One defining moment.
Malvina Monteiro, Malvina Monteiro, Malvina Monteiro.
The Monteiro v. Cambridge case involved judge, jury and appeals court sending a very clear message to the Cambridge City Council, and, as is normal in the City of Cambridge, the Cambridge City Council simply “could not understand” the obvious.
Healy destroyed the life of the head of his Police Review Board, Malvina Monteiro, a black Cape Verdean woman. Judge, jury and appeals court say he did that in retaliation because she filed a civil rights / women’s complaint. I will not go over the analysis yet again.
The clear communication of judge, jury and appeals court was extreme malfeasance in office. They gave the city council clear direction and clear justification to fire the Cambridge City Manager without golden parachute and possibly without pension.
Exactly zero members voted for or made any public attempt whatsoever to meaningfully implement the court orders.
The total non action of the Cambridge City Council on firing the Cambridge City Manager after the issue of firing had been strongly established in decisions up to the appeals court says everything.
The very terrible situation in the City of Cambridge, MA is very much to the pleasure of an extremely bad city council. I realize that 1½ members were not around for the real problem, but you had a city manager who has been declared a pariah up to the appeals court. Even the subsequent members share the filth. In any case, the votes to destroy on the Cambridge Common and irresponsible bike highway routes say all that needs to be said.
3. The fake group system.
The fake groups with very real connections to the City Manager’s people date back to the original City Manager in this ongoing and expanding environmental outrage. The Cambridge City Manager wanted to destroy 23 or so hundred plus year old trees as part of a totally unneeded rearrangement of the city high school. The timing of rebuilding was such that the rebuilding could have occurred in place on top of buildings being replaced.
Dah Dah, a new group announced itself, declared itself above everything and fought for the destruction. Leaders of that group, during its existence, have indulged in corrupt behavior comparable with the recent outrage of the fake group in Cambridgeport.
Over the 40+ years, the biggest change in the fake groups has been the faces and possible questions as to whether new leaders are responsible individuals.
The first thing the Sullivan - Healy regime did was to destroy those excellent trees.
The last achievements of Healy were
A. Massive destruction and animal kills at Alewife which seem to be ready for a very great expansion, with two fake groups leading the way as good company unions by telling folks to look at everything else.
B. The vote of all nine irresponsible city councilors to destroy 22 excellent trees on the Cambridge Common, most because the block the view.
C. The ongoing destruction at Kendall / Longfellow.
D. The ongoing outrages on the Charles River with the corrupt behavior of one or two fake groups.
E. Plans for two bizarre bike highways with massive destruction on the Charles, destruction, of course, kept as secret as possible, but “not negotiable.”
4. Will the new City Manager be better?
The replacement was key in all the destruction where the City of Cambridge has been visible. And I have not mentioned the ongoing destruction at Fresh Pond.
The stench at Kendall / Longfellow is just one example of where an outrage is something which simply fits a very bad city government which always has its filthy hands in the ongoings. It is inconceivable that this wasteful destruction is independent of the City of Cambridge.
Monday, July 01, 2013
The Destroyed Nesting Area a Week After the Lazy, Destructive Workers Leave, Charles River, Cambridge, MA, USA
1. Report.
2. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
1. Report.
I visited the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese on June 30, 2013, and took the following pictures.
The first shot is coming down the staircase which Boston University illegally built, which would have been extremely convenient for parking next to Memorial Drive.
They are under the large tree between the staircase and the railroad tracks. The only other time I have seen the gaggle all gathered under this tree was when the heavy equipment for the BU Bridge work started destroying things.
They were probably keeping out of the heat in a location that had been barred to them for months.
The destroyed vegetation has been removed along with more vegetation of value. The Department of Conservation and Reservation is accelerating its attacks on the animals of the Charles River, in general and this formerly lush, vibrant habitat in particular. Even more horrifying than the destroyed ground vegetation is all that crushed stone dumped in an area which used to be, at least, clean dirt, created by prior irresponsible workers.
The last shot is of a barrier put in place to keep them from crossing the Memorial Drive on ramp, now functioning as Memorial Drive, to get to that luscious grass. So now they are even being starved from eating that little bit of grass.
The real rotters are the liars who claim to love Magazine Beach and tell people to ignore all the very terrible problems, but look at their lovely bathhouse. Destructive hypocrites are the very major environmental problem.
These destructive hypocrites are following in the foot steps of the destructive people fighting for the destruction of the Alewife reservation while lying that they are defending that irreplaceable area.
Both groups lie that Cambridge, MA, USA, its friends in government and its front people are worthy of respect.
2. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
State environmental people, DES Hotline: ESF.Hotline@state.ma.us.
MassDOT Accelerated Bridges Program: 857-368-8904 or Stephanie.Boundy@state.ma.us
All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.
Cambridge, MA, USA city councilors: Council@cambridgema.gov.
**********
For people listening to Boston Sierra Club endorsements of environmentally destructive members of the Cambridge City Council, you should be aware that
(1) using the world’s definition of “environmentalism,” there are no environmentally responsible members of the Cambridge City Council, and
(2) there are Cambridge Machine activists very visible and apparently very active in the Boston Sierra Club.
If you are talking to a person associated with the Boston Sierra Club, do a credibility check. Ask if they are familiar with the “Urban Ring” rapid transit proposal. This is a subway proposal designed to link the existing subway spokes. I have been working on it since 1985. Cambridge raised the project in a comment to an environmental Impact Statement in the last month or so.
If the Boston Sierra Club “expert” answers “yes,” that he / she is familiar with the Urban Ring rapid transit proposal, ask how many rail options there are. If the answer is “one,” you are getting the flat out lie put out by the City of Cambridge.
Cambridge’s flat out lie is that, of the TWO rail options, the only one that exists is the environmentally destructive streetcar option which the City of Cambridge supports. This option would be highly destructive to the environment near the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
The reality is that THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS SUBSIDIZED THE OTHER OPTION, the responsible Orange Line / heavy rail option, the Kenmore crossing. The state legislature has subsidized the expansion of Yawkey Station as part of the massive Fenway Park area project which has gotten recent press.
Cambridge’s nonsensical proposal would move Yawkey Station three blocks. The Cambridge proposal would not work without moving Yawkey Station. The Kenmore Crossing uses the now subsidized and being expanded Yawkey Station as part of a brilliant megastation.
You should immediately respond to such nonsense from a Sierra Club “expert” by having nothing more to do with this person. Whether the person is stupid or venal is irrelevant, the person has no credibility and is not worthy of your time.
It is frequently difficult to pin these irresponsible people down in general. The deviant behavior in my test is extreme. They are pious in their demands that, if you are politically correct and pro environment, you have to rubber stamp them. Please do not waste your time arguing about destruction they can wiggle around.
Turn your back on them and walk away fast.
2. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
1. Report.
I visited the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese on June 30, 2013, and took the following pictures.
The first shot is coming down the staircase which Boston University illegally built, which would have been extremely convenient for parking next to Memorial Drive.
They are under the large tree between the staircase and the railroad tracks. The only other time I have seen the gaggle all gathered under this tree was when the heavy equipment for the BU Bridge work started destroying things.
They were probably keeping out of the heat in a location that had been barred to them for months.
The destroyed vegetation has been removed along with more vegetation of value. The Department of Conservation and Reservation is accelerating its attacks on the animals of the Charles River, in general and this formerly lush, vibrant habitat in particular. Even more horrifying than the destroyed ground vegetation is all that crushed stone dumped in an area which used to be, at least, clean dirt, created by prior irresponsible workers.
The last shot is of a barrier put in place to keep them from crossing the Memorial Drive on ramp, now functioning as Memorial Drive, to get to that luscious grass. So now they are even being starved from eating that little bit of grass.
The real rotters are the liars who claim to love Magazine Beach and tell people to ignore all the very terrible problems, but look at their lovely bathhouse. Destructive hypocrites are the very major environmental problem.
These destructive hypocrites are following in the foot steps of the destructive people fighting for the destruction of the Alewife reservation while lying that they are defending that irreplaceable area.
Both groups lie that Cambridge, MA, USA, its friends in government and its front people are worthy of respect.
2. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
State environmental people, DES Hotline: ESF.Hotline@state.ma.us.
MassDOT Accelerated Bridges Program: 857-368-8904 or Stephanie.Boundy@state.ma.us
All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.
Cambridge, MA, USA city councilors: Council@cambridgema.gov.
**********
For people listening to Boston Sierra Club endorsements of environmentally destructive members of the Cambridge City Council, you should be aware that
(1) using the world’s definition of “environmentalism,” there are no environmentally responsible members of the Cambridge City Council, and
(2) there are Cambridge Machine activists very visible and apparently very active in the Boston Sierra Club.
If you are talking to a person associated with the Boston Sierra Club, do a credibility check. Ask if they are familiar with the “Urban Ring” rapid transit proposal. This is a subway proposal designed to link the existing subway spokes. I have been working on it since 1985. Cambridge raised the project in a comment to an environmental Impact Statement in the last month or so.
If the Boston Sierra Club “expert” answers “yes,” that he / she is familiar with the Urban Ring rapid transit proposal, ask how many rail options there are. If the answer is “one,” you are getting the flat out lie put out by the City of Cambridge.
Cambridge’s flat out lie is that, of the TWO rail options, the only one that exists is the environmentally destructive streetcar option which the City of Cambridge supports. This option would be highly destructive to the environment near the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
The reality is that THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS SUBSIDIZED THE OTHER OPTION, the responsible Orange Line / heavy rail option, the Kenmore crossing. The state legislature has subsidized the expansion of Yawkey Station as part of the massive Fenway Park area project which has gotten recent press.
Cambridge’s nonsensical proposal would move Yawkey Station three blocks. The Cambridge proposal would not work without moving Yawkey Station. The Kenmore Crossing uses the now subsidized and being expanded Yawkey Station as part of a brilliant megastation.
You should immediately respond to such nonsense from a Sierra Club “expert” by having nothing more to do with this person. Whether the person is stupid or venal is irrelevant, the person has no credibility and is not worthy of your time.
It is frequently difficult to pin these irresponsible people down in general. The deviant behavior in my test is extreme. They are pious in their demands that, if you are politically correct and pro environment, you have to rubber stamp them. Please do not waste your time arguing about destruction they can wiggle around.
Turn your back on them and walk away fast.
Friday, June 28, 2013
Reality and the irresponsible Kendall / Longfellow Destruction, Charles River, Cambridge / Boston, MA
1. Report.
2. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
3. Postscript - Prior communication from Bureaucrat.
1. Report.
The state is finally publicizing its Longfellow Bridge project in Cambridge, MA. They are finally holding a meeting on this project in Cambridge.
The outrageous, wasteful, and unnecessary destruction is ongoing and the meeting will probably be held after the worst of this totally unnecessary outrage. Prior meetings were conducted in Boston. The outrageous, wasteful and unnecessary destruction is occurring in Cambridge.
The notice may be read at: http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/InformationCenter/WeeklyNewsletters/RoadtoReformNewsletter06282013.aspx.
First of all, publicizing irresponsible plans do not relieve the irresponsible person of responsibility for irresponsible behavior.
“Shame on you, you should have kept me from doing this terrible thing” is what we got out of the key bureaucrat.
Nevertheless, this announcement should be carefully read and it should be noted that exactly ZERO destruction of trees is presented. This NON-ANNOUNCEMENT dramatically contrasts with the tone of the communication which this blog has now repeated twice.
But the bureaucrats are dealing in Cambridge, MA, a City with a belligerently irresponsible government and a carefully controlled Cambridge Machine running around lying about the piety of the city.
Business as usual in Cambridge, MA, USA.
2. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
State environmental people, DES Hotline: ESF.Hotline@state.ma.us.
MassDOT Accelerated Bridges Program: 857-368-8904 or Stephanie.Boundy@state.ma.us
All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.
Cambridge, MA, USA city councilors: Council@cambridgema.gov.
**********
For people listening to Boston Sierra Club endorsements of environmentally destructive members of the Cambridge City Council, you should be aware that
(1) using the world’s definition of “environmentalism,” there are no environmentally responsible members of the Cambridge City Council, and
(2) there are Cambridge Machine activists very visible and apparently very active in the Boston Sierra Club.
If you are talking to a person associated with the Boston Sierra Club, do a credibility check. Ask if they are familiar with the “Urban Ring” rapid transit proposal. This is a subway proposal designed to link the existing subway spokes. I have been working on it since 1985. Cambridge raised the project in a comment to an environmental Impact Statement in the last month or so.
If the Boston Sierra Club “expert” answers “yes,” that he / she is familiar with the Urban Ring rapid transit proposal, ask how many rail options there are. If the answer is “one,” you are getting the flat out lie put out by the City of Cambridge.
Cambridge’s flat out lie is that, of the TWO rail options, the only one that exists is the environmentally destructive streetcar option which the City of Cambridge supports. This option would be highly destructive to the environment near the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
The reality is that THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS SUBSIDIZED THE OTHER OPTION, the responsible Orange Line / heavy rail option, the Kenmore crossing. The state legislature has subsidized the expansion of Yawkey Station as part of the massive Fenway Park area project which has gotten recent press.
Cambridge’s nonsensical proposal would move Yawkey Station three blocks. The Cambridge proposal would not work without moving Yawkey Station. The Kenmore Crossing uses the now subsidized and being expanded Yawkey Station as part of a brilliant megastation.
You should immediately respond to such nonsense from a Sierra Club “expert” by having nothing more to do with this person. Whether the person is stupid or venal is irrelevant, the person has no credibility and is not worthy of your time.
It is frequently difficult to pin these irresponsible people down in general. The deviant behavior in my test is extreme. They are pious in their demands that, if you are politically correct and pro environment, you have to rubber stamp them. Please do not waste your time arguing about destruction they can wiggle around.
Turn your back on them and walk away fast.
3. Postscript - Prior communication from Bureaucrat.
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/longfellow-bridge-project-on-cambridge.html.
2. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
3. Postscript - Prior communication from Bureaucrat.
1. Report.
The state is finally publicizing its Longfellow Bridge project in Cambridge, MA. They are finally holding a meeting on this project in Cambridge.
The outrageous, wasteful, and unnecessary destruction is ongoing and the meeting will probably be held after the worst of this totally unnecessary outrage. Prior meetings were conducted in Boston. The outrageous, wasteful and unnecessary destruction is occurring in Cambridge.
The notice may be read at: http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/InformationCenter/WeeklyNewsletters/RoadtoReformNewsletter06282013.aspx.
First of all, publicizing irresponsible plans do not relieve the irresponsible person of responsibility for irresponsible behavior.
“Shame on you, you should have kept me from doing this terrible thing” is what we got out of the key bureaucrat.
Nevertheless, this announcement should be carefully read and it should be noted that exactly ZERO destruction of trees is presented. This NON-ANNOUNCEMENT dramatically contrasts with the tone of the communication which this blog has now repeated twice.
But the bureaucrats are dealing in Cambridge, MA, a City with a belligerently irresponsible government and a carefully controlled Cambridge Machine running around lying about the piety of the city.
Business as usual in Cambridge, MA, USA.
2. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
State environmental people, DES Hotline: ESF.Hotline@state.ma.us.
MassDOT Accelerated Bridges Program: 857-368-8904 or Stephanie.Boundy@state.ma.us
All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.
Cambridge, MA, USA city councilors: Council@cambridgema.gov.
**********
For people listening to Boston Sierra Club endorsements of environmentally destructive members of the Cambridge City Council, you should be aware that
(1) using the world’s definition of “environmentalism,” there are no environmentally responsible members of the Cambridge City Council, and
(2) there are Cambridge Machine activists very visible and apparently very active in the Boston Sierra Club.
If you are talking to a person associated with the Boston Sierra Club, do a credibility check. Ask if they are familiar with the “Urban Ring” rapid transit proposal. This is a subway proposal designed to link the existing subway spokes. I have been working on it since 1985. Cambridge raised the project in a comment to an environmental Impact Statement in the last month or so.
If the Boston Sierra Club “expert” answers “yes,” that he / she is familiar with the Urban Ring rapid transit proposal, ask how many rail options there are. If the answer is “one,” you are getting the flat out lie put out by the City of Cambridge.
Cambridge’s flat out lie is that, of the TWO rail options, the only one that exists is the environmentally destructive streetcar option which the City of Cambridge supports. This option would be highly destructive to the environment near the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
The reality is that THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS SUBSIDIZED THE OTHER OPTION, the responsible Orange Line / heavy rail option, the Kenmore crossing. The state legislature has subsidized the expansion of Yawkey Station as part of the massive Fenway Park area project which has gotten recent press.
Cambridge’s nonsensical proposal would move Yawkey Station three blocks. The Cambridge proposal would not work without moving Yawkey Station. The Kenmore Crossing uses the now subsidized and being expanded Yawkey Station as part of a brilliant megastation.
You should immediately respond to such nonsense from a Sierra Club “expert” by having nothing more to do with this person. Whether the person is stupid or venal is irrelevant, the person has no credibility and is not worthy of your time.
It is frequently difficult to pin these irresponsible people down in general. The deviant behavior in my test is extreme. They are pious in their demands that, if you are politically correct and pro environment, you have to rubber stamp them. Please do not waste your time arguing about destruction they can wiggle around.
Turn your back on them and walk away fast.
3. Postscript - Prior communication from Bureaucrat.
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/longfellow-bridge-project-on-cambridge.html.
Thursday, June 27, 2013
Longfellow - Kendall Destruction, Cambridge, MA, USA, May 23, 2013, ongoing, Cambridge Chronicle
1. Introduction.
2. May 23, 2013.
3. June 27, 2013.
4. Mishka.
5. Cambridge Chronicle.
1. Introduction.
Mishka has forwarded me seven photos of the destruction zone on the ramp from Memorial Drive to the Longfellow Bridge heading south.
I returned to Cambridge to go to law school in 1970. I think I recall admiring this grove then.
The first group of photos are of trees slated for imminent destruction (red paint), May 23, 2013.
The second group of photos are from yesterday, June 27, 2013.
I have recently done some good documentation of the corruption of one of the Cambridge Machine’s most currently destructive fake groups. This destruction is part of their filth. That is the purpose of Company Union organizations. Then there are the hundreds of trees their corrupt practices have fought to destroy between here and the BU Bridge, the 22 trees targeted on the Cambridge Common, the acres of needless destruction accomplished at Alewife, soon to be expanded to possible total destruction.
The rottenness in Cambridge, MA, USA, is the Cambridge Machine in combination with a strikingly bad city government with all lying about reality and telling well intentioned folks to chase their tails.
State or local is irrelevant. The rottenness in the City of Cambridge is omnipresent.
2. May 23, 2013.
All slated for prompt destruction (red paint)
3. June 27, 2013.
4. Mishka.
In the early May we noted that a number of trees near the Cambridge
side of the Longfellow Bridge were marked with red paint and
yellow and green tape.
Later in May we contacted the bridge project officials, who indicated
that
"he yellow ribbon with a paint mark on the tree means that the tree
is removed in phase 1. The yellow ribbon with no paint mark means
the tree will be removed in a later phase. The trees with green ribbon
are trees that are going to be transplanted."
As a follow-up I wrote the following e-mail to the project
representative on May 30.
***
I have a follow-up question: are there any plans to hold
a public meeting or a Chapter 87 hearing in connection
with those trees?
I think a number of people who live or work in that area
are concerned about tree loss. So if people representing
the Longfellow Bridge project share the details and
reasons which make this tree loss unavoidable, it would be
very helpful.
***
Unfortunately, the bridge project so far did not respond
positively to this request. Instead they've send an e-mail
which contained the tree removal plans as an attachment, but
only had the following as an explanation:
"The tree protection and removal plan has been presented at numerous
public meetings and hearings during the previous phase of the project,
including general public information meetings and hearings for the
Environmental Assessment, Environmental Notification Form and Notices of
Intent. MassDOT has also coordinated extensively with the Department of
Conservation and Recreation in preparing the plan and understands the
value residents and visitors place on trees. Every effort has been made to
minimize the number of impacted trees through careful design. A landscape
architect and a certified arborist are part of the project team.
MassDOT's Design Build team White-Skanska-Consigli is transplanting eight
trees on the Boston side of the bridge and nine on the Cambridge side.
These trees are marked with green ribbon. Transplanting will be completed
by the end of June. Tree removal will begin after the 4th of July. Trees
that will be removed during Phase 1 of the project are marked with a
yellow ribbon and paint. Trees that will be removed in a later phase are
marked with a yellow ribbon only. Please refer to the Tree Protection and
Removal Plan for details."
That's not good enough. First of all, some people who were present
during a number of those meetings say the issue of the trees never
was discussed (perhaps it was discussed at some other meetings, but
there is no way to verify that). It's not enough that some plans are
on file somewhere.
Then there is a clear requirement of Chapter 87 Section 3 of
Massachusetts General Laws to hold a meeting such that a notice
of such a meeting among other things is placed "upon the tree at least
seven days before such hearing". In this case we see no evidence
that a notice of any of these meetings was posted on the affected trees.
I think the project should present its plans for public scrutiny
in a manner prescribed by law, rather than making an attempt to
avoid extra public scrutiny.
********************************************
I did not mention the June 19 fiasco here, but it is certainly
relevant in that it gives people extra grounds not to fully trust
the statement that "Every effort has been made to
minimize the number of impacted trees through careful design".
We certainly appreciate the efforts the project is doing to
protect many trees. At the same time, the removal of
trees which happened on June 19 is very difficult to justify,
and increases the desire of people to scrutinize the situation
further in this case.
5. Cambridge Chronicle.
Part of the rotten situation in Cambridge is the conversion of the Cambridge Chronicle from a house rag which allows the other side to speak to a house rag which censors responsible comment which disagrees with the nonsense put out by the City of Cambridge and the Cambridge Machine.
A few days ago, I sent out a letter to the Cambridge Chronicle praising the Executive Director of the Cambridge Conservation Commission for responsible behavior at the Destroyed Nesting Area, standing up to state destructiveness.
To no surprise, that praise did not make it into today’s Cambridge Chronicle.
She did print a long editorial publicizing a irrelevant change in process. You publicize process, that gives the impression you are concerned with reality.
No printing of reality.
2. May 23, 2013.
3. June 27, 2013.
4. Mishka.
5. Cambridge Chronicle.
1. Introduction.
Mishka has forwarded me seven photos of the destruction zone on the ramp from Memorial Drive to the Longfellow Bridge heading south.
I returned to Cambridge to go to law school in 1970. I think I recall admiring this grove then.
The first group of photos are of trees slated for imminent destruction (red paint), May 23, 2013.
The second group of photos are from yesterday, June 27, 2013.
I have recently done some good documentation of the corruption of one of the Cambridge Machine’s most currently destructive fake groups. This destruction is part of their filth. That is the purpose of Company Union organizations. Then there are the hundreds of trees their corrupt practices have fought to destroy between here and the BU Bridge, the 22 trees targeted on the Cambridge Common, the acres of needless destruction accomplished at Alewife, soon to be expanded to possible total destruction.
The rottenness in Cambridge, MA, USA, is the Cambridge Machine in combination with a strikingly bad city government with all lying about reality and telling well intentioned folks to chase their tails.
State or local is irrelevant. The rottenness in the City of Cambridge is omnipresent.
2. May 23, 2013.
All slated for prompt destruction (red paint)
3. June 27, 2013.
4. Mishka.
In the early May we noted that a number of trees near the Cambridge
side of the Longfellow Bridge were marked with red paint and
yellow and green tape.
Later in May we contacted the bridge project officials, who indicated
that
"he yellow ribbon with a paint mark on the tree means that the tree
is removed in phase 1. The yellow ribbon with no paint mark means
the tree will be removed in a later phase. The trees with green ribbon
are trees that are going to be transplanted."
As a follow-up I wrote the following e-mail to the project
representative on May 30.
***
I have a follow-up question: are there any plans to hold
a public meeting or a Chapter 87 hearing in connection
with those trees?
I think a number of people who live or work in that area
are concerned about tree loss. So if people representing
the Longfellow Bridge project share the details and
reasons which make this tree loss unavoidable, it would be
very helpful.
***
Unfortunately, the bridge project so far did not respond
positively to this request. Instead they've send an e-mail
which contained the tree removal plans as an attachment, but
only had the following as an explanation:
"The tree protection and removal plan has been presented at numerous
public meetings and hearings during the previous phase of the project,
including general public information meetings and hearings for the
Environmental Assessment, Environmental Notification Form and Notices of
Intent. MassDOT has also coordinated extensively with the Department of
Conservation and Recreation in preparing the plan and understands the
value residents and visitors place on trees. Every effort has been made to
minimize the number of impacted trees through careful design. A landscape
architect and a certified arborist are part of the project team.
MassDOT's Design Build team White-Skanska-Consigli is transplanting eight
trees on the Boston side of the bridge and nine on the Cambridge side.
These trees are marked with green ribbon. Transplanting will be completed
by the end of June. Tree removal will begin after the 4th of July. Trees
that will be removed during Phase 1 of the project are marked with a
yellow ribbon and paint. Trees that will be removed in a later phase are
marked with a yellow ribbon only. Please refer to the Tree Protection and
Removal Plan for details."
That's not good enough. First of all, some people who were present
during a number of those meetings say the issue of the trees never
was discussed (perhaps it was discussed at some other meetings, but
there is no way to verify that). It's not enough that some plans are
on file somewhere.
Then there is a clear requirement of Chapter 87 Section 3 of
Massachusetts General Laws to hold a meeting such that a notice
of such a meeting among other things is placed "upon the tree at least
seven days before such hearing". In this case we see no evidence
that a notice of any of these meetings was posted on the affected trees.
I think the project should present its plans for public scrutiny
in a manner prescribed by law, rather than making an attempt to
avoid extra public scrutiny.
********************************************
I did not mention the June 19 fiasco here, but it is certainly
relevant in that it gives people extra grounds not to fully trust
the statement that "Every effort has been made to
minimize the number of impacted trees through careful design".
We certainly appreciate the efforts the project is doing to
protect many trees. At the same time, the removal of
trees which happened on June 19 is very difficult to justify,
and increases the desire of people to scrutinize the situation
further in this case.
5. Cambridge Chronicle.
Part of the rotten situation in Cambridge is the conversion of the Cambridge Chronicle from a house rag which allows the other side to speak to a house rag which censors responsible comment which disagrees with the nonsense put out by the City of Cambridge and the Cambridge Machine.
A few days ago, I sent out a letter to the Cambridge Chronicle praising the Executive Director of the Cambridge Conservation Commission for responsible behavior at the Destroyed Nesting Area, standing up to state destructiveness.
To no surprise, that praise did not make it into today’s Cambridge Chronicle.
She did print a long editorial publicizing a irrelevant change in process. You publicize process, that gives the impression you are concerned with reality.
No printing of reality.
Wednesday, June 26, 2013
Kendall / Longfellow, Cambridge, MA, USA: Attack on the Prime Grove Starts
1. Report:
2. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
1. Report:
Mishka reports on June 25, 2013:
I don't believe any trees were actually transplanted today. Photo of the
preparations is attached.
[Tree Destruction 3]
For our most recent prior report, with many links, please see: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/longfellow-bridge-project-on-cambridge.html.
2. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
State environmental people, DES Hotline: ESF.Hotline@state.ma.us.
MassDOT Accelerated Bridges Program: 857-368-8904 or Stephanie.Boundy@state.ma.us
All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.
Cambridge, MA, USA city councilors: Council@cambridgema.gov.
**********
For people listening to Boston Sierra Club endorsements of environmentally destructive members of the Cambridge City Council, you should be aware that
(1) using the world’s definition of “environmentalism,” there are no environmentally responsible members of the Cambridge City Council, and
(2) there are Cambridge Machine activists very visible and apparently very active in the Boston Sierra Club.
If you are talking to a person associated with the Boston Sierra Club, do a credibility check. Ask if they are familiar with the “Urban Ring” rapid transit proposal. This is a subway proposal designed to link the existing subway spokes. I have been working on it since 1985. Cambridge raised the project in a comment to an environmental Impact Statement in the last month or so.
If the Boston Sierra Club “expert” answers “yes,” that he / she is familiar with the Urban Ring rapid transit proposal, ask how many rail options there are. If the answer is “one,” you are getting the flat out lie put out by the City of Cambridge.
Cambridge’s flat out lie is that, of the TWO rail options, the only one that exists is the environmentally destructive streetcar option which the City of Cambridge supports. This option would be highly destructive to the environment near the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
The reality is that THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS SUBSIDIZED THE OTHER OPTION, the responsible Orange Line / heavy rail option, the Kenmore crossing. The state legislature has subsidized the expansion of Yawkey Station as part of the massive Fenway Park area project which has gotten recent press.
Cambridge’s nonsensical proposal would move Yawkey Station three blocks. The Cambridge proposal would not work without moving Yawkey Station. The Kenmore Crossing uses the now subsidized and being expanded Yawkey Station as part of a brilliant megastation.
You should immediately respond to such nonsense from a Sierra Club “expert” by having nothing more to do with this person. Whether the person is stupid or venal is irrelevant, the person has no credibility and is not worthy of your time.
It is frequently difficult to pin these irresponsible people down in general. The deviant behavior in my test is extreme. They are pious in their demands that, if you are politically correct and pro environment, you have to rubber stamp them. Please do not waste your time arguing about destruction they can wiggle around.
Turn your back on them and walk away fast.
2. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
1. Report:
Mishka reports on June 25, 2013:
I don't believe any trees were actually transplanted today. Photo of the
preparations is attached.
[Tree Destruction 3]
For our most recent prior report, with many links, please see: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/longfellow-bridge-project-on-cambridge.html.
2. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
State environmental people, DES Hotline: ESF.Hotline@state.ma.us.
MassDOT Accelerated Bridges Program: 857-368-8904 or Stephanie.Boundy@state.ma.us
All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.
Cambridge, MA, USA city councilors: Council@cambridgema.gov.
**********
For people listening to Boston Sierra Club endorsements of environmentally destructive members of the Cambridge City Council, you should be aware that
(1) using the world’s definition of “environmentalism,” there are no environmentally responsible members of the Cambridge City Council, and
(2) there are Cambridge Machine activists very visible and apparently very active in the Boston Sierra Club.
If you are talking to a person associated with the Boston Sierra Club, do a credibility check. Ask if they are familiar with the “Urban Ring” rapid transit proposal. This is a subway proposal designed to link the existing subway spokes. I have been working on it since 1985. Cambridge raised the project in a comment to an environmental Impact Statement in the last month or so.
If the Boston Sierra Club “expert” answers “yes,” that he / she is familiar with the Urban Ring rapid transit proposal, ask how many rail options there are. If the answer is “one,” you are getting the flat out lie put out by the City of Cambridge.
Cambridge’s flat out lie is that, of the TWO rail options, the only one that exists is the environmentally destructive streetcar option which the City of Cambridge supports. This option would be highly destructive to the environment near the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
The reality is that THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS SUBSIDIZED THE OTHER OPTION, the responsible Orange Line / heavy rail option, the Kenmore crossing. The state legislature has subsidized the expansion of Yawkey Station as part of the massive Fenway Park area project which has gotten recent press.
Cambridge’s nonsensical proposal would move Yawkey Station three blocks. The Cambridge proposal would not work without moving Yawkey Station. The Kenmore Crossing uses the now subsidized and being expanded Yawkey Station as part of a brilliant megastation.
You should immediately respond to such nonsense from a Sierra Club “expert” by having nothing more to do with this person. Whether the person is stupid or venal is irrelevant, the person has no credibility and is not worthy of your time.
It is frequently difficult to pin these irresponsible people down in general. The deviant behavior in my test is extreme. They are pious in their demands that, if you are politically correct and pro environment, you have to rubber stamp them. Please do not waste your time arguing about destruction they can wiggle around.
Turn your back on them and walk away fast.
Tuesday, June 25, 2013
Longfellow Bridge Project on the Cambridge side: MassDOT speaks on its actions supporting global warming.
1. Analysis.
A. General.
B. Specific.
(1) Trees already destroyed.
(2) Trees slated to be destroyed.
2. Stephanie Bundy, 6/24/13.
3. Prior Reports.
4. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
1. Analysis.
A. General.
Below I am reprinting a formal response received by Misha from the Massachusetts Department of Transportation concerning the irresponsible destruction of trees as part of the Longfellow Bridge project.
I am printing this response substantially in total in spite of the uniform censorship of meaningful environmental comment in the City of Cambridge. I may change my mind and just present a summary. But right now, I am printing substantially the entire thing.
I am printing this response because I respect MassDOT. My gut feel is that MassDOT has been dealing with the City of Cambridge and the rottenness of the City of Cambridge has rubbed off.
The short of the answer from MassDOT translates as:
“Why did not YOU keep me from doing this terrible thing?”
This is MassDOT’s decision. MassDOT is responsible for an irresponsible decision whether or not the public has objected to MassDOT’s irresponsible decision and whether or not MassDOT has kept its actions secret.
Complying with Environmental Notification Form requirements and providing public announcement buried in fine print telling about things being destroyed does not make the destruction right.
This is MassDOT’s project. It is not the duty of meaningfully concerned people to read the fine print by which the project is analyzed. It is MassDOT’s duty to perform in a responsible manner.
There are still excellent trees which have not been destroyed and which should not be destroyed.
B. Specific.
(1) Trees already destroyed.
I have provided you photos of the irresponsible destruction of the grove of trees above the subway in Kendall Square just before the subway emerges from the ground.
MassDOT has destroyed those excellent trees for convenience.
The alternative is five years of detours, five years of detours which the belligerently irresponsible City of Cambridge would have fought. Cambridge destroys trees on mass and it gets away with it because it has a massive machine lying about it and a city newspaper printing its con games as if they were reality and suppressing reality even after it has photographic evidence and even after, in the Alewife project, the key, and false, defender has published a letter in the Chronicle bragging about the destruction.
Whether this irresponsible and totally needless destruction was disclosed in advance is irrelevant. It was needless, wasteful, and yet another fight for the destruction of our world through helping out global warming.
(2) Trees slated to be destroyed.
I have twice published photos of the excellent trees on the ramp from Memorial Drive to the Longfellow Bridge.
I specifically recall public discussions of drainage correction being accomplished, and the story changed as the matter progressed.
During the preliminary meeting I attended, the creation of a natural drainage system on the Boston end of the Longfellow Bridge was announced with no meaningful explanation of what they were draining. I publicly responded to the lack of explanation with the interpretation that they were draining off poisons being dumped by the Department of Conservation and Recreation on the nearby Ebersol Fields, and that they were taking this action to neutralize the belligerently irresponsible DCR.
More recently, MassDOT explained that the Boston drainage was intended to drain off the Longfellow Bridge.
At no time was I made aware that there was a similar project on the Cambridge side and I most definitely was not told of the destruction of excellent trees as part of this project, either on the Cambridge side or on the Boston side.
Only with Misha making me aware of the destruction pending on the Cambridge side was I made aware of this outrage. I hope the drainage system on the Boston side is not equally destructive.
It is flatly and simply outrageous to casually destroy excellent trees as part of this week’s new approach to the environment.
That is called global warming.
Good intentions and misguided theory are just as destructive as honest belligerent chain sawing. Our world cannot tell the difference.
2. Stephanie Bundy, 6/24/13.
As part of the rehabilitation of the historic Longfellow Bridge and construction of a new Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant pedestrian bridge across Storrow Drive to the Esplanade, several trees must be removed or transplanted.
The tree protection and removal plan has been presented at numerous public meetings and hearings during the previous phase of the project, including general public information meetings and hearings for the Environmental Assessment, Environmental Notification Form and Notices of Intent. MassDOT has also coordinated extensively with the Department of Conservation and Recreation in preparing the plan and understands the value residents and visitors place on trees. Every effort has been made to minimize the number of impacted trees through careful design. A landscape architect and a certified arborist are part of the project team.
MassDOT's Design Build team White-Skanska-Consigli is transplanting eight trees on the Boston side of the bridge and nine on the Cambridge side. These trees are marked with green ribbon. Transplanting will be completed by the end of June. Tree removal will begin after the 4th of July. Trees that will be removed during Phase 1 of the project are marked with a yellow ribbon and paint. Trees that will be removed in a later phase are marked with a yellow ribbon only. Please refer to the Tree Protection and Removal Plan for details.
3. Prior Reports.
A. May 24, 2013: Large Number of Excellent Trees [Marked for Imminent for Destruction Near Longfellow Bridge, Charles River, Cambridge, MA, USA - Approvals obtained by lying through omission.
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/05/large-number-of-excellent-trees.html
B. May 30, 2013: Longfellow / Kendall, Cambridge, MA, USA - Update on Tree Destruction.
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/05/longfellow-kendall-cambridge-ma-usa.html.
C. June 8, 2013: Longfellow / Kendall / Memorial Drive New Photos, WBZ.
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/longfellow-kendall-memorial-drive-new.html.
D. June 18, 2013: Kendall Destruction Starts Wednesday June 18. Cambridge, MA, USA.
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/kendall-destruction-starts-wednesday.html.
E. June 19, 2013: Objections sent on Kendall Destruction, Cambridge, MA, USA.
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/objections-sent-on-kendall-destruction.html.
F. June 19, 2013: First Kendall Square Destruction Accomplished, Cambridge, MA, USA.
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/first-kendall-square-destruction.html.
4. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
State environmental people, DES Hotline: ESF.Hotline@state.ma.us.
MassDOT Accelerated Bridges Program: 857-368-8904 or Stephanie.Boundy@state.ma.us
All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.
Cambridge, MA, USA city councilors: Council@cambridgema.gov.
**********
For people listening to Boston Sierra Club endorsements of environmentally destructive members of the Cambridge City Council, you should be aware that
(1) using the world’s definition of “environmentalism,” there are no environmentally responsible members of the Cambridge City Council, and
(2) there are Cambridge Machine activists very visible and apparently very active in the Boston Sierra Club.
If you are talking to a person associated with the Boston Sierra Club, do a credibility check. Ask if they are familiar with the “Urban Ring” rapid transit proposal. This is a subway proposal designed to link the existing subway spokes. I have been working on it since 1985. Cambridge raised the project in a comment to an environmental Impact Statement in the last month or so.
If the Boston Sierra Club “expert” answers “yes,” that he / she is familiar with the Urban Ring rapid transit proposal, ask how many rail options there are. If the answer is “one,” you are getting the flat out lie put out by the City of Cambridge.
Cambridge’s flat out lie is that, of the TWO rail options, the only one that exists is the environmentally destructive streetcar option which the City of Cambridge supports. This option would be highly destructive to the environment near the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
The reality is that THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS SUBSIDIZED THE OTHER OPTION, the responsible Orange Line / heavy rail option, the Kenmore crossing. The state legislature has subsidized the expansion of Yawkey Station as part of the massive Fenway Park area project which has gotten recent press.
Cambridge’s nonsensical proposal would move Yawkey Station three blocks. The Cambridge proposal would not work without moving Yawkey Station. The Kenmore Crossing uses the now subsidized and being expanded Yawkey Station as part of a brilliant megastation.
You should immediately respond to such nonsense from a Sierra Club “expert” by having nothing more to do with this person. Whether the person is stupid or venal is irrelevant, the person has no credibility and is not worthy of your time.
It is frequently difficult to pin these irresponsible people down in general. The deviant behavior in my test is extreme. They are pious in their demands that, if you are politically correct and pro environment, you have to rubber stamp them. Please do not waste your time arguing about destruction they can wiggle around.
Turn your back on them and walk away fast.
A. General.
B. Specific.
(1) Trees already destroyed.
(2) Trees slated to be destroyed.
2. Stephanie Bundy, 6/24/13.
3. Prior Reports.
4. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
1. Analysis.
A. General.
Below I am reprinting a formal response received by Misha from the Massachusetts Department of Transportation concerning the irresponsible destruction of trees as part of the Longfellow Bridge project.
I am printing this response substantially in total in spite of the uniform censorship of meaningful environmental comment in the City of Cambridge. I may change my mind and just present a summary. But right now, I am printing substantially the entire thing.
I am printing this response because I respect MassDOT. My gut feel is that MassDOT has been dealing with the City of Cambridge and the rottenness of the City of Cambridge has rubbed off.
The short of the answer from MassDOT translates as:
“Why did not YOU keep me from doing this terrible thing?”
This is MassDOT’s decision. MassDOT is responsible for an irresponsible decision whether or not the public has objected to MassDOT’s irresponsible decision and whether or not MassDOT has kept its actions secret.
Complying with Environmental Notification Form requirements and providing public announcement buried in fine print telling about things being destroyed does not make the destruction right.
This is MassDOT’s project. It is not the duty of meaningfully concerned people to read the fine print by which the project is analyzed. It is MassDOT’s duty to perform in a responsible manner.
There are still excellent trees which have not been destroyed and which should not be destroyed.
B. Specific.
(1) Trees already destroyed.
I have provided you photos of the irresponsible destruction of the grove of trees above the subway in Kendall Square just before the subway emerges from the ground.
MassDOT has destroyed those excellent trees for convenience.
The alternative is five years of detours, five years of detours which the belligerently irresponsible City of Cambridge would have fought. Cambridge destroys trees on mass and it gets away with it because it has a massive machine lying about it and a city newspaper printing its con games as if they were reality and suppressing reality even after it has photographic evidence and even after, in the Alewife project, the key, and false, defender has published a letter in the Chronicle bragging about the destruction.
Whether this irresponsible and totally needless destruction was disclosed in advance is irrelevant. It was needless, wasteful, and yet another fight for the destruction of our world through helping out global warming.
(2) Trees slated to be destroyed.
I have twice published photos of the excellent trees on the ramp from Memorial Drive to the Longfellow Bridge.
I specifically recall public discussions of drainage correction being accomplished, and the story changed as the matter progressed.
During the preliminary meeting I attended, the creation of a natural drainage system on the Boston end of the Longfellow Bridge was announced with no meaningful explanation of what they were draining. I publicly responded to the lack of explanation with the interpretation that they were draining off poisons being dumped by the Department of Conservation and Recreation on the nearby Ebersol Fields, and that they were taking this action to neutralize the belligerently irresponsible DCR.
More recently, MassDOT explained that the Boston drainage was intended to drain off the Longfellow Bridge.
At no time was I made aware that there was a similar project on the Cambridge side and I most definitely was not told of the destruction of excellent trees as part of this project, either on the Cambridge side or on the Boston side.
Only with Misha making me aware of the destruction pending on the Cambridge side was I made aware of this outrage. I hope the drainage system on the Boston side is not equally destructive.
It is flatly and simply outrageous to casually destroy excellent trees as part of this week’s new approach to the environment.
That is called global warming.
Good intentions and misguided theory are just as destructive as honest belligerent chain sawing. Our world cannot tell the difference.
2. Stephanie Bundy, 6/24/13.
As part of the rehabilitation of the historic Longfellow Bridge and construction of a new Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant pedestrian bridge across Storrow Drive to the Esplanade, several trees must be removed or transplanted.
The tree protection and removal plan has been presented at numerous public meetings and hearings during the previous phase of the project, including general public information meetings and hearings for the Environmental Assessment, Environmental Notification Form and Notices of Intent. MassDOT has also coordinated extensively with the Department of Conservation and Recreation in preparing the plan and understands the value residents and visitors place on trees. Every effort has been made to minimize the number of impacted trees through careful design. A landscape architect and a certified arborist are part of the project team.
MassDOT's Design Build team White-Skanska-Consigli is transplanting eight trees on the Boston side of the bridge and nine on the Cambridge side. These trees are marked with green ribbon. Transplanting will be completed by the end of June. Tree removal will begin after the 4th of July. Trees that will be removed during Phase 1 of the project are marked with a yellow ribbon and paint. Trees that will be removed in a later phase are marked with a yellow ribbon only. Please refer to the Tree Protection and Removal Plan for details.
3. Prior Reports.
A. May 24, 2013: Large Number of Excellent Trees [Marked for Imminent for Destruction Near Longfellow Bridge, Charles River, Cambridge, MA, USA - Approvals obtained by lying through omission.
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/05/large-number-of-excellent-trees.html
B. May 30, 2013: Longfellow / Kendall, Cambridge, MA, USA - Update on Tree Destruction.
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/05/longfellow-kendall-cambridge-ma-usa.html.
C. June 8, 2013: Longfellow / Kendall / Memorial Drive New Photos, WBZ.
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/longfellow-kendall-memorial-drive-new.html.
D. June 18, 2013: Kendall Destruction Starts Wednesday June 18. Cambridge, MA, USA.
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/kendall-destruction-starts-wednesday.html.
E. June 19, 2013: Objections sent on Kendall Destruction, Cambridge, MA, USA.
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/objections-sent-on-kendall-destruction.html.
F. June 19, 2013: First Kendall Square Destruction Accomplished, Cambridge, MA, USA.
http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/first-kendall-square-destruction.html.
4. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
State environmental people, DES Hotline: ESF.Hotline@state.ma.us.
MassDOT Accelerated Bridges Program: 857-368-8904 or Stephanie.Boundy@state.ma.us
All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.
Cambridge, MA, USA city councilors: Council@cambridgema.gov.
**********
For people listening to Boston Sierra Club endorsements of environmentally destructive members of the Cambridge City Council, you should be aware that
(1) using the world’s definition of “environmentalism,” there are no environmentally responsible members of the Cambridge City Council, and
(2) there are Cambridge Machine activists very visible and apparently very active in the Boston Sierra Club.
If you are talking to a person associated with the Boston Sierra Club, do a credibility check. Ask if they are familiar with the “Urban Ring” rapid transit proposal. This is a subway proposal designed to link the existing subway spokes. I have been working on it since 1985. Cambridge raised the project in a comment to an environmental Impact Statement in the last month or so.
If the Boston Sierra Club “expert” answers “yes,” that he / she is familiar with the Urban Ring rapid transit proposal, ask how many rail options there are. If the answer is “one,” you are getting the flat out lie put out by the City of Cambridge.
Cambridge’s flat out lie is that, of the TWO rail options, the only one that exists is the environmentally destructive streetcar option which the City of Cambridge supports. This option would be highly destructive to the environment near the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
The reality is that THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS SUBSIDIZED THE OTHER OPTION, the responsible Orange Line / heavy rail option, the Kenmore crossing. The state legislature has subsidized the expansion of Yawkey Station as part of the massive Fenway Park area project which has gotten recent press.
Cambridge’s nonsensical proposal would move Yawkey Station three blocks. The Cambridge proposal would not work without moving Yawkey Station. The Kenmore Crossing uses the now subsidized and being expanded Yawkey Station as part of a brilliant megastation.
You should immediately respond to such nonsense from a Sierra Club “expert” by having nothing more to do with this person. Whether the person is stupid or venal is irrelevant, the person has no credibility and is not worthy of your time.
It is frequently difficult to pin these irresponsible people down in general. The deviant behavior in my test is extreme. They are pious in their demands that, if you are politically correct and pro environment, you have to rubber stamp them. Please do not waste your time arguing about destruction they can wiggle around.
Turn your back on them and walk away fast.
Sunday, June 23, 2013
Destroyed Nesting Area, June 23, 2013, the mess the state left.
Photos of the Destroyed Nesting Area, Charles River, Cambridge, MA, USA, June 23, 2019, after the state’s workers leave,
1. Report.
2. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
1. Report.
Today, June 23, 2019, I visited the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
These photos are unedited and unnarrated, except to say a bunch of very destructive, very lazy people seem to have left, and left a mess.
There are young trees which have been wasted, photos of the waste, and a lot more destroyed ground after the fact.
Further down the Charles River, I have provided evidence of the destruction of a lovely grove of trees for no value. They could do what they want to with a detour. They destroyed the trees instead..
At the Cambridge Common, I have documented some excellent trees being destroyed, most because they are blocking the view.
This outrage below follows on the misbehavior by the local fraudulent group lying that they are defending the Charles, multiple reports presented.
2. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
State environmental people, DES Hotline: ESF.Hotline@state.ma.us.
MassDOT Accelerated Bridges Program: 857-368-8904 or Stephanie.Boundy@state.ma.us
All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.
Cambridge, MA, USA city councilors: Council@cambridgema.gov.
**********
For people listening to Boston Sierra Club endorsements of environmentally destructive members of the Cambridge City Council, you should be aware that
(1) using the world’s definition of “environmentalism,” there are no environmentally responsible members of the Cambridge City Council, and
(2) there are Cambridge Machine activists very visible and apparently very active in the Boston Sierra Club.
If you are talking to a person associated with the Boston Sierra Club, do a credibility check. Ask if they are familiar with the “Urban Ring” rapid transit proposal. This is a subway proposal designed to link the existing subway spokes. I have been working on it since 1985. Cambridge raised the project in a comment to an environmental Impact Statement in the last month or so.
If the Boston Sierra Club “expert” answers “yes,” that he / she is familiar with the Urban Ring rapid transit proposal, ask how many rail options there are. If the answer is “one,” you are getting the flat out lie put out by the City of Cambridge.
Cambridge’s flat out lie is that, of the TWO rail options, the only one that exists is the environmentally destructive streetcar option which the City of Cambridge supports. This option would be highly destructive to the environment near the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
The reality is that THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS SUBSIDIZED THE OTHER OPTION, the responsible Orange Line / heavy rail option, the Kenmore crossing. The state legislature has subsidized the expansion of Yawkey Station as part of the massive Fenway Park area project which has gotten recent press.
Cambridge’s nonsensical proposal would move Yawkey Station three blocks. The Cambridge proposal would not work without moving Yawkey Station. The Kenmore Crossing uses the now subsidized and being expanded Yawkey Station as part of a brilliant megastation.
You should immediately respond to such nonsense from a Sierra Club “expert” by having nothing more to do with this person. Whether the person is stupid or venal is irrelevant, the person has no credibility and is not worthy of your time.
It is frequently difficult to pin these irresponsible people down in general. The deviant behavior in my test is extreme. They are pious in their demands that, if you are politically correct and pro environment, you have to rubber stamp them. Please do not waste your time arguing about destruction they can wiggle around.
Turn your back on them and walk away fast.
1. Report.
2. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
1. Report.
Today, June 23, 2019, I visited the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
These photos are unedited and unnarrated, except to say a bunch of very destructive, very lazy people seem to have left, and left a mess.
There are young trees which have been wasted, photos of the waste, and a lot more destroyed ground after the fact.
Further down the Charles River, I have provided evidence of the destruction of a lovely grove of trees for no value. They could do what they want to with a detour. They destroyed the trees instead..
At the Cambridge Common, I have documented some excellent trees being destroyed, most because they are blocking the view.
This outrage below follows on the misbehavior by the local fraudulent group lying that they are defending the Charles, multiple reports presented.
2. Contacts, Miscellaneous.
Massachusetts Governor’s Office email form: http://www.mass.gov/governor/constituentservices/contact/.
State environmental people, DES Hotline: ESF.Hotline@state.ma.us.
MassDOT Accelerated Bridges Program: 857-368-8904 or Stephanie.Boundy@state.ma.us
All Massachusetts Legislators’ emails: http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/emails-for-all-massachusetts.html.
Cambridge, MA, USA city councilors: Council@cambridgema.gov.
**********
For people listening to Boston Sierra Club endorsements of environmentally destructive members of the Cambridge City Council, you should be aware that
(1) using the world’s definition of “environmentalism,” there are no environmentally responsible members of the Cambridge City Council, and
(2) there are Cambridge Machine activists very visible and apparently very active in the Boston Sierra Club.
If you are talking to a person associated with the Boston Sierra Club, do a credibility check. Ask if they are familiar with the “Urban Ring” rapid transit proposal. This is a subway proposal designed to link the existing subway spokes. I have been working on it since 1985. Cambridge raised the project in a comment to an environmental Impact Statement in the last month or so.
If the Boston Sierra Club “expert” answers “yes,” that he / she is familiar with the Urban Ring rapid transit proposal, ask how many rail options there are. If the answer is “one,” you are getting the flat out lie put out by the City of Cambridge.
Cambridge’s flat out lie is that, of the TWO rail options, the only one that exists is the environmentally destructive streetcar option which the City of Cambridge supports. This option would be highly destructive to the environment near the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
The reality is that THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS SUBSIDIZED THE OTHER OPTION, the responsible Orange Line / heavy rail option, the Kenmore crossing. The state legislature has subsidized the expansion of Yawkey Station as part of the massive Fenway Park area project which has gotten recent press.
Cambridge’s nonsensical proposal would move Yawkey Station three blocks. The Cambridge proposal would not work without moving Yawkey Station. The Kenmore Crossing uses the now subsidized and being expanded Yawkey Station as part of a brilliant megastation.
You should immediately respond to such nonsense from a Sierra Club “expert” by having nothing more to do with this person. Whether the person is stupid or venal is irrelevant, the person has no credibility and is not worthy of your time.
It is frequently difficult to pin these irresponsible people down in general. The deviant behavior in my test is extreme. They are pious in their demands that, if you are politically correct and pro environment, you have to rubber stamp them. Please do not waste your time arguing about destruction they can wiggle around.
Turn your back on them and walk away fast.
Thursday, June 20, 2013
Praise for the Cambridge Conservation Commission’s Executive Director
1. Letter to the Editor.
2. Background.
1. Letter to the Editor.
I have submitted the following to the editor of the Cambridge Chronicle:
***********
Editor
Cambridge Chronicle
I want to thank Jennifer Wright Letourneau of the Cambridge Conservation Commission for her lessening environmental damage at the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
These beautiful, popular 32 year residents are being starved and, essentially, confined to their nesting area east of the BU Bridge on the Charles River. This comes from destruction at the Magazine Beach Playing Fields by Cambridge and the Department of Conservation and Recreation. Additionally, most of the nesting area’s ground vegetation has been destroyed by a combination of agents of the DCR and by the BU Bridge project. So it has been necessary for the Charles River Urban Wilds Initiative to replace as much as possible of the food which has been taken from them.
During most of the time since the beginning of December, workers on a project of the MBTA Commuter Rail have added to the abuse by using the less destroyed area for parking. There is adequate parking next to Memorial Drive and on the nearest, and unused area of the Magazine Beach playing fields. The parking next to Memorial Drive is particularly convenient, given the staircase constructed by Boston University for the DCR. It directly and conveniently connects between the work area on the railroad and the parking.
The railroad workers’ misbehavior was exacerbated in the spring by a bizarre and very noisy metal work facility dumped in the most sensitive area. More recently, they parked a flatbed trailer there.
Jennifer has been kind enough to talk to the DCR and minimize the destruction. They have gotten rid of these two most irresponsible intrusions..
The DCR, however, has recognized that the Conservation Commission’s jurisdiction has been limited by the City of Cambridge more than is the case in almost all of the state.
The parking has been continued beyond the very small jurisdiction of the Conservation Commission, and, last I checked, they were sneaking cars back where they had left.
The destructive laziness is outrageous, but Jennifer has done good.
It would be nice if the City Council accepted the same environmental protections as the rest of the state, but the limits are compatible with the ongoing and pending governmental destruction on the Cambridge Common, at Alewife, on the Charles River and as part of the Longfellow Bridge project in and near Kendall.
Jennifer has done good. Her jurisdiction is tellingly restricted. Nevertheless, her help is appreciated.
Robert J. La Trémouille
Chair
Friends of the White Geese
2. Background.
The Cambridge Chronicle has a new editor.
The paper has gone from being a company rag allowing reality to be expressed on the editorial page to a company rag censoring reality.
Two of the many letters they have censored from me have been, recently, (a) a well written letter spelling out the corrupt practices by which the fake neighborhood association is fighting for environmental destruction on the Charles, and (b) one responding to a destructive city council candidate.
The most recent letter responded to a very destructive school committee member running for city council, Marc McGovern, http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/cambridge-ma-usa-environmental.html. This was sent on June 13, 2013.
Shortly after the April 2013 outrage at the fake neighborhood association, I spelled out the nonsense in sound detail, in http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/the-charles-river-corrupt-practices-and.html. This was sent on April 26, 2013.
In today’s issue, once again, the Cambridge Chronicle devoted the first page of their second section to Machine con games. This one is by the fake neighborhood association telling people to look at everything except their fight for destruction on the Charles River. Interestingly, my first knowledge of the Chronicle's latest puff piece came at a meeting of the destroyers in which the second section front page was shown off. This was long after I sent the letter in.
The above letter is highly unlikely to be printed.
Honesty, and not even vague balance, is not the name of the game in the Cambridge Chronicle.
2. Background.
1. Letter to the Editor.
I have submitted the following to the editor of the Cambridge Chronicle:
***********
Editor
Cambridge Chronicle
I want to thank Jennifer Wright Letourneau of the Cambridge Conservation Commission for her lessening environmental damage at the Destroyed Nesting Area of the Charles River White Geese.
These beautiful, popular 32 year residents are being starved and, essentially, confined to their nesting area east of the BU Bridge on the Charles River. This comes from destruction at the Magazine Beach Playing Fields by Cambridge and the Department of Conservation and Recreation. Additionally, most of the nesting area’s ground vegetation has been destroyed by a combination of agents of the DCR and by the BU Bridge project. So it has been necessary for the Charles River Urban Wilds Initiative to replace as much as possible of the food which has been taken from them.
During most of the time since the beginning of December, workers on a project of the MBTA Commuter Rail have added to the abuse by using the less destroyed area for parking. There is adequate parking next to Memorial Drive and on the nearest, and unused area of the Magazine Beach playing fields. The parking next to Memorial Drive is particularly convenient, given the staircase constructed by Boston University for the DCR. It directly and conveniently connects between the work area on the railroad and the parking.
The railroad workers’ misbehavior was exacerbated in the spring by a bizarre and very noisy metal work facility dumped in the most sensitive area. More recently, they parked a flatbed trailer there.
Jennifer has been kind enough to talk to the DCR and minimize the destruction. They have gotten rid of these two most irresponsible intrusions..
The DCR, however, has recognized that the Conservation Commission’s jurisdiction has been limited by the City of Cambridge more than is the case in almost all of the state.
The parking has been continued beyond the very small jurisdiction of the Conservation Commission, and, last I checked, they were sneaking cars back where they had left.
The destructive laziness is outrageous, but Jennifer has done good.
It would be nice if the City Council accepted the same environmental protections as the rest of the state, but the limits are compatible with the ongoing and pending governmental destruction on the Cambridge Common, at Alewife, on the Charles River and as part of the Longfellow Bridge project in and near Kendall.
Jennifer has done good. Her jurisdiction is tellingly restricted. Nevertheless, her help is appreciated.
Robert J. La Trémouille
Chair
Friends of the White Geese
2. Background.
The Cambridge Chronicle has a new editor.
The paper has gone from being a company rag allowing reality to be expressed on the editorial page to a company rag censoring reality.
Two of the many letters they have censored from me have been, recently, (a) a well written letter spelling out the corrupt practices by which the fake neighborhood association is fighting for environmental destruction on the Charles, and (b) one responding to a destructive city council candidate.
The most recent letter responded to a very destructive school committee member running for city council, Marc McGovern, http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/cambridge-ma-usa-environmental.html. This was sent on June 13, 2013.
Shortly after the April 2013 outrage at the fake neighborhood association, I spelled out the nonsense in sound detail, in http://charlesriverwhitegeeseblog.blogspot.com/2013/04/the-charles-river-corrupt-practices-and.html. This was sent on April 26, 2013.
In today’s issue, once again, the Cambridge Chronicle devoted the first page of their second section to Machine con games. This one is by the fake neighborhood association telling people to look at everything except their fight for destruction on the Charles River. Interestingly, my first knowledge of the Chronicle's latest puff piece came at a meeting of the destroyers in which the second section front page was shown off. This was long after I sent the letter in.
The above letter is highly unlikely to be printed.
Honesty, and not even vague balance, is not the name of the game in the Cambridge Chronicle.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)