Sky's the limit


 

At the June 7th TM and at the two CPPC meetings afterwards, I have heard people have been referring to the MBTA's "desires" instead of its well-thought out requests for safety's sake; and people have accused it of being greedy for more space and of it wanting to force the town into land takings.

CPPC members have talked of the MBTA as an "obstacle" to be removed to allow the town to pursue its goals.   In order to remove the "obstacle", the town counts on Senator Brownsberger  and the Senator has vowed to recruit Governor Baker to do so  (Brownsberger does not have the authority to make the MBTA accept the town's  "French" plan but Governor Baker does).  So what I have been witnessing seems to be the casting of the MBTA in the villain's role and a determination to bend it to the town's will despite the MBTA's valid concerns.

It all sounds awfully familiar because we abutters have been subjected to the same treatment: stonewalled, cast in villain's role, accused of spreading "misinformation" and "disinformation" and, of course, we have also been opposed by Senator Brownsberger.  Part of this treatment that we have endured from the town has been an ever shifting story line.  The town rewrites history to cast itself as upright and conscientious; a town which listens to the "concerns" of its residents.
Townspeak glossary: “Disinformation” = accurate information that runs contrary to the town’s official narrative.
 It is so odd to see us - abutters - and a powerful state agency subjected to the same disrespectful  treatment!  We, abutters, are swept aside because the town knows that many of us lack the financial wherewithal to successfully sue the town.   The town attempt to sweep aside the MBTA is because they think they have the right tool to do so: Governor Baker.  I wonder, how will the MBTA defend itself from this assault on its officials who are tasked with the rail's safety?  Will we abutters have to live with a heightened risk of derailment due to successful strong-arming of the MBTA by Brownsberger and possibly Baker?  
 
However, forcing an unsafe project to be build despite the MBTA's and abutters' concerns is a double edged sword: the town and MA will both live under the threat that victims of a derailment will sue the town, state and the people involved.  
 
Based on the available evidence .... the sky would be the limit.



 



Popular posts from this blog

The Miracle of the Sketchily Scheduled Public Hearing

I've been on hiatus fron this blog after Nitsch's submission of the 25% design plan at the end of 2021.  All that time, I've continued to observe the CPPC meetings; they have been as interesting as watching paint dry. Nitsch's Michalak seemed to avoid the CPPC but, a few times, the CPPC succeeded in having Michalak show up to give a report of ... non-progress. This was confirmed by someone with knowledge of the project within the MBTA who complained to me of how Nitsch was not delivering the necessary engineering plan although 1 year had lapsed since the request made in 2022. Engineering plan vs design sketch  My MBTA interlocutor explained that an engineering plan is different from the design plan. The latter is a sketch; the former is plan that shows location of items and structures in the subsurface and surface of the project area.  The subsurface items include pipes and cables because you don't want to start digging - for example - to build a wall and then fin...
Read more

A Tangled Web

  Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive " Abutters have asked for the engineering plan for the 25% design submittal or what Stanton called the "revised" 25% design.  Since, on January 10, Michalak (PE or Project Engineer) announced that the Public Hearing had been scheduled then this revised plan had to exist at that date.  JS requested it from MassDOT Public Records on Februaru 23 and waited and waited.  Finally around March 14-15, JS received documents: the original, unrevised 25% design submission from November 2021, ROW papers, and the bridge worksheet with a submission date of January 24. (It's a tunnel or underpass but technically it becomes a bridge).   Note that it is the original 25% not the revised design so it still has a figure indicating that the tunnel will be "jacked".   The other fun part is that the bridge worksheet was submitted on January 24th not by December 21, 2023 as Michalak had said at the Dec...
Read more

Sept 15 - CPPC: A Fog of Words

Image
 Michalak and Clancy attended.   Michalak reported. 7 Channing Rd: Jammal scheduled a site meeting and, at the last minute, cancelled.  Clancy, Michalak will schedule again. Later on, Michalak said that submitting the 25% design did not depend on meeting Jammal: "that connection/spur is in the plan”.   All they wanted is Jammal’s approval of the spur/path planned for the side of the Chase building.  But Michalak conceded that the only thing he can see changing in the 25% are the access points such as the spur.  [My guess  is that they are likely to back down when it comes to the spur.] Soil borings 1.  Borings that required Keolis/MBTA were completed last week (week of Sept 6).   2.  Two other borings to be completed by the end of this week (week of Sept 13th).  These Pleasant St borings moved away from the ROW "to reduce cost and easier access”.* *Via FOIA request, I received Nitsch-GZA-Clancy emails .  This ROW issu...
Read more