Dear Jen and Conservation Commission Members,
This comment is following up on my brief chat with Jen at the site visit related to the Notice of Intent Application for the MBTA Redline Hi‐Rail Access Tunnel Project. I am disappointed that the MBTA team continues to characterize the trees being removed as “dead or invasive”. Most of the trees are eastern poplars, also known as cottonwood trees, which are native and high quality habitat trees. Five of the 30 trees scheduled for removal are black locust, which are considered invasive by MA, but are native as nearby as PA and would migrate up here inevitably with climate change. They are also trees that have a lot of habitat value and are even admired by the director of the Arnold Arboretum which has several in their park (see: https://arboretum.harvard.edu/stories/in-love-with-an-outlaw/).
I have multiple concerns about their plans for the site. First is that the most numerous planting, “CORNUS ALBA ‘IVORY HALO’, TATARIAN DOGWOOD” (36 plants), is a non-native cultivar with limited habitat value. A much better option would be a local ecotype of red osier dogwood which would have dramatically higher ecological value and similar properties.
My second concern relates to ongoing maintenance of plants and management of invasives. This large structure with what is in effect a metal trellis with drainage rock around it will be ripe for invasive plant growth like bittersweet, knotweed, and other plants that thrive in poor soil conditions. My understanding is that the MBTA will be responsible for maintaining the site, since IQHQ will no longer own the land. I am worried that this will be a similar situation to the Linear Park where the fenced in MBTA structure in the middle of it receives little to no plant maintenance other than periodic cutbacks and has become overrun with bittersweet and Tree of Heaven, which are constantly spreading into the park, requiring additional effort by the city to maintain the park. IQHQ has committed to invasive management on their site, but now this commitment will not apply to this area, because it will be under MBTA control.
My third concern is that the loss of 30 trees with 269″ of DBH and the replacement with 30 trees with only 74 caliper inches is going to have significant, long-term, and negative impacts on the habitat value and experience of visitors to this area that was supposed to be a 4 acre conservation area (see language from their special permit attached). Mature trees play a critical role in reducing the urban heat island effect and sequestering carbon. The trees being planted right next to a large tunnel, based on the growing conditions and species, are unlikely to ever match the environmental contribution of the 30 existing trees that are being removed.
If this infrastructure must go into the middle of what was required by the Cambridge Planning Department to be a 4 acre habitat area, between scenic overlooks (see attached language and figures), can the MBTA come up with plans that provide more ecological and aesthetic value to this area where the community already worked extensively with IQHQ to protect mature trees? Can they commit to long-term maintenance of the site, including plantings and invasive management? Perhaps the MBTA can work with ASG, Mass Audubon, Green Cambridge or other community groups to create a community centered design for the tunnel structure that has greater ecological and community benefits, similar to the Polinature installation at Harvard’s Graduate School of Design: https://www.gsd.harvard.edu/2024/09/belinda-tato-polinature-delivers-instant-urban-greening/.
Thanks and happy to discuss further.
Sincerely,
Eppa Rixey
126 Harvey Street
Alewife Study Group
Attachments:
Specific language from Notice of Decision for case #387 on page 6 paragraph number 3:
“South of the building group, two undeveloped areas are established as public benefits: a 4 acre natural habitat area north of the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) headhouse and Russell Field, and the area around Jerry’s Pond, where extensive improvements will enable public access and improve pedestrian and bicycle movement. The 4-acre area will be improved to accommodate stormwater, much of it will become a meadow, but numerous new trees will be planted. The landscape design reinforces public spaces and offers beauty and environmental benefits.”
Image showing protected area from planning board submissions by IQHQ:
Specific language from Notice of Decision for case #387 on page 11 condition number 3:
“a restrictive covenant or other legal mechanism would be executed to limit development rights on the non-developed lot in order to ensure ongoing compliance with the Special District 3 (SD-3) zoning requirements, which limit the total Gross Floor Area (GFA) in the district. Such a mechanism shall be provided to the City Solicitor for review, and no building permit shall be issued until the City of Cambridge certifies in writing that such legal mechanism is found to be acceptable.”
Planting plan from MBTA submission with overlooks to be built by IQHQ (as a condition of their special permit) highlighted in yellow and benches shown in red:
