Waste Management Ripped for Lack of Updates on Transfer Station Plans

By Conor Greene

Unhappy with the lack of updates from Waste Management regarding the company’s plans for a new transfer station on Review Avenue, the chairman of Community Board 5’s Sanitation Committee ripped the company during last week’s meeting.

Waste Management is planning to expand its transfer station on Review Avenue in Long Island City to allow it to increase the amount of trash it receives each day. However, the plan would require the company to place the trash on trucks and transport it about two miles to the rail yard on Rust Street in Maspeth. There, it would be loaded into rail cars to be shipped out of the area.

While the plan would allow Waste Management to sharply reduce the amount of miles trash is driven through city streets, it would require the approximately 1.5 mile trip from Review Avenue to Rust Street, a plan that has been met with strong opposition. Instead, residents and officials are pushing the company to either construct a rail spur on its property so the trash can be loaded directly onto train cars there or to purchase another nearby property and use the Newtown Creek to barge the trash from the area.

At last week’s CB 5 meeting, Sanitation Committee Chairman Paul Kerzner took an unorthodox approach to providing his update: frustrated with the lack of details from Waste Management, he simply read aloud an e-mail exchange between him and a company official. The official responded to his request for an update with a short messages informing him that Waste Management is “actively researching potential options” that would avoid trucking the trash to the rail yard.

In response, Kerzner wrote that the update was “just a bit skimpy for five months,” referring to the amount of time that has elapsed since he requested a status update. He added that he is “truly disappointed with Waste Management’s work product.” The company only said in response to that message that research is still ongoing and that a timetable will be provided once it is available, according to Kerzner.

In a statement to The Forum, a Waste Management spokeswoman said the company has formed a technical team that is studying potential solutions to concerns raised by the community. “It would be premature to speculate or comment further until our research is completed,” wrote Rachel Amar. “We will report back to CB5 as soon as we have concrete results. Waste Management will consult with the community before taking any action.”

Kerzner later told The Forum that he was prompted to call the company onto the carpet since months have passed since CB 5 overwhelmingly voted in favor of a resolution rejecting the company’s current plan and requesting that other alternatives be explored.

“It has been several months since this motion was made, and I think the board should have a status report,” he said. “I’m waiting for them to produce some results and I’ll be happy to hear what other proposals they have… I’m waiting and so is everyone else.”

Newtown Pippin Apple Trees Planted Around Town

The Newtown Historical Society, in conjunction with The Newtown Pippin Project, identified 3 locations at which to plant his- toric Newtown Pippin apple trees, bringing the fruit back to its place of origin. The fruit trees were planted today at Maspeth Federal Savings, the Middle Village 75th Street Block Association’s community garden and at Ridgewood’s Onderdonk House.

The Newtown Pippin variety of apple was named after the western area of Queens, once known as Newtown Township. The original apple tree was located on the Gershom Moore farm along a tributary of Newtown Creek in the 1700s. From it, cuttings were taken and planted in orchards throughout the world. The apples were cultivated by some of our country’s founding fathers, including George Washington and Thomas Jefferson.

As part of a history and environmental project, the Newtown Pippin Project is offering free Pippin trees for planting throughout the city, with added emphasis on locations in western Queens, where the Pippin once grew and was first discovered by colonial Americans. Thanks to a sponsorship from Green Apple Cleaners, care and guidance from the NYC Department of Parks and Recreation, and pioneering local orchard replenishment by Slow Food NYC, a distributed orchard is being created among the city’s open spaces.

The Newtown Historical Society scouted out locations suitable for the trees and volunteers planted them in Maspeth and Middle Village on Monday, October 5th. The planting consists of a Newtown Pippin tree and a pollinator tree. The Onderdonk House received an Elstar apple tree as a pollinator, which is a Dutch variety, planted by the Ridgewood Historical Society. The other two locations received St. Edmund's Russet trees.

“The Newtown Pippin represents an important part of our agricultural history which is often overlooked,” said Christina Wilkinson, President of the Newtown Historical Society. “We hope by bringing a little bit of it back, we can use it as a teaching tool to help people understand the rural past of this area and the once-pristine condition of Newtown Creek.”

Erik Baard, Outreach Coordinator for the Newtown Pippin Project, said, “Let the abundance of these trees, and those to come, remind us of how lush and fertile the Newtown Creek and the surrounding city once were, and inspire our actions.”

"I commend Christina Wilkinson for her leadership in bringing back Maspeth's own Newtown Pippin tree," said Council Member Elizabeth Crowley. "As a member of the Environmental Protection committee, I am working with my colleagues to restore the growth of these beautiful trees through New York City and to declare the Newtown Pippin the official apple of the Big Apple!"

The trees may bear their first fruits by 2011. For the next planting in Spring 2010, Newtown Historical Society will focus on bringing the trees to area schools, houses of worship and cemeteries. For more information about the Newtown Pippin Project, please visit newtown- pippin.org or newtownhistorical.org.

Newtown Creek Considered for Superfund Status

Would Initiate Federal Cleanup of Toxic Waterway

By Conor Greene

The Environmental Protection Agency is considering the heavily polluted Newtown Creek for Superfund status, which would allow federal authorities to move forward with a long-awaited cleanup of the waterway, which runs between Brooklyn and Queens.

The EPA announced last week that officials have nominated the 3.8-mile stretch of creek, which separates Greenpoint and Maspeth and is considered the most polluted waterway in the city, for its National Priorities List. Doing so would allow the EPA to build on the extensive sampling of the creek that has already been completed.

“Newtown Creek is one of the most grossly contaminated waterways in the country,” said Acting Regional Administrator George Pavlou. “By listing the creek, EPA can focus on doing the extensive sampling needed to figure out the best way to address the contamination and see the work through.”

Designating the Newtown Creek as a Superfund site would allow the EPA to use taxpayer money to fund a cleanup, and to charge individuals responsible for causing the pollution as well as current property owners. The site’s contamination includes a 30-million gallon oil spill discovered by a Coast Guard helicopter in 1978 that has been found across 55 acres, including beneath area homes and businesses.

The spill, which is three times larger than the Exxon Valdez incident, has been lamed on the area’s industrial past, which at one time saw more than 50 industrial facilities along the banks, and on a 1950 industrial explosion. Currently, ExxonMobil and several other companies are working with the federal government on programs to remediate portions of the spill.

News that the creek is being considered for Superfund status was welcomed by two of the area’s representatives in Congress, Anthony Weiner (D-Forest Hills) and Nydia Velazquez (D-Brooklyn), who have fought for years to direct federal resources to clean the area up. In a press release, Weiner noted that the area surrounding the Newtown Creek is home to more than 446,000 residents and a number of schools, parks and hospitals.

“I am pleased to see that while the oil companies lag in their cleanup responsibilities and put the health and safety of Newtown Creek’s residents at further risk, the EPA has decided to take action and hold these companies responsible for their negligence,” said Weiner. “Newtown Creek is the single most polluted waterway in New York City, a legacy left by more than a century of heavy industrial activity.”

In the mid-1800s, the area adjacent to the creek was one of the busiest hubs of industrial activity in the city, with dozens of oil refineries, petrochemical plants, fertilizer and glue factories, sawmills and lumber and coal yards. In the early 1990s, the state determined that Newtown Creek was not meeting water quality standards under the Clean Water Act.

Since then, the EPA has worked to collect data from the entire length of the creek that has been used to determine the actual extent of the pollution. Various sediment and surface water samples taken along the creek have revealed the presence of pesticides, metals, PCBs and volatile organic compounds, which are potentially harmful contaminations that can easily evaporate into the air.

Now that the site has been nominated to the National Priorities List, a 60-day public comment period has begun. If the area is designated a Superfund site, a four-step process will be initiated to clean up the area. The site would first undergo immediate stabilization to stop any immediate threats to the community, before the EPA performs a comprehensive investigation of the site and analyzes clean up options. The EPA would then develop a plan to clean up the site, which would be carried out by the agency or by responsible parties the federal government could force to do the work.

“The contamination in and around Newtown Creek is of catastrophic proportions and Greenpoint residents have suffered the consequences for too long,” said Velazquez. “Inclusion in the EPA’s National Priorities List may help determine the best approach for cleaning up the creek. As the process continues, I look forward to examining the data as well as working with federal, state and city officials to identify a comprehensive plan to reclaim the pride of Brooklyn’s waterfront and protect New Yorkers.”

Residents, Business Owners Protest Waste Management Expansion Plan

By Conor Greene

Civic leaders and elected officials gathered in front of Waste Management’s Review Avenue property on Monday to call on the city to reconsider its solid waste disposal plan, which will increase the amount of local truck traffic in West Maspeth.

The press conference, which included Councilman Tony Avella (D-Bayside), Councilwoman Elizabeth Crowley (D-Middle Village), members of the Juniper Park Civic Association and local business owners, was called in response to a plan by WM to expand its waste transfer station under the city’s Solid Waste Management Plan.

Residents and officials are objecting to the plan because it would require the company to truck residential waste from Review Avenue, where it is delivered by city sanitation trucks, to the Maspeth Rail Yard at Rust Street, a trip of about 1.5 miles each way. Instead, the community is calling on WM to either purchase a nearby property that has access to the existing rail line running through the area or the adjacent Newtown Creek, or to at least build a rail spur on the Review Avenue property, which is next to the track.

“This is just one more example of the city not reaching out to the community to find appropriate solutions,” said Avella. “We’re calling on the city to take a second look at this plan and… together come up with a plan that works. This doesn’t.”

The solid waste management plan was approved by the City Council in 2006. Then Councilmembers Eric Gioia, who represented that section of Long Island City and Maspeth at the time, and Dennis Gallagher, who represented parts of Maspeth, both voted in favor of the plan, according to city records.

The facility is currently permitted to receive up to 958 tons of trash per day. Under the new arrangement, the site will be able to handle up to 2,100 tons per day and will typically receive about 1,150 tons per day. As a result, there would be at least 65 round trip truck trips each day between Review Avenue and the Maspeth Rail Yard.

Crowley, who holds Gallagher’s old seat, said she is “outraged” by the current plan and suggested that WM instead look into using other nearby sites that have creek and rail access, such as the former Phelps Dodge property. She said “it’s not fair for our families” to have the amount of trucks in the area increased, especially since the local asthma rate is “through the roof.”

“Waste Management has to go back to the drawing board and come up with a plan that will work for our community,” added Crowley.

Robert Holden, president of the Juniper Park Civic Association, noted that the WM facility is located on contaminated land. “So they’re going to build on a toxic site and then pollute the air,” he said. “This whole plan stinks to high heaven.” He also criticized the city for allowing WM to run public hearings on the proposal. “A private company ran a public hearing notifying the public on what’s to come,” he noted.

Holden called on Mayor Bloomberg, who is seeking reelection to a third term in November, to intervene. “If he wants to be mayor for four more years… We haven’t heard any indication that he wants to work with the community,” the civic leader said.

Maspeth civic leader and business owner Tony Nunziato made it clear that this isn’t a case of residents demanding that the project not take place in their backyard. “We’re not saying keep it out – we’re saying put it in the right spot… This is not a case of NIMBY,” said Nunziato. “It’s an easy request.”

Richard Sherman, the second generation owner of Williams Valve Corporation – located on one side of the driveway used by WM to access the facility from Review Avenue – accused the city of ignoring the needs of small businesses. “When it comes to us, they don’t really care,” he charged. “They’re going to permit the expansion of a toxic waste dump… We feel as taxpayers that we have the same rights as anyone else.”

While the WM expansion will only create about 10 additional jobs, Avella pointed out that there ultimately will be a net loss of jobs in the area because neighboring employers are leaving the area as a result of the project. He lamented that the city continues to ignore the input of those living and working near the site. “These people have good suggestions – it’s time [the city] started listening to them.”

Last week, a WM spokeswoman said the company is taking into account the community’s input but wouldn’t say if construction of a rail spur or the purchase of a nearby site is being considered. “We continue to listen to the community comments regarding the Review Avenue project and are evaluating our future options in response to these concerns,” wrote Rachel Amar. “Waste Management can’t speculate on the basis of any rumors.”

A LIRR spokesman said the agency has "not yet received any specific proposal" on allowing WM to use the tracks and will evaluate the plan once it is officially presented.

Cross Harbor Tunnel, Dog Run and Garbage Plan Discussed at CB 5 Meeting

By Conor Greene

This month’s Community Board 5 meeting was highlighted by three old issues that are familiar to many local residents – the cross harbor tunnel project, which is again being discussed, the push for a dog run in Juniper Valley Park, which has come down to money, and Waste Management’s plan to expand its Review Avenue transfer facility.

Cross Harbor Tunnel Plan Resurfaces

District Manager Gary Giordano informed board members and residents that the Port Authority of New Jersey and New York has scheduled a meeting on September 30 for members of the project’s Stakeholders Committee. The meeting will not be open to the public or media and individuals who were not invited will not be allowed to attend.

The Port Authority has taken over as local sponsor for the project’s Environmental Impact Statement, and the meeting is being billed as a chance for various elected officials and civic leaders to provide input in hopes of developing consensus, according to an e-mail sent by Laura Shabe, who is managing the project for the Port Authority.

The plan features a tunnel beneath New York Harbor connecting rail yards in Bay Ridge, Brooklyn and Jersey City. The Long Island Railroad’s Bay Ridge line would be upgraded and a huge intermodal facility would be built in West Maspeth. Trains would travel through the tunnel and continue to the Fresh Pond Rail Yard in Glendale before switching to an LIRR line to finish the trip to Maspeth. Cargo would be loaded into trucks for transport to destinations around the city, resulting in about 15,000 additional trucks on local streets each day.

Local civic groups protested loudly when the plan was first presented nearly a decade ago by Rep. Jerrold Nadler. In 2005, Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced his opposition to it during a Juniper Park Civic Association meeting, arguing that the project “really would destroy neighborhoods here in this area.” However, speaking at a July press conference in Brooklyn, the mayor indicated he might support the plan in the future. “There is not going to be tremendous impact on any neighborhoods because they can design it in such a way with multiple terminals and so forth so no particular neighborhood has unmitigated consequences as were feared a number of years ago,” said Bloomberg.

At last Wednesday’s CB 5 meeting, Giordano warned that the project “is being resurrected.” While the September 30 meeting is not open to residents, “eventually they’re going to have to come out to the public with the plan,” said Giordano. “I don’t know who resurrected this, but here we go again… It seemed like a bad plan to a lot of us, but this whole idea is upon us again.” He added that while the area’s rail infrastructure needs to be better utilized, the original plan would have resulted in too large of an impact on Maspeth, which already suffers from heavy truck traffic.

In the message to stakeholders, Shabe noted that the Federal Highway Administration, the lead agency on the project, has broken the EIS into two phases. The first will analyze the marked demand for an improved New York Harbor rail crossing, while phase two will focus on specific site impacts, “resulting in traditional project-level environmental documents.”

Dog Run Funding Questions

While the proposal to have a dog run created in Juniper Valley Park wasn’t raised during CB 5’s budget hearing (see related story), it was discussed later in the meeting in light of a feasibility study recently completed by the city Parks Department on the idea.

Kathy Masi, co-chair of the board’s Parks Committee, reported that “we’ve come to a problem” regarding a request by a group of local dog owners to have a fenced in area created in an area of the park currently used during off-leash hours. “Obviously, what we have now is a group that wants a dog run put in the park,” said Masi. In light of that, the Parks Department conducted a feasibility study to see what could be created if funding can be found to pay for it. The study found the project would cost about $750,000, “which the CB and dog group will have to raise if they decide a dog run is appropriate for the park and the community,” according to a Parks Department statement.

One of the sticking points for opponents is the proposed location within the park, so Councilwoman Elizabeth Crowley (D-Middle Village) is instead looking into acquiring vacant land from CSX railroad. “Where we’re at now is, where do we get the money?” added Masi. “I personally, in today’s economic time, just don’t see where those numbers make sense to me,” she said referring to the cost of acquiring the land and building the dog run. Still, the community board has created a subcommittee to further investigate the idea. “This does not put an end to our efforts,” said Masi.

In a statement, a Parks Department spokesman said a plan submitted by the local dog owner group was reviewed by the capital team, which recommended the size be reduced to .75 acres “to better fit the proposed area and preserve ornamental trees in the area.” Other minor changes were also recommended, including a retaining wall. The submitted design was “very preliminary and simple” featuring just an aerial map of the park and a footprint of where the dog run would be located under the dog group’s proposal.

Waste Management Transfer Station

Discussions also continued over Waste Management’s plan to expand its garbage transfer station on Review Avenue to accommodate residential trash from community boards one through six. Earlier this year, board members objected to the plan because it requires trucks to transport the trash from Review Avenue a mile and a half through Maspeth to the rail yard at Rust Street. Instead, the board and local officials are pushing the company to construct a rail spur on its property to eliminate the need for additional truck trips.

Giordano told the audience that officials are pushing Waste Management “to go a little further on the community board’s recommendations for a rail spur.” Since the facility is adjacent to the Newtown Creek, officials are also urging the company to consider barging the trash from the area. “We need to make sure that if more garbage is going to be transported by rail, it be done in a better manner than has been done,” he said.

However, board member Robert Holden later said that he doesn’t think the community should be pushing for a rail spur. Calling the Review Avenue property “an environmental nightmare,” Holden instead argued that the company should look into another site that isn’t heavily contaminated. “We should be encouraging cleanup first and should be asking the mayor to stop this in its tracks,” he said.

Giordano noted that the board had suggested the company pursue other nearby sites such as the former Phelps Dodge property.

A Waste Management spokeswoman said the company is taking into account the community input, but wouldn’t say if construction of a rail spur is being considered. “We continue to listen to community comments regarding the Review Avenue project and are evaluating our future options in response to these concerns,” wrote Rachel Amar. “Waste Management can’t speculate on the basis of any rumors.” She noted that the solid waste plan, of which facility expansion is a part of, will greatly reduce overall truck traffic and create between 15 and 20 new jobs. However, it will lead to an increase in local truck traffic due to the trips between Review Avenue and the Maspeth rail yard.

Officials Push Waste Management to Amend Waste Tranfer Plan

Rail Spur at Review Ave Site Would Help Reduce Truck Traffic

By Conor Greene

Discussions are ongoing between local officials and Waste Management in hopes of convincing the company to build a rail spur adjacent to its Review Avenue transfer station, which would eliminate the need to haul garbage by truck to the Maspeth rail yard.

Waste Management is seeking to expand its existing truck-based solid waste transfer operation at 38-22 Review Avenue with a new rail-based facility that would accept residential trash from neighborhoods within community boards 1-6. However, under the plan the company would transport the trash by truck one-and-a-half miles from Review Avenue to the Maspeth rail yard at Rust Street to access the train line.

Local residents, officials and Community Board 5 members objected to that aspect of the plan and instead want Waste Management to investigate other options that would allow the trash to be placed directly on rails to avoid increasing the amount of truck traffic in that area.

In a resolution approved earlier this year, CB 5 members urged the company to barge the trash directly from the facility, which has access to Newtown Creek, build a rail spur at the site or investigate other nearby properties with rail access such as the former Phelps Dodge site.

Those sentiments were echoed in a July letter to the company from Councilwoman Elizabeth Crowley (D-Middle Village), which urges Waste Management to come up with a plan that allows the trash to be directly placed on trains, without the 1.5 mile trip through Maspeth. “Until a new plan is put forward… I cannot and will not support any plan for a truck to truck to rail transfer station,” the lawmaker wrote.

An aide to state Senator Joseph Addabbo has been in discussions with Waste Management officials over the past few months. Now that the senate is in recess, Senator Addabbo (D-Howard Beach) will meet in the coming weeks with the company to discuss the community’s objections to the plan.

“Obviously my constituents have a lot of concerns and… residents, especially those who live right near the area directly impacted, certainly should have their voices heard,” said Addabbo. “I will go to the site and talk to them about their proposal… As an elected official I have to see the project done in the most efficient way with the least minimal impact, not only in the short term but post construction.”

Aside to concerns over truck traffic, residents fear the plan will lead to unsafe conditions for pedestrians and will negatively impact the environment through increased emissions, said Addabbo. “On this particular situation, the residents have a lot of concerns, and some are very critical,” he said.

Gary Giordano, district manager of CB 5, said he is still waiting to officially hear back from Waste Management on the recommendations made in the resolution rejecting the company’s current plan. He said Waste Management has informed him they “are looking into the possibility” of building a rail spur at the Review Avenue facility. “From our point of view we’re just looking not to increase truck traffic in western Queens and specifically along that route from the Review Avenue facility to where Maspeth Avenue meets Rust Street,” said Giordano.

Crowley said her chief of staff, Lydon Sleeper, has been in contact with Waste Management officials, but she has yet to receive word of a revised plan. “It’s a fairly large project and when you think about how much it costs to truck all this garbage a mile away instead of building a spur, it doesn’t make sense economically or environmentally,” said Crowley.

A Waste Management spokeswoman did not return a message seeking comment on the status of discussions between the company and elected officials regarding the plan.

Residents Protest Trash Plan, Rally for Maspeth Parkland

By Conor Greene

Several dozen Maspeth residents and community leaders gathered at the Clinton Diner on Rust Street to protest the city’s plan to have garbage trucked through local streets, and to call on the city to buy the former St. Saviour’s property for parkland.

Saturday’s rally, which was organized by Christina Wilkinson, attracted officials including Councilman Tony Avella (D-Bayside), Councilwoman Elizabeth Crowley (D-Middle Village), several state assembly candidates, civic leaders and representatives for other elected officials. It focused both on the city’s solid waste plan and the need for green space in the area.

Under a proposal aimed at removing long-distance truck trips, local residential trash will be brought to Waste Management’s transfer facility on Review Avenue, which will be expanded. From there, it will be placed on trucks and driven one-and-a-half miles to the rail yard at Rust Street and Maspeth Avenue. It is that aspect of the plan that has angered locals, as it will result more than 100 local truck trips per day.

Instead, residents, officials and Community Board 5 members want Waste Management to construct a rail spur directly on its property or to utilize the adjacent Newtown Creek to eliminate the need for more trucks on Maspeth streets.

The rally was also called in response to a related issue – the push for the city to acquire the former St. Saviour’s property as the site for a new park, which is needed in that area. Last year, the Juniper Park Civic Association removed a historic church building from the property, which is across the street from the rail yard. While the church will likely be rebuilt on land in Middle Village, the property remains vacant and is being offered for sale for $8 million.

Wilkinson noted that the current projection of more than 100 local truck trips per day “is just a starting point” and likely would be much higher in future years as the city’s population continues to grow. “There are more than enough trucks already in Maspeth residential streets where they don’t belong,” she said. “This is really ridiculous – stop dumping on Maspeth.”

State Senators Joseph Addabbo (D-Howard Beach), who was represented at the rally by aide Jeff Gottleib, and George Onorato (D-Astoria), who issued a statement, both support the efforts. Gottleib suggested that Waste Management instead pursue the former Phelps Dodge property and build a rail spur connecting to the LIRR Montauk line. “There is something they’re not explaining to us,” he said.

“Like others here today, I think there must be a better way to deal with our garbage disposal issues in Queens,” said Onorato. “This plan by Waste Management will have a negative effect on our residential neighborhoods, our general daily quality of life, and the public health. The heavy truck traffic will only add to the air pollution that already plagues our community and results in higher instances of asthma and other health problems.”

The senator instead suggested that Waste Management look into using rail spurs or the Newtown Creek to move the trash. That sentiment was echoed in a letter to the company by Crowley. “I believe I speak on behalf of my constituents when I say the current proposal must be adjusted before the community can embrace this plan,” she wrote to Jim Van Woert, senior district manager.

Crowley notes that community leaders and groups including Community Board 5, which voted against the current plan, have suggested alternate proposals. She suggests either building a rail spur at Review Avenue or acquiring the Phelps Dodge site.

“Maspeth has been dumped on for years [and] across the street we have the opportunity to build a park,” Crowley told the residents at the rally. She called on Mayor Michael Bloomberg to allocate funding needed to provide the area with its “fair share of green space.”

Several of the candidates running for the vacant 38th District Assembly seat suggested legal action might be needed. Farouk Samaroo argued that, unlike many other instances in the city, this might be an appropriate use of the city’s powers of eminent domain. Since it would be for a true public use, it would be a more appropriate use of eminent domain than turning private land over to developers with political ties, he argued.

“As a citizen and an aspiring public official, I fully support using the right of eminent domain to make this park a reality,” he said. “I challenge anyone to tell me why a public park is not a permissible public use.”

One of his opponents, Albert Baldeo, said that the residents could file a lawsuit against the plan, especially if changes suggested by CB 5 aren’t taken into consideration. “If that is not done, we are all aggrieved citizens here,” he said, adding that a lawsuit focusing on the environmental impacts might be appropriate.

Waste Management officials previously said in a statement that the project is in accordance with the solid waste plan approved in 2006 by the City Council. Crowley, who wasn’t in office at the time, said she doesn’t think council members “knew the nitty gritty details” at the time of the vote. “For them [Waste Management] to pass it off to the City Council or Sanitation Department is ridiculous,” she added.

Avella, who is also a mayoral candidate, said his philosophy as an elected official is that “nobody knows their block better than the people who live there” and wondered aloud why the city isn’t listening. “We have to change the very way we do things.” He called for “community-based planning” where the residents have real input into the planning process.

“We have to take care of the people who live in the neighborhood,” said Maspeth resident Tony Nunziato. “This is a case of waste not managed.” He stressed that this isn’t a case of residents fighting against a proposal in their backyards. “This is not NIMBY – this is a case of put it in the right location,” he said.

Wilkinson said the St. Saviour’s property has been used to store Dumpsters since 2005and reported that the city Buildings Department issued a full stop work order for the site on July 17th. She urged nearby residents to continue reporting any illegal activities on the property, including storage of Dumpsters that contain trash.

In his statement, Senator Onorato supported the effort for parkland in West Maspeth. “Speaking of our environment, I am also pleased to lend my support to the effort to bring a new park to western Maspeth at the former St. Saviour’s church site,” he wrote. “This site is now being used as a garbage dump, and there is no question that the area could be put to much better use as green space that could be enjoyed by all members of our community.”

In an interview Tuesday, Crowley said that the battle to force Waste Management to revise its plan “is not over.” She said this is another situation that began years ago that she has been forced to try to rectify since taking office. “I don’t know what Dennis Gallagher was thinking at the time,” she said referring to the area’s councilmember when the solid waste plan was approved. She said it “would have been fair” for the council to demand that Waste Management construct a rail spur as part of the project.

Crowley also said there is a possibility of winning the battle for a park at the St. Saviour’s property. “I don’t think it’s just a pipe dream,” she said. “I think that rally was a step towards pressuring the mayor to put city dollars for what he speaks in favor of – more parks, especially in neighborhoods that have not seen their fair share. That part of Maspeth does not have enough green space… But that’s the type of money that takes a mayoral initiative.”

Board Rejects Company's Trash Disposal Plan

Maspeth Truck Traffic Would Increase

By Conor Greene

Waste Management’s plan to transport trash from a new facility on Review Avenue to the Maspeth rail yard for transportation to out-of-state landfills was resoundingly rejected by Community Board 5 members because it will result in more truck traffic in Maspeth.

At its meeting last Wednesday at Christ the King High School, the advisory board unanimously voted in favor of a Sanitation Committee resolution rejecting Waste Management’s current plan. Instead, the resolution suggests that the company use the adjacent Newtown Creek to barge the containerized trash out of the area, build a rail spur at its Review Avenue property or purchase part of the former Phelps Dodge property or another site where a rail spur can be accessed or built.

Waste Management has applied to the state Department of Environmental Conservation for permission to replace its existing truck-based solid waste transfer operation at 38-22 Review Avenue in Long Island City with a new rail-based transfer facility that would accept trash from neighborhoods within community boards 1-6 in Queens. However, the plan would require the company to transport the trash one-and-a-half miles from Review Avenue to the Maspeth rail yard at Rust Street.

It is this aspect of the plan, which would result in 85 round-trip truck trips daily between the two sites, that didn’t sit well with board members. “This whole plan – pardon the pun – stinks,” said Robert Holden before the vote.

“We all know how congested that area is now.” Sanitation Committee Chairman Paul Kerzner noted that the area was already backed up with traffic at 9:30 on a recent morning. “This is just going to add to it,” he said.

Holden also noted that the containerized trash will be loaded onto trains near the Clinton Diner at Rust Street and Maspeth Avenue. The transfer will take place in the open, near the former St. Saviour’s property and homes. He questioned whether the plan meets requirements that this type of facility be located at least 400 feet from homes and parks.

The resolution notes “there was significant opposition” to the plan during a public information session the company held last month at Martin Luther High School. In addition, “there was unanimous agreement that for several important reasons, a better waste transport plan needs to be found.”

The “major reasons” for the board’s objection to the plan include that it “would mean additional handling of garbage” in order to get it loaded onto trains; that “the Maspeth community would have dozens of additional movements by tractor trailers daily” between Review Avenue and Rust Street; that the additional traffic “would mean significant increased air pollution hazards to Maspeth and adjacent communities,” and because the truck traffic would cause hazards, especially navigating tight turns such as from Rust Street onto Maspeth Avenue and after leaving the rail yard.

The resolution instead urges Waste Management to barge the trash directly from its facility, build a rail support at its 38-22 Review Avenue property - which is adjacent to LIRR tracks that are only used by two passenger trains daily - or investigate other nearby properties such as the former Phelps Dodge sites.

“Part of this former Phelps Dodge site would be further from residents than the Maspeth rail yard, where there is a residential area across the street,” the resolution notes. “By reducing the handling steps associated with transporting residential garbage… barging of garbage or establishing a rail spur may prove less expensive over time.”

Under the current plan, Waste Management will build a new, fully enclosed transfer facility at the Review Avenue site. The current facility is permitted to receive up to 958 tons of garbage per day. Under the new plan, the site will be able to handle up to 2,100 tons per day and will typically receive about 1,150 tons per day, according to the company. The facility would receive 134 deliveries daily from garbage trucks, in addition to the tractor trailer trips to Maspeth. The company claims that each train will carry between 60 and 68 containers, which is the equivalent of 51 to 58 tractor trailer loads.

In response to CB 5’s vote, a Waste Management spokeswoman said the company met with the community board “and other stakeholders several times” to discuss the project and obtain input. “We are committed to continuing this dialogue with the community and to working with the city to address the issues that have been raised,” wrote Rachel Amar.

Amar noted that the city Department of Sanitation identified Waste Management’s Review Avenue property as a site for handling residential waste under the city’s Solid Waste Management Plan (SWMP). “The plan was developed over several years with input from environmental groups and other stakeholders and was approved by the City Council in 2006,” she wrote. “The SWMP is designed to manage the city’s municipal solid waste in a more sustainable, efficient manner over the next 20 years, by shifting NYC’s waste exports from a truck based system to a rail and barge based system, reducing truck traffic and vehicle emissions.”

Still, some residents aren’t accepting the additional truck traffic without a fight. Maspeth activist Christina Wilkinson has organized a rally at the Clinton Diner at 11 a.m. Saturday to call on the city to prevent additional truck traffic and instead preserve the former St. Saviour’s property, which is being offered for sale for $8.5 million. In addition to members of local civic groups, Councilmembers Elizabeth Crowley (D-Middle Village) and Tony Avella (D-Bayside) are expected to attend, along with other elected officials’ representatives.

Company Wants to Expand Garbage Facility

Plan Will Increase Truck Traffic in West Maspeth

By Conor Greene

Waste Management is seeking state approval to expand its Long Island City transfer station to handle twice as much garbage each day over its current levels. While the upgrade will allow the company to use trains instead of trucks for long-distance hauling, there is local concern since truck traffic will increase in Maspeth.

The company has applied to the state Department of Environmental Conservation to replace its existing truck-based operation on Review Avenue into a new “rail-based solid waste transfer facility” that would receive residential waste from neighborhoods within Community Boards 1-6 in Queens.

Currently, the trash is brought to the facility and then loaded into tractor-trailers for longdistance hauling to landfills in states such as Virginia. Under the new plan, the trash will be loaded onto rail containers at the Review Avenue facility and trucked several miles over local streets to the rail yard at Maspeth Avenue and Rust Street.

The facility is currently permitted to receive up to 958 tons per day. Under the new arrangement the site will be able to handle up to 2,100 tons per day and will typically receive about 1,150 tons per day, according to the company.

While the project is not subject to the city’s land use review process, the company was required to hold several public information sessions in Sunnyside this past Monday and in Maspeth this past Wednesday. The proposal is part of the city’s Solid Waste Management Plan, which aims to “shift the city’s waste exports from a truck-based system to a rail and barge transportation network, to reduce traffic and vehicle emissions, to ensure each borough is responsible for handling its own waste and to help the city manage its waste in a more sustainable, efficient and cost effective manner.”

However, while the Review Avenue facility is located alongside the Newtown Creek, barges will not be used there, according to the company. Instead, garbage trucks would enter the facility and dump the trash using one of the facility’s five bays. The trash would then be loaded into sealed containers, which are trucked to the rail yard in Maspeth. From there, it would be brought via train to the Fresh Pond Road rail yard in Glendale before it is shipped long-distance to the landfill.

The company boasts that one train containing 15 to 17 cars is the equivalent of between 51 and 58 diesel engine trucks, meaning the project will greatly reduce the amount of mileage driven and emissions produced. Still, there is local concern since the new transfer station will handle garbage from additional communities in Western Queens, since there will be an increase in the amount of trucks bring garbage to the facility, along with the new trips between Review Avenue and the rail yard.

According to a Waste Management spokeswoman, there are currently about 100 city sanitation trucks entering and leaving the facility each day, and about three tractor trailers exiting the facility for long distance hauls. Under the new plan, there will be about 125 DSNY trucks using the facility each day, and an average of four trucks an hour will make the trip to the Maspeth rail yard, replacing the need for long distance hauling.

Gary Giordano, district manager of Community Board 5, said the plan definitely comes at a cost for Maspeth and Long Island City residents. “Unfortunately that’s the price that somebody paid for the greater good, so to speak,” he said. It is certainly going to bring more truck traffic, no doubt about that. “I think what we need to do is work with Waste Management as far as the portions that are somewhat controllable,” he said, referring to issues such as routes and timing.

He also recalled issues last summer with horrific odors emanating from trains hauling garbage in unsealed containers. The trains will go from Maspeth to the Fresh Pond Road yard until they are transported out of the city by CSX. The issue with the odors came when trains were forced to sit idly on tracks near residential areas due to scheduling issues between the disposal company and the railroads.

However, to alleviate these problems, Waste Management has designed a sealed container that company officials say works “pretty well” and is working to improve the timing to prevent trains from sitting in one spot for too long.

Maspeth civic leader Tony Nunziato questioned why the city didn’t demand that Waste Management construct the facility in a location with direct access to train tracks, which would eliminate the need to haul the containers through Maspeth by truck. “I’m all for it, but my main concern is they’re not doing it at one stop,” he said. “If you’re going to make that kind of money, get the facility.”

Robert Holden, president of the Juniper Park Civic Association, took exception with the public review process and questioned why the company ran the information sessions, instead of the city. “The more questions you ask, the more you find out this thing stinks to high heaven,” he said. “They’re sealed, but they still produce odors,” he noted of the shipping containers. He also pointed out that the company’s Bronx facility is adjacent to tracks.

“Why didn’t Waste Management buy a facility next to the rail?” questioned Holden. “The city should have demanded it – that’s a real solid waste, not a phony one like this. It’s going to cut down on trucks, but not in our neighborhood. It’s going to create more traffic here, and Maspeth doesn’t need it.”

Waste Management hopes to have the new facility constructed in time to begin accepting waste by February 2011.

Company Accused of Illegal Dumping at Newton Creek

Riverkeeper, Gioia, Plan Lawsuit Against LIC Supply Co

By Conor Greene

A local City Councilman and environmental watchdog group are planning legal action against a Long Island City concrete manufacturer they claim illegally dumped waste into the Newtown Creek.

The environmental group Riverkeeper and Councilman Eric Gioia (D-Sunnyside) announced they have filed a notice of intent to sue NYCON Supply Corporation for discharging concrete waste into a tributary of the heavily-polluted Newtown Creek.

Riverkeeper, an independent organization dedicated to protecting waterways throughout the city, claims it observed NYCON employees dumping concrete waste into the Dutch Kills tributary of Newtown Creek without required Clean Water Act permits. The group also claims the company left piles of gravel and layers of concrete on the riverbed adjacent to the company’s facility.

The group filed a notice of intent last Thursday to sue NYCON, claiming the recent instance of dumping constitutes “an imminent and substantial endangerment to health and environment under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, which is the nation’s primary law governing the disposal of solid and hazardous waste.

“The pollution issues confronting Newtown Creek and other waterways surrounding New York City cannot be fully addressed without enforcing environmental laws and holding polluters accountable for their actions,” said Riverkeeper Investigator Craig Michaels. “We will continue to work with elected officials and government agencies to track down and protect environmental lawbreakers who threaten the environmental and public health of our communities.”

Both the Clean Water Act and the RCRA allow citizen groups to sue polluters, subjecting violators to up to $32,500 in penalties per day for each violation.

“For too long, Newtown Creek has been the forgotten waterway of New York City, and polluters have taken advantage by dumping with impunity,” said Gioia. “We’re here today to send a strong message that we will not stand for more dumping and more pollution in the creek. Polluters beware: we are watching, we are vigilant, and we will go after you.”

The Newtown Creek is a three-mile long tributary of the East River separating Brooklyn and Queens. It was the site of a 17-million gallon oil spill in 1950, which continues to be the center of numerous lawsuits against Exxon-Mobil by environmentalists and lawmakers. Pollution at the site dates back to the 1870s, when dozens of refineries were located along the creek banks.

The creek was recently identified by the federal Environmental Protection Agency as a contaminated area warranting further study for possible inclusion in the Superfund program.

Feds Agree to Study Newtown Creek Spill

Could Lead to Superfund Designation

By Conor Greene

Two local lawmakers are one step closer to having the Newtown Creek included in the national cleanup program. The federal Environmental Protection Agency has agreed to conduct testing at several sites along the creek, which could lead to its inclusion in the Superfund program.

Representatives Anthony Weiner and Nydia Velazquez, both Democrats who represent parts of the area surrounding Newtown Creek, had called on the EPA to test the area to see if it warranted inclusion in the federal Superfund program. Doing so could lead to millions of dollars in funding for the cleanup and allow the federal government to hold the companies causing the contamination responsible.

The creek is a 3.5-mile waterway running between Greenpoint, Brooklyn and Maspeth, Queens. It is known as the city’s most heavily polluted waterway and was the site of a huge oil spill in 1950.

This week, Weiner and Velazquez’s offices released a letter from Alan Steinberg, regional administrator at the EPA, informing them that agency will work with the state Department of Environmental Conservation, which is conducting its own cleanup of the creek, to determine what chemicals are present there.

“To address your concerns regarding testing of the abovementioned properties (Phelps Dodge, BCF Oil, Quanta Resources and National Grid), and to define the nature and extent further of the hazardous substances that may be present… EPA will review existing information from ongoing and past environmental investigations,” he wrote.

Following the review of the investigations, the EPA will “develop a sampling plan” to fill in any gaps in data that may be needed to determine whether the Newtown Creek is accepted into the Superfund program. “We anticipate that this effort will take approximately six months to complete. Once the data are collected, EPA will evaluate what additional actions, if any, may be warranted in accordance with CERCLA,” wrote Steinberg. CERLA stands for the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, which was the 1980 law creating the Superfund program.

Steinberg notes in the letter, dated August 15, that the state DEC “has investigated a number of sites in this area… that are potentially contributing to the contamination in Newtown Creek… As you know, a major impact on Newtown Creek is associated with oil releases that are being addressed through state enforcement and oversight of cleanup efforts conducted by private parties.”

The state cleanup effort involves an agreement reached with ExxonMobil forcing the company to clean up about 17 million gallons of oil that leaked into the ground and water when a tank exploded in 1950. The spill was discovered by the Coast Guard in 1978, and to date about half of the spill has been cleaned up.

Basil Seggos, chief investigator for Riverkeeper, said the announcement means “a restored Newtown Creek is within reach.” The EPA’s resources “will prove indispensable in protecting the creek and its surrounding communities from a legacy of toxic dumping,” he said.

Weiner called the EPA’s commitment to test the sites “a big win” for residents living near the creek. “These tests will help us find answers to basic questions about the spill’s health and environmental risks, giving this environmental disaster the national attention it deserves.”

In other news related to Newtown Creek, the Brooklyn District Attorney’s office announced recently that an Appellate Court judge has ruled that a case against a cement company accused of illegal dumping can move forward.

In 2005, Brooklyn DA Charles Hynes charged Constantine Quadrozzi and his company, Quality Concrete of Metropolitan Avenue with violating multiple provisions of the state Environmental Conservation Law and with dumping hazardous materials into the creek.

A Brooklyn Supreme Court Justice later dismissed the entire indictment after ruling that Hynes lacked the authority to prosecute cases under the Environmental Conservation Law without the involvement of the state DEC and that there was insufficient evidence to support the charges.

Following an appeal filed by Hynes’ office, the Appellate Division rejected those conclusions and reinstated all of the charges contained within the appeal, the district attorney announced on August 21.

Willets Point Critic Agrees to Maspeth Relocation

Crown Container Inks Deal with City EDC

By Conor Greene

One of the most vocal opponents to the city’s plan to redevelop Willets Point has reportedly agreed to make way for the project and relocate to a Maspeth site.

Jerry Antonacci, owner of Crown Container, has agreed to sell his 23,000-square-foot property to the city, according to several published reports. Under the agreement, the waste transfer company started by his father in 1959 would move from 34th Avenue to a location in Maspeth.

The city’s Economic Development Corp, which is overseeing the city’s ambitious plan to redevelop the industrial area near Shea Stadium into housing, retail and office space, has yet to formally announce the agreement with Crown Container, which was first reported last week.

Antonacci was on vacation this week and unavailable to comment on the reported deal. However, he told Crain’s New York Business, “All I can say is it’s a very good deal… The last couple of weeks we put a lot of time in, and we got it done.”

The deal with Crown Container would mark the fifth agreement the EDC has signed with the approximately 250 businesses based in Willets Point. Many owners have publicly expressed concern that the city will use eminent domain to seize their land if they don’t enter into an agreement.

While the exact location in Maspeth hasn’t been announced, it will likely be in an industrial area near Grand Avenue and 48th Street near the Newtown Creek, currently home to a number of businesses.

Sources are speculating that the city will wait until after Labor Day to announce several deals at once, according to a recent report in Crain’s.

Up to this point, Antonacci had been one of the most outspoken members of the Willets Point Industry and Realty Association, which is a group of landowners opposed to the city’s redevelopment plan. He has withdrawn from that group now that he has reached a deal with the city, but said he is still concerned about the threat of eminent domain.

“I don’t want to see eminent domain used on anybody,” he said. “I hope the city treats everyone else as good as they treated me. If they do, maybe you won’t see so much fight,” he told Crain’s.

Senator Clinton Pushes for Federal Cleanup of Newtown Creek

Superfund Designation Would Provide Federal Funding

by Conor Greene

The federal government should conduct testing at four hotspots along the Newtown Creek to determine whether a federal cleanup effort should move forward, according to U.S Senator Hillary Clinton.

In an August 13 letter to Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Stephen Johnson, Senator Clinton requests that the agency “use its Superfund authority to conduct preliminary tests at four known hotspots along the Newtown Creek.”

The letter comes just weeks after two local members of congress, Anthony Weiner and Nydia Velazquez, held a press conference calling for the 3.5-mile creek to be named a federal Superfund site. The waterway, which runs east from the East River between Brooklyn and Queens, was polluted by as much as 30 million gallons of oil over 150 years of industrial activity.

“New Yorkers living in communities near Newtown Creek have suffered long enough,” said Senator Clinton. “We know that there are dangerous chemicals in the soil, water and air at sites around the Newtown Creek. It’s time to put the resources of the Superfund program to work to conduct additional tests at known contamination hotspots to see whether a federal cleanup should go forward.”

Clinton notes in the letter that the creek “is well known as one of the most polluted industrial waterways in North America, where chemicals from factories along the bed of the creek have seeped into the soil, sediment and water.” She adds that the issue is “of particular interest” to her as chair of the Superfund and Environmental Health Subcommittee and a member of the Senate’s Environmental and Public Works Committee.

Much of the waterway’s pollution is believed to have occurred as a result of a huge oil spill, which was discovered by the Coast Guard in 1978 and is thought to cover properties on as much as 70 acres in Brooklyn. The oil spill encompasses an area that is one-and-a-half times larger than the site of the Exxon Valdez spill. However, it has never been tested by the EPA for consideration for inclusion in the federal Superfund site.

Under a state remediation plan being carried out by ExxonMobil due to a court order, about 9.4 million gallons of oil have been removed from the area so far. Officials estimate that it will take until 2026 to finish the current remediation effort. While the creek is already a state Superfund site, the federal designation would mean millions of dollars of funding for testing and remediation.

“For years, the residents in the vicinity of Newtown Creek have been forced to live, work and play with toxic fume in the air and contaminated water, soil and sediment on the ground,” wrote Clinton. “This exposure has led to community concern about potential pockets of serious illness... The people of Newtown Creek have suffered long enough.”

Lawmakers Push for Federal Cleanup of Newtown Creek

Weiner and Velazquez Want Feds to Designate the City’s Most Polluted Waterway a Superfund Site

By Conor Greene

Two local lawmakers want the federal government to declare the Newtown Creek a Superfund site, which would provide millions of dollars to help cleanup the city’s most heavily polluted waterway.

The 3.5-mile creek, which runs east from the East River between Queens and Brooklyn, was polluted by as much as 30 million gallons of oil over the course of 150 years of industrial activity, which included the explosion of an oil refinery in 1950. The spill was discovered by the Coast Guard in 1978, and is thought to cover properties on as much as 70 acres in Brooklyn.

Under a remediation plan begin carried out by ExxonMobil due to a court order, about 9.4 million gallons of oil have been removed from the area so far. However, officials estimate it will take until 2026 to finish the remediation effort currently ongoing at the site.

Now, Democratic lawmakers Anthony Weiner and Nydia Velazquez, who each represent parts of Queens in congress, want the area designated as a federal Superfund site. That could make the creek eligible for federal funding to cover up to 90% of the cost – possibility as much as $15 million towards the effort, according to the representatives.

“While the oil companies lag in their cleanup responsibilities, the health and safety of Newtown Creek residents hang in the balance,” said Congressman Weiner. “Testing these four sites will help us find answers to basic questions about the spill’s health risks and give this national environmental disaster national attention.”

At a joint press conference last week, Weiner and Velazquez called on the federal Environmental Protection Agency to conduct preliminary testing at the creek. They argue that if those tests find high levels of toxic chemicals, the entire Newtown Creek could become eligible for inclusion on the national Superfund site list.

Even though the oil spill encompasses an area one-and-a- half times larger than the site of the Exxon Valdez spill, the Newtown Creek has never been tested by the EPA for consideration for inclusion in the Superfund program. At the press conference, Weiner and Velazquez released a letter to the EPA identifying four sites along the creek for federal review, including two former hazardous waste facilities, a former copper smelting plant and a former coal gasification complex.

“It’s time for the EPA to acknowledge that the people who live here already know: the contamination of Newtown Creek is nothing short of a human tragedy,” said Congresswoman Velazquez. “The EPA should use its strongest tools possible to begin remediation. The time to act is now.”

Last September, an EPA report commissioned by Weiner and Velazquez suggested that that size of the spill was likely close to 30 million gallons, not 17 million gallons as thought at the time. It also indicated that the spill could be causing toxic vapors to leak into nearby homes and business. At the current rate that ExxonMobil is cleaning up the site, it could take 25 years to clean just 70% of the contamination, the report found.

State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo sued ExxonMobil and several other companies last year, charging them with creating an “imminent and substantial endangerment to health and the environment” as a result of the slow cleanup process.

“This is one of the worst environmental disasters in the nation, larger than the Exxon Valdez [spill off Alaskan coast] and slower in cleanup,” said Cuomo last year. “The toxic footprint of ExxonMobil is found all over this area. It is ExxonMobil’s oil that remains under the homes and businesses. And it is ExxonMobil that has dragged its feet and done as little as possible to address the dangers it has created.”

That lawsuit is still pending, but Weiner and Velazquez hope that the federal government will now step in and help the creek shed its title as the city’s most polluted waterway. The call for action comes after the House of Representatives passed legislation to have the oil spill fully mapped, so the extent of the creek’s contamination can be determined. If the law is passed in the Senate, the EPA will move forward with the more comprehensive study of the creek since the spill was discovered.

The politicians specifically want the federal government to review the four sites highlighted in their letter: a 44-acre property off 56th Road in Maspeth used by Phelps Dodge; a 37-acre site in Long Island City used by Quanta Resources for waste oil reprocessing; a hazardous waste and oil processing facility at 360 Maspeth Avenue in Brooklyn used by BCF Oil until 1994 and three Brooklyn sites owned by National Grid, which is formerly known as KeySpan.

The Superfund program was created in 1980 and gives the government the authority to force responsible parties to clean contaminated sites. According to Weiner, funding for the program has dropped from $3.8 billion in 1997 to just $178 million last year. He blames the decline in funding on expired taxes on the oil and chemical industries along with an expired corporate environmental income tax.

If the federal government designates the area as a Superfund site, a four-point process would begin. First, a one-year cleanup would immediately stabilize the area to stop any immediate threats to the community. The EPA would then perform a “comprehensive investigation of the site and analyze cleanup options,” a process that takes “months to years” according to Weiner. It would take about two more years to develop a plan for the site, after which the agency would commence with the cleanup, or force a responsible party to do so. On average, the cleanup process takes 8 to 11 years.

Photo by: Steve Garza

Kosciuszko Replacement Delayed Again

Business Owners Left in Limbo

By Conor Greene

MASPETH -- The state has decided to replace the aging Kosciuszko Bridge with two parallel structures, but the effort has once again been delayed, to the frustration of property owners being forced out for the project.

Businesses and homeowners that will be displaced were informed that the project has been delayed for about two months so that the federal government can review the project’s timeline and costs, according to the state Department of Transportation.

The latest bad news for property owners comes after the project was already delayed for six months by the Historic Preservation Department, which had argued that the aging span carrying the Brooklyn Queens Expressway over the Newtown Creek between Maspeth and Greenpoint should be saved.

When breaking the news of the delay to business owners, state DOT officials were able to inform them that a decision has been made regarding the new structure’s design. It is expected to cost $630 million to demolish the existing structure and replace it with two parallel bridges. The construction phase is expected to begin in 2011 and take about five years to complete.

The plan is to build a four lane span, demolish the existing bridge, and then complete the second span. For the several dozen businesses and three homeowners that must move to make way for the project, the latest delay is beyond frustrating. George Kosser, vice president of Karp Associates, said the news is “very difficult on us and upsetting” because it has prevented them from purchasing a new piece of land elsewhere. “For the past 18 months we have been looking for buildings,” he said. “We recently found one that is a good fit, but we can’t move on it.”

According to the state DOT, the current delay is due to federal regulations requiring that state projects costing at least $500 million must under go a “risk assessment.” The federal review is expected to take place by the end of this week, in hopes that DOT can submit its formal plans to highway officials in Washington.

"It was unexpected," said state DOT spokesman Adam Levine. "We had spoken with the New York division office of the Federal Highway Administration, which said it wouldn't be a requirement, but the Washington office stepped in and said we have to."

The feds first told the state DOT that the study couldn't take place until October, but then agreed to perform it immediately, according to Levine. "We told them, and the division office told them that it is unacceptable because we are so close to completing the environmental study. It could have been worse, but it still is not anything we're pleased with."

With 100 employees, Karp Associates, which has been in Maspeth for 52 years, is the largest of the companies being forced to move. Before the project was announced, the company purchased additional land near its current location at the foot of the bridge so that it could expand its operations. “We had already hired an architect over four years ago, and then heard about the potential for the project and put everything on hold,” said Kosser. “We’re overcrowded beyond belief internally, and it’s hurting us.”

The problem now is that Karp can’t move ahead with a purchase of new land until it is assured that the project is moving forward, otherwise the funds currently earmarked to relocate businesses won’t be available. “Any risk that we take prior to the formal commitment from the DOT to us is strictly at our risk,” Kosser said. “If I go and buy a building and they don’t [move ahead with the project], I don’t have any recourse.”

Kosser indicated that any further delays might force Karp’s hand and force ownership to move ahead with the expansion project. That in turn would cost DOT money, as the amount they must compensate Karp for taking the land would increase. “I can’t stop forever,” he said. “We cannot continue down the path we have taken up until this point if the DOT can’t give us a firm date we can hold.”

The DOT says it sympathizes with the property owners and understands that “delay and uncertainty make it difficult to move forward with new leases.”

For Kosser and business owner Adam Gold, one positive of the whole ordeal has been the support it has received from the community. “We are overwhelmed,” said Kosser. “The residents and people from the community board literally stood up at meetings and told the DOT it was unfair what they are doing to Karp and other businesses. When [the process started], we thought for whatever reason that the community would never care about that happened to businesses. The community has been unbelievably supportive of our position, I can’t say that strongly enough.”