Comments on: Civil society strategies on the Gowanus Canal

By: Truth Out

Truth Out — Tue, 26 May 2009 16:51:53 +0000

The comments by Owen of the Dredgers is riddled with miss-information. Their years of accepting funding from Toll must be twisting their perspective.

And as for the final option he spells out in point #8, the EPA rivers program funds are far less than available under Superfund and lack any method to collect cleanup costs from the polluters. This dead-end alternative is being proposed to muddy the waters even more.

By: Gennaro Brooks-Church

Gennaro Brooks-Church — Tue, 26 May 2009 12:34:23 +0000

Here is what our Canoe Club head Owen Foote has to say. My head is spinning from the many conflicting statements I’m hearing, all of them with logic. Here is another:

1. The superfund is not “broke” as may have been mis-stated. The Superfund trust fund lacks the sufficient funds to clean up even a small number of the sites on the NPL. see: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/20/nyregion/nyregionspecial2/20Rsuperfund.html?_r=1&fta=y&pagewanted=all
2. The current owner or operator of a site may be held liable for remediation costs.
3. No Environmental Impact Statement has been conducted to disclose to our community what the effects of this litigation and construction may have on our environment. The project will not be subject to ULURP – our City review of significant land-use changes.
4. The EPA has not disclosed what density, height, etc. of Gowanus development is anticipated to finance the cleanup project.
5. The EPA should describe all public benefits to accompany the construction project. (ie: local hiring, affordable housing, educational institutions, recreational, environmental, educational, maritime opportunities, etc.)
6. The cleanup project is estimated to cost between $400M and $2B (or more) and may result in the displacement of every manufacturing job in the Gowanus neighborhood as those uses would likely need to be replaced by higher revenue-generating uses, including big-box retail and residential.
7. The project has no intention to address or remediate the Combined Sewer Outfalls that currently contribute to canal pollution.
8. Other waterways are receiving Federal funding without suing property owners and operators and the EPA has not disclosed why that approach is not an option for the Gowanus. See: http://www.epa.gov/region09/nepa/letters/los-angeles-river-revitalization-master-plan-DEIS.pdf

By: FROGG

FROGG — Sun, 17 May 2009 19:37:54 +0000

Founded in 2003, FROGG, Friends ans Residents of Greater Gowanus is missing from this assessment. This is a community group of local citizens concerned for the health of the community. FROGG has worked with Columbia graduate environmental and architecture students on numerous projects in order to expand the discussions about what to do about the Gowanus and the water quality and Brownfield problems. Please see the book: ECO GOWANUS, self published by Columbia Architecture school.

FROGG and the Professors at Columbia who have studied the environmental issues of the Gowanus support the Superfund cleanup for the Gowanus.