Red Hook Trolleys and Bus Service Reductions - Take the RHED Survey

In recent transportation news, the Red Hook trolley plan, supported by Congresswoman Nydia Velazquez, seems to be gaining steam and getting more publicity (stories here, here and here), and that's good news, considering the imminent reduction in transportation options we're facing with the combining of the B61 and B77 bus services.

The Red Hook Economic Development group - RHED - an organization that represents small-business owners in Red Hook and advocates for improvement in our neighborhood's amenities, quality of life and overall vitality has put together a survey to gather information from Red Hook residents and businesses about their transportation needs. Please take a couple of minutes to fill it out and have a voice in the discussion about this matter. Results of the survey will be conveyed to our elected representatives and the MTA. Also, there will be a Community Board 6 Transportation Committee meeting this Thursday, which RHED is also encouraging you to attend.

This from RHED -

Please complete the 2-minute survey (http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/CJ5TSRY ) to help Red Hook Economic Development (RHED) demonstrate to New York City Transit (NYCT) Red Hook's need for public transportation.

As many of you may be aware, New York City Transit intends to merge the B61 and B77 bus lines among a host of service reductions that would go into effect on June 27^th. RHED’s Transportation Committee is concerned that should the merger go ahead, the expanded line will be subject to

· Overcrowding - essentially fitting the riders of two bus lines onto one

· Slower travel times - to accommodate longer boarding times at each stop for the increased usage

· Schedule delays - less likely to keep on schedule due to traffic conditions miles from Red Hook (ex. A bridge going up over the Gowanus).

Please also join RHED as we voice these concerns at Community Board 6’s Transportation Committee meeting on Thursday May 20th at 6:30 at Long Island College Hospital (339 Hicks Street), where NYCT will hear from the community regarding the service cuts.

Port Authority Statement: Brooklyn Residents, the Ships are Killing You. Health Costs approaching $9 million per Year.

I've encouraged you before to pay attention to the admittedly mind-numbing and long-winded process that has been taking place at the Public Service Commission (PSC), the outcome of which should set a "tariff" (rate of electricity supply), supplied by Con Edison, that is economically viable for the cruise ships to hook up to "shore power" at the Brooklyn Cruise Terminal (BCT). This will allow them to stop "idling" constantly while in port, turning off their extra-dirty diesel burning engines in a practice called "cold ironing". This electricity rate, once set, could also apply to other locations and provide the potential for the establishment of "shore power" throughout the Ports of New York (and possibly beyond) to be used by all different types of ships - like the container and cargo ships that also idle in port, using the same extra-dirty diesel that the cruise ships do - thereby encouraging the wider practice of "cold ironing" and achieving air quality and health improvements on a much broader scale.

The process at the PSC has been hard to follow, from their initial refusal to make any ruling on this case in April 2009, saying it was basically outside of their jurisdiction (making the assertion that it was the New York Power Authority, not Con Edison, that supplied electricity to the Port Authority owned piers on which the Cruise Terminal operates). Then, earlier this year, in an apparent contradiction of this initial statement, they accepted the case, asking for "public comment" etc., (my post here) but with no resolution as yet, as far as I can see.

I happened to bump into a couple of people over this last week who have been following the case closely, and their take on the process was not that reassuring. One person referred to the PSC as being something like "the Kremlin", (archaic, impenetrable and secretive perhaps?), and another with some inside knowledge saying it was "typical Albany" - not very reassuring considering the recent news (here) that another Albany based agency, the State's Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), had been aware of the dangerously high levels of PCBs at the Red Hook Ball Fields for nearly a decade, but had neglected to pass that information on to the City of New York and the Parks Department, let alone the Latin American food vendors, soccer players and visitors who have been using that park for many, many years. It seems that the Public Service Commission, like this other Albany based agency, despite the urgent and important statements made by the Federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) at that initial hearing where the case was strangely proclaimed to be out of the PSC's jurisdiction, is not exactly viewing this case with the importance and urgency that is required. (The important EPA statements presented at that initial hearing are permanently listed on the side-bar of this blog).

That prompted me to go the the PSC site and check out was was posted about this case - No: 09-E-0428. Link (here). There, among the many documents posted, were public statements in support of the creation of a Con Ed "shore power" stand-by rate from Council-member Brad Lander, Assemblywoman Joan Millman, The Columbia Waterfront Neighborhood Association and from the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey.

All of the statements supported the establishment of the new power rate, noting the harmful effects of ship smokestack pollution and particularly their negative health impacts on the residents of our neighborhoods and the city as a whole, stating, as per Joan Millman's letter, that they "damage lung tissue, increase respiratory illness, suppress immune systems, aggravate breathing problems and asthma" and additionally that they "contribute to premature death for people with respiratory and cardiac disease".

Additionally, they noted that the air quality of the communities surrounding the port constantly "fail to meet national air quality standards" including levels of ozone and particulate matter.

All these statements were well and good and many points were ones we've heard before, but when I read the statement from the Port Authority, (click here), that's when things really got down to the nitty gritty.

The Port Authority, in a letter directly from their Executive Director, Chris Ward, had a whole section titled "Negative Environmental and Human Health Externalities".


Chris Ward's signature, above. Click HERE for a Google docs version of the full letter.

In the section I mentioned, above, Mr. Ward noted that the implementation of "shore power" at the Brooklyn Cruise Terminal (BCT) alone would reduce the "harmful air emissions" that the ships visiting the terminal produce significantly (by 98% in fact) - 100 tons per year of SO2 and NOx each, and a reduction in particulate matter and CO2 by 6 tons and 1,500 tons respectively. He also noted that with an increase in cruise ship calls to the terminal (as is anticipated, according to statements I heard at a Port Authority Public Board Meeting last year), these reductions would obviously be greater.

Mr. Ward's statement went on to list in more detail the heath impacts of these and other ship emissions -

"According to the EPA's Health Effects of Shipping Related Air Pollutants", these pollutants will "damage lung tissue, causing inflammation and resulting in lung damage and reduced lung function, increased respiratory illness, and aggravated breathing problems; cough, chest pain, asthma. Even short term exposure to SO2 has been shown to irritate and restrict airways, increase chest tightness, and reduce mucus clearance. Studies of the health effects of PM (Particulate Matter) also show that particles damage lungs, increase asthma attacks, aggravate bronchitis, reduce lung function growth in children, increase risk of cancer and cardiovascular disease, and contribute to premature death and hospital visits of people with respiratory and cardiac problems."

Then Mr. Ward mentioned Red Hook and our neighbors, specifically -

"Due to close proximity to port pollution, communities near the BCT" (the Brooklyn Cruise Terminal in Red Hook) "face increased health risks, and have been actively calling for a shore power solution."

Continuing, Mr. Ward wrote about the matter of the health benefit/cost to our residents, in terms that everyone seems to take notice of - dollars.

"Using the Yale Air Pollution Emissions Experiments and Policy Analysis Model (APEEP)" Mr. Ward wrote, "we estimate that the annual health benefits emissions reductions arising from a switch from on board generation to shore power at the BCT, adjusted for Kings County, approaches $9 Million"

In other words, the annual monetized health cost of the cruise ships visiting Brooklyn on our community is estimated to be $9 million. This is the figure for the cruise ships alone, right now - not even taking into account the equally dirty-diesel burning container and cargo ships visiting the adjoining Container Terminal, nor any of the predicted increase in ships visiting the Brooklyn ports in the future.

Wow.

Actually, that doesn't surprise me, considering the recent study in Charleston, N.C., that estimated the monetized annual health cost to the residents of the operation of their soon to be expanded port, the 10th largest in the country (the Ports of NY and NJ are the 3rd largest), to be $81 million (just to be clear, that's per year). You can only imagine what the entire yearly health cost of our much larger ports is on our much larger and more densely populated metropolitan area.

So there it is. They're saying it out loud. Ship pollution - It's dangerous. It's harming our kids. It's killing us. It's costing us and the city a sh*tload of money and there's a solution - a solution for the Brooklyn-based cruise ships at least, that would pay for its own implementation, in health care savings in our neighborhoods alone, in under two years. These statements are coming directly from the head of the Port Authority, the Big Kahuna ..... but what is the Public Service Commission doing or saying?

Cue: crickets

Mr. Ward states that the "status quo ... is not acceptable in the long term" and that the Ports of NY and NJ need to 'get with the program' in regard to greening their ports' operation, as is being done on the West Coast and elsewhere. The setting of the power rate will not only allow this to happen and encourage these money-saving and life-saving practices in all of our city's ports and communities, with all of the different types of ships - container and cargo, too - but will spur the adoption of these practices and spread their resultant benefits even further afield.

And as far as "getting with the program", thankfully the Port Authority is making a start and has committed money to getting this done at the Brooklyn Cruise Terminal, committing at least $8 million for the required infrastructure, plus receiving an EPA grant around $3 million to assist this plan. Also, the cruise operators, Carnival, have committed to retrofitting their ships at approx. $1-2 million each.

So what's the missing piece? The Con Ed shore power rate to make it happen.

Sure, we could insist the cruise ships hook up to the shore power, regardless of cost (perhaps covering the extra cost by adding an "asthma and morbidity reduction levy" to a glass of Champagne - charging 50c more, perhaps), or maybe Marty Markowitz, the terminal's loudest advocate, could come up with the difference in cost out of his office's budget. What about the NYC Economic Development Corporation (EDC) who, in 2006, brought the $56 million terminal to our neighborhood without "cold ironing" infrastructure, physical or commercial connection to the community, public space, aesthetic sensibility, nor even the ability to use the terminal building as a function venue when the ships aren't in - there's no kitchen, loading dock or even windows to look out at the harbor? Maybe the EDC could pay the difference until the wrinkles were "ironed out" (no pun intended) with Con Ed.

But the bottom line is, we're all going to pay for it anyway, in some way, so let's just get this done in the way that it is being pursued now - as frustrating and befuddling as that may be.

This should be an easy task. These entities - Con Ed, the PSC and other interested parties - they should be able to come to an agreement in the name of improving the health of our kids, at the very least.

If they don't sort this out quickly, shame on them, and perhaps the residents of Red Hook, the Columbia Waterfront, Carroll Gardens, etc., should take the advice of a friend and neighbor who, like many of us, is frustrated with this whole process. She suggested that we encourage our neighbors and their children to go to the Cruise Terminal at the end of our street to greet the next port call of the Queen Mary 2 ..... wearing gas masks, carrying banners saying "NO IDLING" or "Your ship's smoke is killing our kids" or "You Cruise - We Lose" ... you get the idea.

I wonder if Marty will turn up.

Help Plan The City's Waterfront - Brooklyn Meeting *Tonight* - Monday, May 17th. 6pm

As I mentioned in a previous post, here, today is the day for New York City's Department of City Planning Brooklyn-focused "workshop", convened to gather input from the public to help shape their newly announced initiative, Vision 2020 - New York City Comprehensive Waterfront Plan.

Click on their flier, below, to enlarge for details.


They held their initial meeting on April 8th (slideshow and summary of presentation here), but during May and June, as promised, the City is holding borough specific meetings - they're calling "workshops" - to concentrate on getting input regarding local issues. There is a list of upcoming meetings here.

This from their web site -

We will be holding public workshops in May and June in each borough to present an overview of each Borough’s waterfront resources and to discuss the future of specific waterfront sites. At these workshops, City Planning will present an overview of the borough’s waterfront resources and existing uses. We’ll then break into small groups to discuss particular segments of the Borough’s waterfront, what we refer to as Reaches. For each reach the groups will discuss opportunities and challenges for the future of specific sites along the waterfront. We’re also holding a sixth public meeting to discuss the Blue Network and other citywide issues.

Brooklyn's workshop will be held, as follows -

May 17, 2010, 6-8:30 pm
Brooklyn Technical High School
Dekalb Ave. & S. Elliot Pl, Brooklyn.


View Brooklyn Technical High School in a larger map

See you there.

Red Hook Mercado Opens Tomorrow! Saturday, May 5th.

As mentioned in the previous post, starting tomorrow you can get your non-toxic tacos, papusas and other Latin American fare from some of the excellent Red Hook Ball Field vendors, plus some German fare from the yet-to-open Van Brunt Street "Grindhaus" and baked goods from Brooklyn's "Fattycakes" and more at the "Red Hook Mercado". Kicking off at noon, at 410 Van Brunt Street, between Coffey and Van Dyke Streets.

Hope to see you there!

.

State DEC has known about the high PCB contamination levels at the Red Hook Ball Fields since "at least May 2001."

Image from Wall Street Journal

Put this one in the "company pollutes and puts people's health at risk while authorities say nothing" category.

The local papers have been covering the revelation that Red Hook Ball Fields, where the Latin Food vendors and soccer matches take place on the weekends, is contaminated with PCBs that have been found in the soil at levels over 100 times more than is deemed safe. The PCBs are a result of chemical spills from a property, previously occupied by the now bankrupt Chemtura plastic additive company, that abuts the Red Hook Ball Fields. The latest revelation, via this Wall Street Journal article (here), is that the State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) first found hazardous-waste violations at the site during the 1990s and has known about the dangerous levels of cancer causing PCBs since "at least May 2001", and, despite the fact it has been taking legal action to try to force Chemtura to clean up the contamination, the DEC has not kept the City, the Parks Department, nor the people using the field informed.

What action is the City now taking? This from the WSJ article -

The city, newly aware of the fight, said Wednesday that the Parks Department would measure pollutants in the park. The 58.5-acre space is home to scores of youth soccer tournaments, adult softball leagues, playgrounds and the popular Latin American food vendors, who operate during soccer games. The Health Department said it plans to analyze soil samples from the area closest to the shuttered plant.

"We will rely on the Health Department's evaluation of test results to determine whether further action is warranted," said Parks Department spokeswoman Vickie Karp.

What are the DEC saying about their lack of communication?

Yancey Roy, a DEC spokesman, said, "The agency followed the necessary outreach protocols, but in retrospect we could have done more." (my emphasis)

Ya think so, Mr. Roy?

In the Wall Street Journal article, John McGettrick, co-chair of the Red Hook Civic Association is quoted -

"It's frustrating," he said. "Why didn't they (the DEC) say anything? If this was property adjacent to Central Park, would people be dealing with this in such a cavalier fashion?"

In Gary Buiso's Brookyn Courier article, (here), Community Board 6 District Manager Craig Hammerman is quoted -

“If the state is not sharing information with their city counterparts, then it seems they are not acting in the best interests of the public,” he said.

Hopefully, despite the DECs poor communication, the testing will take place, the uncertainty will be soon cleared up (or chemicals cleaned up), and the "Soccer Tacos" will be able to continue their raging weekend trade without fear of what is in the the ground under their feet and those of their customers.

Anyone wanting a guaranteed non-toxic location to eat their tacos and papusas should head to the new "Red Hook Mercado" on Van Brunt Street, opening this Saturday, where some of the Ball Field vendors will be dishing up their delicious food in a more traditional (and PCB free) environment.

.

Red Hook Welcomes Phoenix Beverages.... er, Long Feng Trucking?

This week, a resident of the Columbia Street Waterfront sent me an email noting a recent uptick in beer delivery trucks on their residential streets.

"What's the scoop with Phoenix in your neighborhood? They are rolling right through our neighborhood on Columbia Street - cited 7 in 20 minutes today!

They were supposed to be using the inside of the pier only.

I was under the impression that they had a uniform fleet with their logo - but no they use various beer trucks with the branding of the actual beer company."

Is that right? It seems as though the trucks don't necessarily have "Phoenix Beverages" on the side. They have the decals, etc., of the various beer companies covering them, and nothing in particular to say that they're Phoenix Beverages trucks. (They certainly don't resemble the clean, glossy brown, newly painted trucks that Phoenix and the EDC proudly displayed in their PowerPoint presentations at their "community outreach" meetings.)

So, this week, late one afternoon, I attempted to confirm these observations and took a look at the new line-up of trucks parked in front of Pier 7, on Columbia Street at the bottom of Atlantic Avenue. (Right next to the soon to be opened Brooklyn Bridge Park's children's playground at Pier 6).

And there they were - parked all in a row after completing their day's deliveries, I assume, with some more trucks coming back through the gates to park for the night. Before me was yet another parking lot with amazing Brooklyn Waterfront views to add to Red Hook's collection (Cruise Terminal, Fairway, Ikea, the ATF Building next to Valentino Pier, etc.).


But on the side of the trucks, there was no indication they were from Phoenix Beverages. What was written on the side was "Long Feng Trucking", with a Laight Street address. Who is Long Feng Trucking?



Googling "Long Feng" at the Laight Street address showed no results, but on further searching I found this - an ad for a job opening at Long Feng at this Long Island City address in Queens - 37-88 Review Avenue.


A quick Google Maps search of this LIC address showed - aha, "Phoenix Beverages".

Here are a couple of screen shots of their old LIC location. I'm not sure if they're still operating from there during their relocation to the Red Hook Piers. You can see the truck with actual Phoenix Beverages markings with the same address as "Long Feng" painted underneath entering the compound.





Mystery solved - it seems as though Long Feng Trucking licenses their trucks to Phoenix Beverages. Whatever the situation, it's pretty clear that "Long Feng Trucking" trucks are "Phoenix Beverages" trucks.


So, look out for those trucks in our neighborhood. As the resident who emailed me noted, these trucks are supposed to be using the internal roadways within the Container Terminal site as much as possible, only entering via Bowne Street (Cruise Ship Terminal entrance) and the bottom of Atlantic Avenue - next to the Pier 6 BBP kiddie's playground. If you see the trucks regularly straying from those routes, it may be an idea to give Phoenix a call on 718-609-7200. Greg Brayman is the owner / VP of Operations who guaranteed at community meetings that these measures would be adhered to. Alternately, you could always email the NYCEDC, who pushed for the deal to bring Phoenix to Brooklyn's waterfront at both Piers 7 and 11, as they have the contract with Phoenix, and it was their contractual requirement - included as a response to objections from the community about the additional 200+ truck trips a day that Phoenix would be bringing - that Phoenix ensured that that their trucks use these internal roadways as much as possible. The EDC's general email is - info@nycedc.com - you should write to the attention of Seth Pinsky (Pesident), Venetia Lannon (VP Maritime), or Andrew Genn (also at the Maritime unit).

There is still no sight of any of those flashy, new, cleaner, CNG (Compressed Natural Gas) burning, brown trucks that Phoenix has also promised, the introduction of which is part of their contractual obligations. As part of their contract with the EDC they have 7 years to convert their entire fleet to this cleaner fuel.

Also, I have seen nothing of Phoenix's operations at Pier 11 at the Atlantic Basin yet. Remember, Phoenix's deal (insisted on by the EDC) meant their taking of both Pier 7 and most of Pier 11 in a 20-year lease - despite only ever asking for either one or the other.

Pier 11 shed and Imlay St. buildings behind.



Pier 11, on right, and Atlantic Basin.


Well, these new trucks and their resultant pollution and congestion will join the other new additions to our neighborhood - the cement trucks at the new and quietly opened cement plant next to IKEA and across the street from Added Value's Organic Farm. (Click here for a slideshow courtesy of Vivian Doskow)



They make lovely bookends to our neighborhood, don't you think?

Anyone want to attend a "Vision 2020 Waterfront Planning" workshop? - see my previous post, below.

Have your Say on Waterfront Planning - Come to the Brooklyn "Vision 2020" Workshop, May 17th, 2010.

What do you hope to see on our waterfront in the future? Big box stores? Luxury condos? Cement plants? More trucks? More pollution?

Do you have some ideas of what would be appropriate for the Red Hook waterfront? Do you like the idea of having more open space, public access (both physical and visual) and people-friendly activities and amenities? Do you hope for better waterborne transportation options? Are you interested in how planning for Red Hook's waterfront can be better connected to the future plans for Governors Island? Are you interested in the push for the "greening" of the various activities along the waterfront? Are you hoping for the City and its agencies to take a more balanced, resident-friendly approach to future planning along our waterfront and in our neighborhood? Does your small business hope to benefit from planning that better connects it to the broader neighborhood and beyond through the waterfront?

Would you like any development to conform to the EPA supported guidelines called "Smart Growth for Coastal and Waterfront Communities"? (See them here)

We'll here's your chance to have a say -

As I mentioned in a previous post (here), New York City's Department of City Planning is holding meetings to gather input from the public to help shape their newly announced initiative, Vision 2020 - New York City Comprehensive Waterfront Plan.

They held their initial meeting on April 8th (slideshow and summary of presentation here), but during May and June, as promised, the City is holding borough specific meetings - they're calling "workshops" - to concentrate on getting input regarding local issues. There is a list of upcoming meetings here.

This from their web site -

We will be holding public workshops in May and June in each borough to present an overview of each Borough’s waterfront resources and to discuss the future of specific waterfront sites. At these workshops, City Planning will present an overview of the borough’s waterfront resources and existing uses. We’ll then break into small groups to discuss particular segments of the Borough’s waterfront, what we refer to as Reaches. For each reach the groups will discuss opportunities and challenges for the future of specific sites along the waterfront. We’re also holding a sixth public meeting to discuss the Blue Network and other citywide issues.

Brooklyn's workshop will be held, as follows -

May 17, 2010, 6-8:30 pm
Brooklyn Technical High School
Dekalb Ave. & S. Elliot Pl, Brooklyn.


View Brooklyn Technical High School in a larger map


Here's the flier. Click on it to enlarge, get transportation information and more.



All this talk of Waterfront Planning reminds me, again, of the words of Bert Hooijer, professor of applied science at Rotterdam University in the Netherlands, who was in New York in September last year as part of the "H209 conference, a Trans-National Look at Modern Urban Water Challenges", a part of the larger Henry Hudson NY400 celebration. Professor Hooijer was on Brian Lehrer's show on WNYC (hear the interview here) and spoke of developing the waterfront in the "right way", with "multiple functions". He said the goal was to "get people to it" and to "combine several disciplines" to "develop the waterfront in a new way."

Professor Hooijer went on to say, "the most beautiful thing to do is to bring the people to the water ... bring the local people to the water ... give people activities to do on the waterfront side" and "on the water" and to "use the quality of the people who are living next to the waterfront."

Good ideas from the Dutch professor ... and surely good ideas for "Roode Hoeke".

See you at the meeting. (And if you can't come you can submit comments on-line, here)

.