Below is a detailed and informative brief put together by John Link, President of the W. 141st/142nd Street Block Association. John took the lead in protesting this when the issue was first raised two summers ago.
Our Mayor plans to dump a huge garbage transfer station near us, and, incidentally next door to our waste treatment plant, Riverbank State Park. Once it gets put there, the stink--morally and in our air--will be forever.
Please educate yourselves, talk to others, send and share this information, and begin calling and writing your elected officials to tell them to STOP this plan. Robert Jackson, our Councilmember has stated publicly that he he would "look like a fool" if he opposed this, which is startling.
Marcus Edward
President
Hamilton Heights Homeowners Association
LinkJ@wpunj.edu wrote:
Hi all,
Everyone who is interested in the garbage issue should go to:
http://www.ci.nyc.ny.us/html/dos/html/swmp2k.html
(the City's Solid Waste Management Plan) and download the chapters on the
135th St. Marine Transfer Station (MTS):
Chapter 1: Description of the Proposed Action (which describes the rules for
site selection in section 1.4 and an overview of the W. 135th St. MTS in
section 1.4.3.2.3)
Chapter 2.11: West 135th Street Modified MTS, Manhattan
Chapter 13: Environmental Review - West 135th Street MTS Site
The plan calls for the expansion of the current 135th St. MTS (which is
immediately south of Riverbank State Park and visible from the Fairway
parking lot) from its current 6/10 of an acre to 4.9 acres, an increase of
more than 800%. This plan is described in detail in the documents mentioned
above, complete with drawings and photographs.
The site selection rules given in the plan state that no existing MTS should
be considered for expansion if it is within 400 feet of residential zoning
districts, public parks or schools. The only other MTSs in Manhattan -- at
E. 91st St. (near Gracie Mansion) and W. 59th St. (near Donald Trump's new
development) -- were removed from consideration for expansion partly because
of these rules. The 135th St. MTS, on the other hand, was given a "qualified
pass," even though it is only 220 feet from a residentially zoned area and
only 60 feet from Riverbank State Park, and 50 feet from Riverside Walks, an
area designated as parkland. Clearly the site! selection rules were violated
in order to ensure the 135th St. MTS would not be removed from consideration
for expansion.
The proposed 800% increase in the size of the 135th St. MTS is also of great
concern, particularly since the City's claim that the site is suitable for
expansion rests on the repeated assertion that the expanded facility would
be "similar to the existing facility in industrial type and function,
physical size, location, operation and operational capacity." This is
patently false. The physical size of the expanded facility is eight times
greater than the existing facility. The peak capacity of the new facility
2300-4320 tons per day. The current levels processed at existing facility
1240-1440 tons per day. The City's false claim is used again and again to
assert that there will be no adverse impacts on air quality, on truck
traffic, on noise, on water quality, etc. Surely there were studies done to
verify thes! e assertions? No. "Because analysis of traffic impacts was not
required for the West 135 th Street Modified MTS ... Future Baseline
conditions were not estimated." "Because there are no additional Department
collection vehicles delivering waste to West 135 th Street Modified MTS than
under Existing conditions, no off-site air quality analysis is required.
Noise was studied, but "No changes in on-site noise levels are anticipated
by 2002; therefore Future Baseline conditions are expected to be the same as
Existing conditions." It is evidently easy to conclude a facility adds no
noise if you study it before it is built!
There is a lot to be upset about in the plan. Particularly galling is the
description of the expanded MTS as a positive part of "waterfront
development": "The West 135 th Street Modified MTS site redevelopment, as
described in Section 2.11.2, would help to restore and revitalize the
industrial waterfront property and ! would be compatible with existing and
neighboring industrial uses."
Christina Lee informs me that there is a provision in the plan saying the
DOS has no plans to increase the throughput of garbage through the 135th St.
MTS and that if those plans change, it may not use the existing
Environmental Impact Statement. This is good news, but it does not change
the fact that the expanded MTS would have a capacity three times that of the
current MTS. It would be naive to assume that capacity will remain unused.
I've attached a copy of my testimony to the City Council two summer's ago. I
collected 500 signatures on a petition and sent copies with a letter to most
of our elected officials in the summer of 2000. C. Virginia Fields issued a
press release around the same time raising many of the same issues.