BROOKLYN COMMUNITY BOARD 6
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
JUNE 6, 2016
ATTENDANCE
J. Armer P R. Levine E M. Shames E R. Bashner E S. Lonial P M. Silverman P P. Bellenbaum A R. Luftglass E S. Turet P P. Blake P E. McClure P R. Underwood P P. Fleming P T. Miskel P G. Kelly P M. Racioppo A. Krasnow P
P = present, E = excused, A = absent
GUESTS:
E. Landau – Rep. for Department of Environmental Protection K. Clarke – Rep. for Department of Environmental Protection D. Abramson, Rep. for Mayor’s Community Affairs Unit
*** M I N U T E S ***
Update and report by the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) on the City’s siting recommendation for the retention tanks and components for the Gowanus Canal Superfund Remedy.
Eric Landau and Kevin Clarke from the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) made the
presentation.
NYC DEP has spent two years trying to figure out where to place the required Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) retention tanks. Eighty-six possible sites were reviewed, and two sites were chosen. OH 007: DEP chose the same location that EPA recommended. (Salt lot at 2nd Ave)
RH 034:
o DEP preference is adjacent to the canal on private property, which is contaminated. o EPA preference is on Thomas Greene Park, which is City-owned land that is also contaminated.
Contaminants are: CSO sediments from sewer overflow, and coal tar from manufactured gas plants.
Pros & Cons: 1. Thomas Green Park: a. To remediate soil and rebuild pool and park = 4 years. (National Grid) 1
b. To include retention tank will add 6 years. Total = 10 years of construction with no available pool. (Retention tank is DEP responsibility) c. Head House: required for accessing and cleaning up the tanks. Will take up parkland. This would require alienation of the parkland, and a loss of playground space. d. Tank would take up 30% of the park e. NYS DEC has stated that the park does not pose a health risk.
2. Private site: a. Located on the canal, closer to the pumping station. Less conveyances to reach canal. b. Easier access and containment of the site. c. Nevins Street remains open to traffic.
City of New York has a draft agreement (an Order) with EPA that includes two “pivot points”; dates after which DEP has to change course and use City-owned land.
1. March/April 2018: ULURP process must be underway. Public review process for the City purchase of private property for use as sewage retention tanks.
2. April 2020: Acquisition of properties for retention tank. City wants to purchase the sites. Eminent Domain would be a last resort.
EPA has 3 options: 1. Sign the Order 2. Make changes to the Order 3. Say no to the Order
City is working with the property owner, Alloy. They are also trying to work out an agreement with Eastern Effects, which operates out of a building as a tenant on Alloy’s site.
o DEP will continue to study both sites. o National Grid will do pre-investigation for sites. o City will do remediation for the tank site. National Grid will remediate if it is just for the pool o City will work with Alloy and let them build after, but there is a “tie-back” requirement, i.e. a set- back requirement from the canal that will severely hamper building location. Amount of tie-back is not confirmed yet. o There is no replacement for park and pool yet (i.e. temporary replacement?) o Cost of tanks is $700K+. DEP says that original cost was grossly underestimated by EPA. o DEP’s preference for a Staging Site is along the canal, directly adjacent to tank. Currently home to Eastern Effects. It is contaminated and has to be first remediated.
Questions: o Why take an actively-used site with good jobs, when there are other underutilized sites? o What about other parcels that have been identified: Parcel 3, Con Ed, a combined 6 smaller lots. Answer: All of these options are east of Nevins, which would require closing the street. o Con Ed site: Con Ed says No, They want to build a substation. City could use eminent domain, but cannot condemn property of another condemning entity, without going before the court. Con Ed is also next to NYCHA. 2
o 6 small sites: Too small and right next to park. More complicated acquisition. o Parcel 3: Contaminated and smaller. Need parcel 3 & 4. o Why, after two years are we here now without fully understanding the impact of the options? o What happens if the street is closed? Answer: Preliminary siting work is all that has been done to date. Now the full design and environmental studies (EAS) can be done. o OH tank at 2nd Ave: NYC Sanitation owns the site and is planning to install a shed to protect the salt lot. What happens when tank is built? Answer: Shed will have to come down and then be rebuilt. Cost is a couple million compared to the overall $800 million price-tag for project. Also, City will get several seasons use out of the shed which is not a “substantial” structure. o Timing: Why so long? And why would the DEP preferred site take less time? Answer: remediation has to happen on both sites. But on the park site, after remediation, the tank then has to get built. Very big excavation and components = 6 years. If the park is just remediated then the pool can go back in right away.
Finalize Annual Review of Brooklyn Community Board 6 Committee Structure.
The purpose of suggestion of a realignment of the committees was to reinvigorate them and activate the members and membership. However, committees seem to be getting more engaged through this process, so shifting everything around my not be needed anymore.
Two Committee Changes are suggested, and ratification is requested: 1. Permits and Licenses will become a stand-alone committee.
2. Environmental Protection will merge with Parks (and meet on the current Parks night)
This change to the committee structure is unanimously approved.
Suggestion was made that Permits and Licenses should create a Co-Chair position so that the Chair is not wholly responsible all the time. The Chair agreed that would make sense.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
The minutes were submitted by Ariel Krasnow.
3