We got an email from the Friends and Residents of Greater Gowanus group (FROGG) called “Defend the Gowanus.” It’s about a new online petition calling for a cleanup of the deeply polluted canal and protecting it from development that would worsen conditions. Here’s the email:
I wanted to share this petition I created online that essentially takes an adopted resolution by the Sierra Club of New York to protect the environs of the Gowanus Canal in Brooklyn. Some of you may be very well acquainted with Gowanus and its long industrial history, but presently there is a debate ensuing on permitting an exemption to allow for spot rezoning. This rezoning will open the development of residential housing along the waterway. This development, while promising for the community, will disrupt the environmental balance of the canal. The canal currently has not received any public funding for remediation and likely will not receive the appropriate funds going forward. Private development has committed to invest BUT in very limited capacity.
There are over 50 LETHAL pathogens in the canal which are contained by a natural state of remediation. Any disturbance will elevate the levels of toxicity and risk of exposure to nearby residents (including my family, friends and neighbors). More disconcerting is the risk of potential tidal surges that will spill the waters of the Gowanus into our adjoining communities. Gowanus is currently designated by FEMA as a flood zone.
You voice will represent the defense of the health and safety of the Brooklyn communities and our Gowanus environs. You are not obliged to sign, but your support will not go unnoticed or underappreciated. If you can click this link and look for the button on the web page which states “view whole petition” you will be able to review yourselves. The more this petition can be distributed electronically, the greater its support.
(The full name of the petition is “Defend Gowanus (No Love Canal Here)”
We the undersigned, in an effort of protecting all waterways, seek a thorough cleanup of the Gowanus Canal, followed by an environmentally sound comprehensive community derived plan for any development, and the perpetual monitoring of the area for pollutants. We support the resolution submitted by the Sierra Club of New York.
The Gowanus Canal area (Brooklyn, New York) is undergoing changes from its currently manufacturing zoned to proposed spot zoning residential. As a result of this proposed change, the Gowanus environment, while already very damaged, will prevent its own vital and necessary natural remediation. Natural remediation provides the most effective alternative in absence of a comprehensive government cleanup.
Over 50 years, the Gowanus natural wetlands and habitat have been dangerously compromised as a result of industrial pollution and lack of action by public or private cleanup. This petition rejects this spot development along the canal as it endangers the health of local residents and the promise of any meaningful remediation. .
13 responses so far ↓
1 solidago // Dec 11, 2008 at 11:41 am
Huh? This is one dumb and misguided petition. A bunch of luxury housing along the canal that dramatically increases the corridor’s value, owned by wealthy and entitled folks used to getting what they want would be the best damn thing to ever happen to its health. Those of us here now who aren’t hopeless idealists realize that the government is not going to spend hundreds of millions (and probably billions to do it right) of dollars to clean up the canal for our benefit, and frankly shouldn’t. Furthermore, a lot of us are here as a direct consequence of the pollution – if it weren’t for the industrial hangover of the neighborhood, rents would likely be a lot higher and you wouldn’t have the great mix of folks we have now. The new residents who will have millions invested in property along the canal, however, will likely have a much different attitude.
2 designforlife // Dec 11, 2008 at 3:14 pm
solidago comments lays offer a confused reality:
Government “frankly shouldn’t” cleanup our public waterway for the citizens of New York, even thoughthe City is the primary offender.
That those living here because of the “industrial hangover of the neighborhood” will face ” a lot higher” rents with the development.
And that “wealthy and entitled folks (does this mean all those Palin folks?) who invest millions into this contaminated site will have “a much different attitude” when they discover the extent of the environmental drawbacks of their new home. (They sure will; so just who will they be suing here).
woo… dumb and misguided?
3 designforlife // Dec 11, 2008 at 3:15 pm
solidago comments offer a confused reality:
Government “frankly shouldn’t” cleanup our public waterway for the citizens of New York, even thoughthe City is the primary offender.
That those living here because of the “industrial hangover of the neighborhood” will face ” a lot higher” rents with the development.
And that “wealthy and entitled folks (does this mean all those Palin folks?) who invest millions into this contaminated site will have “a much different attitude” when they discover the extent of the environmental drawbacks of their new home. (They sure will; so just who will they be suing here).
woo… dumb and misguided?
4 duffy // Dec 11, 2008 at 3:37 pm
solidago-
I hear your passion. Let’s try a different angle to frame what you just posted.
Let’s start with the fact that Gowanus is contaminated. It’s just a fact. ..not fiction.
Private development promises to do their part to clean up. “Cleanup” means controlling their sewage discharge and putting on a “green roof.”
The toxins in the canal are buried as a result of years of nature healing itself…NOT billions of dollars from government or private interests which goes sorely lacking.
Develelopment will tear apart what is now contained…it’s a fact, not fiction.
Rents would not be much higher if the industrial area were clean… rents are driven by jobs.
I signed this petition not because I’m a ‘hopeless idealist,’ but because I’m a commited parent.
It is my responsibility NOT to be blind to the facts for the sake of my kids….take alook around at the blundering mistakes made by the people throwing money around at our expense.
We are all paying for it. I won’t stand to pay for this one.
5 Mare // Dec 11, 2008 at 3:57 pm
amen solidago. I’m always amazed when current residents in old industrial neighborhoods such as Greenpoint, Red Hook, Sunset Park don’t get this.
6 free donia // Dec 11, 2008 at 4:56 pm
And where will the money come from? Given that NY is in financial crisis. The only way is to get user fees from people who want to near the canal. That will require development. You can either have a dirty canal with no one near it or a cleaner canal with development. You can’t have a clean canal with nothing on it(or only three story buildings)…
If you think you can you have obviously been drinking THAT water……
7 skunkworks // Dec 11, 2008 at 5:27 pm
solidago makes an interesting point; the petition’s author is probably someone wealthy enough to make a difference who’s recently moved into the area.
8 hannible // Dec 11, 2008 at 5:51 pm
NOOOO! Leave it polluted. If it gets cleaned rents will go up and the real estate agents will start selling it as beach front property! That is all we need.
9 loise // Dec 12, 2008 at 1:39 pm
Seems the choice here is sewage filled water co-habatiting with industrial structures and open space; or sewage filled water co-habatating with 12 story homes buildings all creating more sewage. What a lovely for all those wealthy and entitled folks!
10 gogo // Dec 12, 2008 at 4:30 pm
The new admin in DC will have money for infastructure work. Seems to be a good time to get that Army Corp wetlands restoration project up and running.
Then after the problems are sincerely addresses the tax payers should get to decide just how this area should be used.
11 anon // Dec 14, 2008 at 7:12 pm
The first time I read this, I seriously thought it was an Onion headline. Anyone who can use the term “Gowanus natural wetlands” clearly does not live in the area, and has no idea what they’re talking about.
Given a choice between the area being an abandoned dump for the next few decades and having a new development come in that offers to clean things up a little, the choice is pretty obvious.
12 local // Dec 18, 2008 at 5:45 pm
I couldn’t help but notice that few bloggers have their facts wrong. The choice to “clean things up a little” is misguided.
The petiton is correct in its content- wonder if anyone read it through. I also wonder if bloggers also read the environmental reports.
The reports are a lot to read, but crystal clear. The canal is in an inert, but very dangerous state. Development does not succeed in cleaning anything but improving the canal’s curb appeal. According to the studies, their is significant risk to tearing up the canal waterfront without real cleanup. Whether Toll development puts on a ‘green roof,’ it does not seriously clean anything. Our health is more 100% important than developing this back ass.
No question the development will spruce things up, but the approach is like offering 100% financing to a borrower who has no credit…sounded good for alot of people and look where that got everyone.
Clean it up. If our elected officials did their jobs, we’d have the money. Do it right and everyone gets what they want.
13 BrownFEELd // Jan 28, 2009 at 7:43 pm
Does anyone know what is involved in Brownfeild remediation? It involves pouring a clay cap ontop of the toxic area. When the EPA comes in to clean a toxic industrial site they clean it to a level of relative safety. They do not remove toxic contaminants, they cover them, just as “natural remediation” or accumulating new sediments do over time. Even if it’s “cleaned up” future development would have the same underlying toxins to contend with. So really it’s a catch 22. I wish the group formulating the petition would stick to thier most compelling argument: “We the undersigned, in an effort of protecting all waterways, seek a thorough cleanup of the Gowanus Canal, followed by an environmentally sound comprehensive community derived plan for any development , and the perpetual monitoring of the area for pollutants. We support the resolution submitted by the Sierra Club of New York.”