I was waiting for when this would be available since for some reason, SCA does not have it on their website.
Oh, so the site's contaminated. Well that's no shock. There was an active factory on the site when I was a kid. But if this info is in the EIS that the elected officials had access to, then I just have to ask...
Why was Eric Gioia (the great public advocate candidate) up in arms that a school was opened at a contaminated site in LIC but not here? (Gioia voted yes)
Why was the great environmentalist and earth scientist Jim Gennaro going apeshit over the same LIC site but not here? (Gennaro voted yes)
Why did comptroller candidates and financial geniuses John Liu, David Weprin and Melinda Katz not question why the City would go through the expense of using eminent domain to acquire contaminated property that will also require an expensive remediation? (Liu, Weprin and Katz voted yes)
Why was Maria del Carmen Arroyo upset about the toxicity found at a proposed school site in her Bronx district but not here? (Arroyo voted yes)
Why was Charles Barron more upset about perceived Archie Bunkerism than about the health of innocent minority children once again being endangered by The Man? (Barron voted yes)
Why didn't grandmother Helen Sears question the SCA's choice of site? (Sears voted yes)
Why does Elizabeth Crowley want a school in her district built on top of a contaminated site? Why was enrollment an issue for her but not this? (Crowley voted no and then whined to the papers last week that it was everyone else's fault the council voted yes but hers. But she also unbelievably said she could have gotten more no votes if she tried.)
Why is Randi Weingarten not holding a protest in front of this site to protect the health of her members and the children they teach?
Why did Community Board 5 attach a bunch of stipulations onto their yes-out-of-guilt vote, but not include anything about remediation or monitoring?
Why is Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum not concerned about this? Why is she not holding SCA's feet to the fire for failing to submit the required site remediation and post-construction monitoring plan prior to the council vote?
Why did we allow such god damned morons to take charge of our city?
Why are you reading about this for the first time on a blog instead of in the mainstream press?
132 comments:
Not only is the site contaminated but let us not forget the cell towers aiming at the site. Nice S.C.A. don't tell the parents!!!
DIZZY LIZZY TOOK AN AX, GAVE HER MARRIGE 40 WACKS.
WHEN THE COPS SAW WHAT SHE HAD DONE, SHE SAID B.J.'S ANYONE?
Stepford voters
Good job Crappy, exposing these idiots. None of them deserves to hold public office. It's supposed to be their job to protect us from this crap.
When a site is found to be contaminated, shouldn't that end it's consideration as a location for a school?
It's sad that we apparently have overdeveloped so much that we have to force our kids to learn in toxic environments.
Liz didn't ask enough questions. Actually none of these sheeple council members did. All they see is UFT money.
Yes indeed, it's pathetic that blogs are becoming the only source of real info in this city. The government hides it and the papers help them. If the Bloomberg administration had its way, they'd outlaw Blogger and Wordpress!
More school contamination in the news this morning.
Hey, Queens is not alone, either!
Why did we allow such god damned morons to take charge of our city?
The question should be how do we rid ourselfs of these morons effectively?
The site of the new Metropolitan Schools (or as I call it, the School that Blotted Out the Sky)was contaminated. Did you guys ever hear of remediation?
Yeah, it would have been great if the toxicity of the Metro site had fended off this mega-school but alas, no.
Land is too valuable a commodity in NYC to stay vacant forever. If the ground is contaminated, they will dig it out and do what they have to do.
Sorry but a little contamination is not going to save from incoming hoards of young people.
"Why is Randi Weingarten not holding a protest in front of this site to protect the health of her members and the children they teach?"
Because she's very, very busy preparing the fixed questions for her paid-for council member UFT employees. Oddly, none of the questions is concerning putting teachers and children on toxic waste sites that have microwaves beamed through their heads all day.
Did Weingarten agree with the Commissar to permit this proposed school to be a testing ground for the effects of long-term exposure to toxic fumes and microwaves. Think that's a stretch? What about the use of kids for testing all sorts of new drugs - with the illiterate non-English speaking parents signing "informed" consent forms written in legalese English?
And, does anyone actually believe that the UFT or these council members who voted for the proposed school did not know the facts? They could have known and should have known. Believe me - they did know. So, the remaining question now is: what did it cost the UFT, the Commissar and the inner-circle gang at City Hall to purchase the Council's silence?
Want control? TAKE control. Dump them all on November 3.
Require all candidates to answer all your questions. Write, email, your questions. Pepper them and refuse to stop until you get straight answers. Attend every sort of event where the candidates will speak or debate. Stand up and ask your questions.
Good, honest people running for an office welcome all sorts of questions. The devious snakes evade, limit, lie, and even try to embarrass anyone who dares to ask questions. Be more aggressive in ridding these people from any office.
Since no candidate can ever agree with you on every issue, you have to do a lot of sifting. What is most important to YOU? Does the candidate come close to agreeing with you on the important issues?
Do you detect honesty, integrity and character in the candidate? Or, is the candidate just another expensively dressed, big smile, blow-dry celebrity shaking hands and acting like a celebrity?
November 3. Take back control day!
WE NEED SCHOOLS!!!!!!!!!!!
Crappy you have done the work on this and served the public.Wow! I am sitting here stunned. Just when you think you understand how corrupt and uncaring the "leaders" are, this comes in. I think there is big money to be made in remediation; and contaminated land like this would never go to the developers--they get prime cuts of beef--so it goes to the schools. Eminent domain enriches somebody--the developers and bribe taking pols. This has to stop. Bastards!
The site of the Metro Ave school had been mostly remediated BEFORE the SCA took it over. We are going to foot the bill for the eminent domain, the cleanup, the construction and the post-construction monitoring. Then there's always the chance that once they start digging, they find out it's contaminated worse than they thought.
Trilby said...
Did you guys ever hear of remediation?
Yes, I heard of it. They did that in LIC, the pump broke and the vapors were detected in the school. As Crappy pointed out, the pols went nuts in 2007 when that came to light. What assurances do we have that the kids won't be exposed to that here?
Good point, reading this EIS, it sounds like the plan for this school is exactly like the LIC one, with a vapor pump put in place.
You all really are sad. You will grasp at anything to whine about. Why don't you just say that you are all a bunch of crabby nimbys who don't want anything built or any activity near your homes.
Wow, remediation is needed. Big deal, remediation is often done before building.
I don't like Crowley, but she came in late to this process, got concessions on this school's size and zoning for the district, gave a speech calling for no votes, and voted no herself. And for this all you big mouths still crucify her. You wonder why everyone considers you to be Archie Bunkers - you have the same judgment, maturity and mentality that he did.
From the Times article:
"The plaintiffs’ lawyers said they hoped to meet with the city to discuss the judge’s order, which requires the construction authority to submit a supplemental environmental impact statement laying out its plan for long-term monitoring.
“It puts the School Construction Authority on notice that they would be breaking the law if they don’t put forth a detailed monitoring plan before the City Council approves the site,” said Dave Palmer, the lawyer who handled the suit, filed by New York Lawyers for the Public Interest."
Don't think this was done here.
"The plaintiffs’ lawyers said the ruling could set a precedent for future construction of schools on brownfields, polluted sites that Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg has singled out for cleanups and redevelopment because they are among the last parcels of vacant land in the city."
And there you go. Give away all the city-owned land to developers for luxury condos and this is what you're left with.
Apparently there are school groupies who are ok with the city poisoning our children and also with spending millions of dollars we don't have during a recession to remediate contaminated land when there are other sites out there that quite possibly require little to no remediation and no eminent domain. It's a shame what parents have been brainwashed into believing is for the good of their kids.
"she came in late to this process, got concessions on this school's size and zoning for the district, gave a speech calling for no votes"
Crowley did not get concessions on the school's size. This was suggested by CB5 and SCA also realized that another middle school was not needed in this area and cut that piece out. As for District 24 priority, it doesn't matter when the school will not only be themed, but only takes the students with the best grades. Crowley herself said local kids only have a 1 in 20 chance of getting into the school so what kind of accomplishment is that? As for her speech, I printed it multiple times and she didn't call for no votes. She just explained why she was voting no. She admitted to the Chronicle that she could have gotten more no votes if she had tried. A smart council person would have questioned the remediation plan especially since none was presented as was required by a judge's ruling last October. And she can't blame Gallagher or anyone else for her failure to bring that up.
It's funny how the CEC and PTA were against the school just before the vote, but now that it has passed, Dmytro is writing letters defending Crowley.
"Why don't you just say that you are all a bunch of crabby nimbys who don't want anything built or any activity near your homes."
Please show me the person who lives across the street or down the block from a NYC public high school and thinks it's great. Please also show me those great people who have begged for high schools to be built on their street. I'll come back to this post in a decade or so and check.
I like how the Times Newsweekly corrected Crowley's assertion that Forest Hills High School has a 96% graduation rate. Crowley obviously doesn't know what she's talking about or will deliberately lie in an attempt to pull the wool over her constituents' eyes.
The more Liz speaks, the more apparent her lies become. She can't wriggle her way out of this one.
Sins of omission are sometimes worse than sins of commission. As in this case where Crowley not only lied about her opposition to this school but failed to disclose to her constituents that the site was contaminated.
So let me get this straight...
The site is contaminated.
The site needs to be remediated.
Before this is done the site needs to be acquired.
The owner does not want to sell it at the price being offered by the city.
Eminent domain will therefore be used to purchase a contaminated site that requires remediation.
Other contaminated and supposedly remediated sites where schools have been built have been shown to not have been cleaned up thoroughly, putting people's health at risk and pols went bonkers over it.
There are alternate locations where it's quite possible that none of the above would apply.
Yet the council voted to allow this school at this site under these conditions in these economic times.
You've got to be kidding me. Who's getting paid off? There can be no other explanation if you think about it because this defies all common sense and logic.
Has Joe Addabbo taken a stance concerning this school issue? What are his thoughts from the state level that helps fund these school projects?
Way to go Crappy. At least there is someone out there that is watching out for our children!!
Gutt-bomb is the worst public Advocate
we have ever had she is just a PR person for Bloomy.
Do you think she would be quiet on this if this school were the elite
Stuyvesant HS?
This location is not next to surrounding homes. It has a warehouse, office and the LIE around it.
Where are these alternate locations everyone keeps spouting about?
It is directly across the street from homes and the LIE is a block away. And the alternate locations were mentioned here. Why put out a list of alternate locations if you don't plan to investigate them? Why did they concentrate on the St. Saviour's site in their testimony before the council but not list it here?
Also, the site behind the Queens Center mall and the closed hospital were also suggested. As they are near subways, they make more sense than this location.
Let's put this back in the lap of
Mayor Bloomberg where it rightfully belongs!
Is he not the captain of the NYC
vessel?
Is he not a "staunch advocate"
of education?
I guess he feels that subterranean
fumes escaping from soil contamination won't affect the learning process!
Well...
during the 18th century
society had do deal with such maladies as "the vapors" and "the humors"...
so why should a little 21st century
poison bother Emperor Bloomberg?
"When a site is found to be contaminated, shouldn't that end it's consideration as a location for a school?"
You would think, but guess what, they will just sell the public more bs saying they will clean it up and build the school anyway, just like what they are doing on 164th street by Queens Hospital Center.
"It's funny how the CEC and PTA were against the school just before the vote, but now that it has passed, Dmytro is writing letters defending Crowley."
Dmytro Fedkowskyj, the Queens representative on the citywide Panel for Education Policy, doesn't know what day it is.
He sits on the community planning board but he NEVER mentioned that the Maspeth school would be a theme high school and impossible to locally zone. He is clueless and keeps echoing his mantra on overcrowding but NEVER mentions that the area of proposed HS is overcrowded WITH SCHOOLS.
"so why should a little 21st century
poison bother Emperor Bloomberg?"
It should bother him greatly being he is the leader of the save your children from second hand smoke person, you would think something like this would make his head blow off. But i guess when there is money to be made certain dangers could be overlooked. Hey these guys are all great at cherry picking health reports. Either way they do it to their advantage and we the people are usually the losers one way or another. The Poor Children how they are so used by our leaders as pawns. Makes me sick to say the least.
A state-owned site will be the location of the Gateway to Health Sciences High School, a school in Briarwood that has not been built yet. When a petroleum contamination was discovered there, the city initiated a cleanup plan that Kevin Forestall, community board member and president of the Hillcrest Estates Civic Association, who was involved with this project, felt was sufficient. Forestall said, "We would have preferred not having a school in that location. We felt like we couldn't have stopped it."I think the correct word considering Kevin's quote, is "insufficient". But sad that the community's concerns were swept under the rug.
"The site of the Metro Ave school had been mostly remediated BEFORE the SCA took it over."
Really????? I beg to differ. That land lay vacant and dormant and contaminated (to what degree I don't know) for years. Nothing whatsoever was done there until the school was scheduled to be built. Then, it looked to me like they simply dug a foundation (there's your remediation!) and started to build. I live right there and I'm very aware of what went on at the site.
But the fact remains, no one wants to live right near a big school, no one hopes a big school gets shoehorned into their peaceful nabe, but people keep having children and we need to get them educated. So someone is going to live near a school. It's unavoidable. One just hopes that the schools you have to put up with will at least serve local kids. That is not too much to hope for, is it? That the people who put up with the school also be served by it? It's a reasonable trade-off.
God knows who will be going to the Metro Schools- 200 special ed kids concentrated in one of the schools sounds kinda scary.
"but people keep having children and we need to get them educated."
You are correct. However, the problem is exacerbated when you have a sanctuary city and have no idea how many people actually live in an area. You then find yourself with tremendous shortages in school seats. It's bad enough that they come here illegally; we don't need our mayor encouraging it.
Remediation is a scary prospect. I read 2 stories this morning about school contamination, one where the kids got really sick. There is no guarantee to not have problems (and lawsuits) down the road unless you start off with a clean site.
Are you kidding with these alternate sites? You listed 5. Two of them are being used for schools. Another one has been approved for a school. Two were determined unacceptable because of the irregular shape and size, and right of way issues with a railroad.
What hospital site? St. John's? That wasn't available at the time, and who knows how that property will be used in the future.
Crappy, you rock.
This really should have be in a major newspaper / tv news, etc.
It is disgusting that we're blowing money to buy a contaminated site to build a school on.
so let me get this straight. there is a contaminated site next to your house. the city is offering to come in and clean it up. you don't want them to do that and would rather that they leave it alone. you are concerned about kid in a school that has not been built yet? If i lived there I'd go to my doctor asap and get screened for cancer.
"If i lived there I'd go to my doctor asap and get screened for cancer."
I think I'm safe as long as I don't drink water from a local well (there are none) or grow and eat crops on that land.
But I think the contanimation issue is really a cover for saying we don't want *those people* coming into our neighborhood to use this school.
Without being racist about it, yeah, it is an imposition to live near a school. It is less of an imposition if the same people enduring the school are also being served by it. If thousands of kids are coming from outside the nabe and the school's neighbors have to deal with that, it's not fair!
That's my opinion anyway.
Instead of going by your "opinion" why don't you do a little research and determine whether your "opinion" is a reasonable one.
My sister narrowly missed sending her child to the Long Island City school with the broken vapor pump.
People had "opinions" on that too, but it is the children exposed to the volatile substances who will have their lungs ruined.
Many chemicals are VOC's, that is they are volatile compounds that can aerosolize and be breathed in. Common substances that share this characteristic include a wide variety of industrial solvents used in the cleaning and de-greasing of machinery.
My best friend's mother, a tea-totaller, had to endure question after question about her cirrhosis of the liver. She worked in at least two industries exposed to liver destroying chemicals: hairdressing and as a match factory worker.
No one ever paid her a dime for taking at least 20 years off her life and forcing her to stick to a diet so strict that her water intake was monitored.
If you think this high school is such a deal, don't even bother to send your child. Instead, buy the "safe" property at presumably depressed prices near that site and move right in.
build schools on every corner because District 24 is overcrowded.
build schools on every corner because District 24 is overcrowded.
build schools on every corner because District 24 is overcrowded.
build schools on every corner because District 24 is overcrowded.
build schools on every corner because District 24 is overcrowded.
build schools on every corner because District 24 is overcrowded.
I went to a Catholic school during the height of the baby-boom where teacher's contracts were unheard of and there were 50 children to the class.
My high school years were spent during the worst of the fiscal crises years when students sat on the floor and on radiators.
Never, during all my life did we suggest that we build schools over cancer ridden cesspools. Perhaps we can find an active volcano to site a school on. It would be safer. If we have to run schools in shifts and teach by the light of the moon, never resort to this.
If we have to take a leaf from the Irish during penal times and teach in hedgerow schools in the fields, never this.
I have had neighbors who had 2 forms of cancer simultaneously because they foolishly exposed themselves to unproven chemicals for money. If you would not live on the site, send no one's children there.
"so let me get this straight. there is a contaminated site next to your house. the city is offering to come in and clean it up. you don't want them to do that and would rather that they leave it alone. you are concerned about kid in a school that has not been built yet? If i lived there I'd go to my doctor asap and get screened for cancer."
This is an industrially zoned lot. We have manufacturing zoning because these sites tend to become contaminated and the zoning is a way to keep them somewhat separated from the residences. We shouldn't be building schools on them.
"Are you kidding with these alternate sites? You listed 5. Two of them are being used for schools. Another one has been approved for a school. Two were determined unacceptable because of the irregular shape and size, and right of way issues with a railroad.
What hospital site? St. John's? That wasn't available at the time, and who knows how that property will be used in the future."
No, SCA was kidding with those sites. how do you list them as alternate sites when there are schools being built on them already?
Don't you understand that the whole thing is a joke?
Just think if anybody cared what they would find in "5 pointz".
Asbestos anyone?
For those so sanguine about remediation. Let me give you some true examples of remediation in action.
Right now in Rockaway Beach an active remediation program is going on on a 100-year old gas plant that was covered over with earth and relatively safe.
The neighbors are have conniptions because "remediation" of this site is putting once-contained gas vapors into the air, and trucks full of contaminated earth past their houses.
Given the known corruption in construction, who knows where the contaminated landfill will end up, perhaps next to you.
Second, I was a secretary for American Society of Civil Engineers during the early 90's. While I worked there an active asbestos removal was being conducted in the engineering center building where I worked.
I asked Dr. Phrang, a leading forensic engineer and president of the 150-year old society what his opinion was of this work.
He told me that asbestos removal was a scam because encapsulating the material was much safer and prevented its release into the air.
If engineers can violently disagree, how do we know whether the correct view wins the argument?
"Why does Elizabeth Crowley want a school in her district built on top of a contaminated site? Why was enrollment an issue for her but not this? (Crowley voted no and then whined to the papers last week that it was everyone else's fault the council voted yes but hers. But she also unbelievably said she could have gotten more no votes if she tried.)"
HEY CRAPPER, CROWLEY MADE A DEAL WITH THE SPEAKER. CHRISTINE "THE NOT SO GREAT" QUINN ALLOWED CROWLEY TO VOTE NO ON THE SCHOOL TO MAKE IT LOOK LIKE SHE WAS FIGHTING FOR HER COMMUNITY. BUT IT HAS NOW BEEN CONFIRMED THAT CROWLEY DID NOT LOBBY ANY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO VOTE HER WAY.
Did Crowley actually think she was going to get away with this? What an idiot!!!
Crowley is in the pockets of the construction unions.
That's who she represents, not the people of the 30th Council District.
April 14, 2009; Queens, NY – In regards to the Environmental Impact Statement on the Maspeth school site Council Member Elizabeth Crowley released this statement:
“The School Construction Authority and the Department of Education are obliged by law to clean up any contamination on school construction sites before building a school,” said Council Member Elizabeth Crowley. “Toxins in soil on industrial sites is a given. The soil contamination was identified in the Environmental Impact Statement because it is apart of their plan in addressing the issues in order to clean the site before constructing the school. As Council Member, I will ensure that Department of Environmental Conservation, the Department of Environmental Protection as well as the School Construction Authority and the Department of Education follow the law by purifying the soil before they think about building a school on this property. Bottom line, I stand behind my vote which was against this school.”
Dizzy Lizzy apparently still hasn't read the report. The fumes CAN'T be cleaned up, so they have to devise a system to vent the vapors out of the ground while the kids occupy the building. This same system failed in LIC and put the kids health at risk.
If anyone wants to read the entire report, I have uploaded it here.
Elizabeth Crowley did not read the EIS report and didn't know about the contamination of the property.
Elizabeth Crowley is unqualified, incompetent and her office is ill-prepared for the responsibilities for the day to day tasks of her position. In November, CD30 needs to upgrade. She won't have Obama heading the ticket and they must elect someone other than Crowley. She is an embarrassment to the good neighborhoods she pretends to represent.
Good work, Crappy!
I tip my hat to you.
“Toxins in soil on industrial sites is a given."
Wow, is this woman for real?
Why do any testing on industrial sites since toxins are a given?
Does Crowley read the newspapers?
Does she understand that school after school are showing elevated levels of toxins in the air our children breathe?
Crowley is the only councilmember to make any sort of headway in the Maspeth high school proposal. Pinky did nothing. Phony tony Como did nothing.
Crowley actually did something and you still are not happy!!!
Batman never revealed his identity.
Why did crappy reveal hers?
Simple
No Bloomberg= No school
LIZ VOTED NO!!!!!!
DIZZY LIZZY SHOULD RESIGN NOW BEFORE SHE HAS A TOTAL MELT DOWN. NOT ONLY IS SHE STUPID BUT THE PEOPLE SHE HAS BLGING HERE AND SUPPORTING HER ARE JUST AS STUPID. THEY SHOULD STAY OFF THE SITE, UNLESS THEY CAN USE THEIR REAL NAME AND NOT ANONYMOUS. SHE IS A DUMB BROAD, PLAIN AND SIMPLE. AND SHE CAN FORGET ABOUT RUNNING AGAIN CAUSE THE LITTLE PEOPLE SHE HAS SUPPORTING HER WONT HELP HER WIN. SHAME ON YOU DIZZY LIZZY!!!!!!
I sent the EIS to the media yesterday, was interviewed by NY1 about it and the NY seems very interested too. I supposed that's why that non-answer was released to the public. The question was why Liz didn't bring it up during the council hearing, not what she is planning to do about it now.
If smoking is forbidden in city schools, why is breathing toxic fumes required?
You hypocrites are trying to reach for anything you can to hide the fact that you just don't want anything built on this site or anywhere. I would think more of you if you just admitted that you were Nimbys instead of all this pretense. It won't work.
I don't live in Maspeth, and I don't want anything built on that site either. Astoria is a hot-bed of cancer because of our several superfund sites including Polletti Number 5.
Why would I want anyone's child exposed to these chemicals when I know what they can do? Only someone ignorant of the dangers of Brownfields could possibly call for this.
Again, if you are sure these people are NIMBY's, buy property near this site and move right in. You should be able to get it cheap with all the bad publicity about it, and after all, it is perfectly safe.
They clean the site and remove the toxins before building the school. I know that is tough for some of you to understand . . .
No they aren't. They are installing a pumping system to divert the vapors away from the building. Too bad they have been known to fail, as in LIC. Sorry that's too hard for you to understand.
BLOOMBERG IS A CRIMINAL!
And the voters are worse if they re-elect this tyrant!
Great post Queens Crap, great post and yes those questions on Weprin, Liu and Katz are on the ball. Liu is unethical and heartless. Don't ever vote for John Liu. Weprin is simply too stupid to function. the brain is stupid, plain and simple and Katz goes for the $$$$$. Vote for Yassky and send Liu back to communist China were he belongs.
(You hypocrites are trying to reach for anything you can to hide the fact that you just don't want anything built on this site or anywhere. I would think more of you if you just admitted that you were Nimbys instead of all this pretense. It won't work.)
Idiot, the MTA is raising the fares and public transportation and pollution is already high. why shouldn't children go to their local schools? Why build schools for kids to travels miles via bus and trains. Most of the school transportation passes are paid by taxpayers. what a waste of money and unnecessary congestion. it is all about money for the developers and education contractors and not for the kids.
Yassky, hmmm? And just how did he vote on this project? Oh, that's right...YES.
And who pull all the strings are FUGLY Christine Quin and KINGPIN Billionaire Bloomberg. He gets richer and this city gets poorer. I hope he dies.
And Bloomberg controls the press, why isn't this story in the papers? poor kids exposed to toxic, wtf??? I hope all the parents sue the city and bloomberg and bankrupt the city and bloomberg.
who voted NO?
And Bloomberg is posing as Mayor that is Green and he put kids in toxic sites. Then he is the one who stated kids should wear sweaters since he had no air conditioning when he was in school. This motherfucker cares about the Israeli kids but not about NYC. I hope he dies.
This story has had no press exposure, other than the local papers. Where is the Daily News, New York Times, NY Post? Where does the Mayor stand on this issue? If he wants to run for Mayor, he would surely get a lot of votes if he squashed the school and exposed the SCA for the criminals and liars that they are. I can't believe our government would take the chance of exposing children to this toxic dump, just so someone can be paid off. This story needs to be on the 6:00 news. No more cover-up.
Why would the press print a story about the City cleaning up a site to build the school? Big deal. Let's get with reality people . . .
Because the City has supposedly cleaned up contaminated school sites before only to find they didn't do a thorough job and the site was still contaminated.
This is coming out in the papers and on TV, not to worry.
Who voted NO?
Corwley Voted NO. I dont understand you people. The italians have been running this district ever since i could remember; Only helping themselves and their firends.
Now, we actually have one of us in the council and your still no happy.
You people are really stupid. Remember what you had before, I sure do.
Very true.....these people are never happy!
I agree. Let's just go back to the way it used to be. NOT!
"The italians have been running this district ever since i could remember; Only helping themselves and their firends.
Now, we actually have one of us in the council and your still no happy."
Not sure what this is supposed to mean. Irish? We had an Irish jerk named Gallagher who opened the door to this and an Irish lass named Crowley who pushed it through. So looks like Irish is not the way to go either.
gallagher is a rapist, LOL
"we actually have one of us in the council and your still no happy. "
yessa, i still no happy wit da crowley dumb ass machene... may be wee shulda go backa to shool.
Crappy - so basically you would rather have (what you think) to be a toxic site, and let it remain so, rather than have them clean it up?
You would rather have whatever is on that site leach into your home, which this site is obviously close to?
It's not spreading, the vapors are rising into the building and the parking lot. So let's build a school there!
Is that in the report? I haven't read it...Rain causes things to leach into the soil offsite. Sometimes there is more of a danger offsite than onsite, given how the water underneath the soil moves.
Says the groundwater's clean.
Well that's good to know. That means that the stuff that they found there can be scooped out, and the site can be remediated pretty easily. They replace it with clean fill. They definitely have to do a much better job of the venting systems though.
Thanks for staying on top of this.
Actually, it does not mean that at all. NYC background levels for contamination (which is what SCA uses) are above USA Eastern Levels which are more stringent. This doesn't make sense right now, but it will soon.
Crappy is soo short-sighted..its disgusting
No, short sighted is building a school on a toxic site and then your kids dying of cancer in their 20s because of it.
What is USA Eastern Levels?
Got this today:
"I read the EIS statement created by the School Construction Authority and find it highly ambiguous and lacking scientific credit in its present format. I
recently noticed the news coverage regarding this newly constructed school sitting on Toxic Soil containing RCRA compounds that may be higher than the acceptable levels. I am requesting to see the hard-data chemical results from this project. Also, I
am wondering what chemical standards were being used? Was it DEC TAGM#4046 or Subpart 375-6: Remedial Program Soil Cleanup Objectives?"
- James Cervino, PhD
I think the question should not be whether the site is contaminated but rather whether or not it is able to be remediated. If the groundwater is clean, I think that means that the pollution isn't going anywhere and that it is isolated - both on the site (the pollution isn't going down) and off.
I think a more relevant point is that the SCA uses NYC measurement standards, which allow for levels of carcinogens in amounts that cause cancer. The stricter DEC levels fall below this level and for a school site, are the levels that should be used. Which means it's probably REALLY contaminated.
Suprised that Marge "Won't Someone Think of the Children" Kolb and Dmytro "Let's Build High Schools on Every Corner" Fedkowskyj and Dan "Let's Not Have Local Zoning" Creighton weren't concerned about contamination at this site.
Instead of trying to use outlandish scare tactics about vapors and toxins, why doesn't Crapper just admit that he doesn't like anything new and doesn't want anything built near his home?
Anonymous, (from another anonymous!) Can you share any studies that show that NYC allows for more carcinogenic amounts? I'm curious.
I think your point is relevent, regardless of this study. But I still think that if the site can be cleaned of whatever is there, high levels or not, I'd rather it be cleaned rather than have it sit there.
"Instead of trying to use outlandish scare tactics about vapors and toxins, why doesn't Crapper just admit that he doesn't like anything new and doesn't want anything built near his home?"
I live miles away from this site. But thanks for the hypothesis.
"But I still think that if the site can be cleaned of whatever is there, high levels or not, I'd rather it be cleaned rather than have it sit there."
And the next commercial owner can be the one to take care of that. There are several who are interested in the property but haven't been able to negotiate because of the threat of eminent domain.
"And the next commercial owner can be the one to take care of that."
I don't think they have to, because its zoned commercial - and because they would probably use the building as is.
If its that bad, I say clean it the hell up now, rather than wait till the people next door to the site start getting sick. I think they are the real victims here.
No one lives next door. But when they start digging this crap up and releasing it into the atmosphere, the people across the street may start to get sick.
Maybe New York City and the taxpayers should not be the ones stuck with the cost of cleaning up this site, and the possible lawsuits that could follow.
I have already cited several examples of the danger of toxic chemicals from my own life.
Now a few more: Times Beach, Love Canal, the former factory in Brooklyn converted into a condo that was condemned because mercury from the former use had permeated the surfaces and floors and vapors were rising up into the air, destroying nervous systems.
How about Libby, Montana? An entire town that had to be evacuated due to contamination with asbestos that was naturally present in the vermiculite they mined.
Why don't the experts remediate these sites? Not as easy as claimed. All the experts say, "Trust us," and we do.
Remember the psychology experiment where the man in the white coat was able to convince people to deliver jolts of electricity that would have been deadly if real to subjects just based on his say-so? Maybe we need to be more skeptical of "authority."
Whoever you are, you are comparing apples to oranges. It is irresponsible to compare this site to Love Canal and those other sites. If the contamination was that bad, the people that live across the street would be dead.
Im just going on what Crappy put up on his site. And he said the groundwater was clean.
Groundwater was clean by SCA standards, and as was explained, their standards allow for levels that cause cancer.
No, I don't think the cancer link was ever explained - someone just said it.
I guess if its on the internet, it must be true.
and again, the relevant question should be "can it be cleaned up?
And again, no it can't, which is why they have to install a vapor pump and an expensive monitoring system which may or may not work.
I haven't seen any evidence of the cancer link, and the quality of the venting system is up for debate.
If the school is built, the community should be made aware of the upkeep and maintenance of the venting system, for the health and safety of the kids in the building, as well as the nearby residents. Maybe they should issue reports to the community board or something.
"I haven't seen any evidence of the cancer link."
Do some research. Better yet, it will all come out soon and be posted here so why not reserve judgment until it is presented to you.
CB5 forgot to distribute the EIS to its members while they were debating whether or not to support the school. So let's not trust them to monitor anything, please...
To the person who thinks I am comparing "apples with oranges" when I mentioned Times Beach etc. compared with this proposed school site.
Cancer has a latency period of 20 years. Heavy metal contamination can do tremendous damage with killing and a form of "immunity", i.e. enhanced resistance to poison may develop.
Cases are legion of poisoners using arsenic in small unnoticeable doses to kill and when the victim fails to succumb they hit them with one big dose.
A notorious example of this was Rasputin who survived a poisoning attempt because he dosed himself with small amounts of arsenic daily. By your logic, arsenic would be completely harmless.
After Hiroshima, Nagasaki and the Bikini Atoll tests thousands of apparently healthy people were walking around just fine. They would be dead within a few years, however.
Then, there is the example of my neighbor who developed cancer from years of offering herself as a skin patch guinea pig for clinical tests.
Two cancers on her, both of them rare and unrelated and near the sites of the patches.
And my friend's mother who worked with hepatoxic chemicals in two different industries for years and looked jim-dandy until she dropped dead from Cirrhosis of the liver.
However, if you are still dissuaded, ask yourself why a clean site cannot be used for the school, and you can make a bid for the contaminated land yourself for your home. What a deal! What a deal!
You just compared this site to Hiroshima, Nagasaki and the bikini atoll. You're right - Apples and Atom Bombs.
I rest my case.
You live "miles away" Crapper? Don't you live in Maspeth? Isn't this site in Maspeth? Your BS never ceases.
I am sorry that you cannot read a nuanced argument. You think that I am comparing this site to Hiroshima. Rather I gave several examples of time bombs, chemical and otherwise that took years to explode.
The Department of Education fields an excellent adult education class in the Mid-Manhattan Learning Center for the GED.
Perhaps you can work on your reading comprehension there before you help put other people's offspring at risk. Or are you busy packing your kit bag so that you can move into your glowing new home in Maspeth?
If you are an avid reader of this site you would know that I moved out of Maspeth last year. But I did grow up there and am concerned about this location.
Maybe you are in Middle Village, like that is so far.
Dan Creighton is a Gallagher asswipe.
It's obvious that Dizzy Lizzy is blogging on this site. Hey Diz, read the report before you write dumb comments.
Nope, don't live in Midville either. Don't know why you care so much.
"You live "miles away" Crapper? Don't you live in Maspeth? Isn't this site in Maspeth? Your BS never ceases."
Another asshole with a computer Crappie. Maybe you could turn on the asshole filter to minimize the stench in here.
nuanced argument? PLEASE. The amount of pollution that you are talking about is NOWHERE EVEN CLOSE to what is on this site.
I can give you a math class, if you need it.
Since the EIS doesn't give numbers, it's kind of hard to judge just how much there is in the soil, isn't it?
Thank you for the offer of the math class, but The Bronx High School of Science, my undergraduate classes in chemistry and differential calculus and several years behind the counter of a bank and as a secretary keeping degree and enrollment statistics for the American Society of Civil Engineers have already given me an excellent background.
By the way, you need not remove your shoes to count to twenty.
Bet all in favor for this school their children don't go to public schools and especially on contaminated grounds. It's sad that UFT keeps posting comments "we need more schools", they don't give a crap if the grounds are contaminated too, as long as they think they are creating jobs. Someone should be out there questioning all of these findings and putting a stop on it. It's bad enough that phone towers are on the roof across the street and now this, please enough already we don't want to start cleaning up anything unless we know exactly what we are dealing with. Hello there is a school a block away and we don't need young children getting sick. Where the hell is Liz, the Lesbian one, and our Mayor on this. What, they don't want to show face NOW!!!! Sick of all the lies and we need to stop the crap NOW!
to the Bronx HS grad:
Perhaps you can figure out why you had to resort to ad hominem attacks when I pointed out that your comparison is irresponsible?
Post a Comment