Check out articles on the web at: BCEQ and FIPNA
Filed under Court related, Friends of Jerome Park Reservoir
On September 3, we returned to court to argue that 76 days ago on June 19, 2008 - the DEP announced for the first time, that it was going to make a substantial change to the 2004 Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (FSEIS) for the work proposed at the Jerome Park Reservoir related to the now almost $3 Billion Croton Water Treatment Plant (CWTP).
This change was not a minor deviation from a prior approved plan but rather a literal bombshell dropped by DEP when it proposed to blast a shaft through soil and rock along “Education Mile” adjacent to the Jerome Park Reservoir. Had DEP stayed this ill-advised course, this substantial change would have resulted in numerous significant adverse environmental impacts as outlined in Plaintiff’s brief.
The subject matter of this dispute involves an important project to ensure that NYC continues to enjoy plentiful and safe drinking water and the impacts of this project were reviewed for many years culminating in a then and now (even more so) seemingly wrong-headed decision to locate the plant on parkland in Van Cortlandt Park at the Mosholu Golf Course and not in Mount Pleasant at the Eastview site where we now know it would have been much less expensive to build.
Be that as it may, the many years of environmental review under CEQR, SEQRA & ULURP also resulted in a decision not to undertake major construction of the plant at the Jerome Park Reservoir or to blast there in large part because of the significant potential for adverse impacts. Final agency action and exhaustion of the then available administrative remedies occurred on July 16, 2004 with DEP’s issuance of a Statement of Findings.
Yet, knowing the concerns of the Bronx community for this site and its sensitive nature with many residential and institutional receptors of adverse impacts, DEP nonetheless proposed this past June to undertake blasting – an ultra hazardous activity – without a supplemental environmental impact statement. It proposed to do this even after the FSEIS stated that there would be “no blasting or surface drilling” at the Jerome Park Reservoir. Nothing could have been clearer – no blasting meant no blasting. This agency action motivated the Bronx Borough President to write DEP Commissioner Emily Lloyd on July 11th to express his dismay that DEP did not bring this decision to blast to the public sooner. Assemblyman Jeffrey Dinowitz echoed the Borough President’s dismay in a late July letter.
We are delighted that this litigation caused DEP to re-think this arbitrary and capricious decision and now concurs with DEP – if indeed blasting at the JPR as it pertains to work related to the CWTP project is off the table and is no longer being considered as an available alternative - that this issue is now moot.
We reminded the Court that DEP has flip-flopped on the issue of blasting. In the 2004 FSEIS, it said “no blasting,” yet on June 19, 2008 DEP was extolling the “Benefits of Controlled Blasting” in its PowerPoint presentation “Upcoming Construction at the Jerome Park Reservoir.” In the late August 2008 just released Technical Memorandum (prepared solely in response to this litigation) DEP announced “updated design and construction changes” and mentions “mechanical excavation” but does not mention either blasting (or hoe-ramming or surface drilling for that matter). It is only by looking at litigation documents for this case – the August 28th affidavit of Gary Heath of the DEP that the community learned that DEP decided to proceed with mechanical excavation (i.e. hoe ramming) instead of blasting.
Because of DEP’s flip-flopping and its continuing attempts at purposeful vagueness and, while we believe Mr. Heath, we were prepared to ask the Court to conform the pleadings to this new evidence available only for the last 2 business days by amending our request for relief to now become either: a) an extension of the preliminary injunction and TRO issued by this Court on July 29th up to the date and time that DEP reviews this proposed “updated design and construction change” not to blast with the Croton Facilities Monitoring Committee (FMC) as required by City Council Resolution # 933 or b) to ensure the sincerity of DEP and to ensure that DEP ratifies its Director’s assertion that no blasting will take place, the Court issue a permanent injunction barring DEP and its contractors from any and all blasting at the Jerome Park Reservoir site as it relates to the CWTP.
The community won a big fight as there will be no blasting at the reservoir.
While the Court denied our request for a permanent injunction, it was because the Judge believed DEP when it stated that the “blasting” issue was Moot.
Justice Betty Owen Stinson will make her final decision on remaining issues concerning the FMC and surface drilling by the end of the month.
The DEP intends on beginning “hoe ramming” by the end of the month.
On July 29, 2008, the Bronx Council for Environmental Quality joined by other community organizations and leaders brought an Order to Show Cause to stop the City from blasting at the Jerome Park Reservoir. This first successful temporary restraining order (TRO) brought against the City on the Croton Water Treatment Plant (CWTP) project, was prepared by a group of community pro-bono attorneys. Aimed with the premise of we are not going to be pushed around, this grass root effort demonstrated how Bronx community people working together could assure that promises made in environmental impact statements by agencies and developers are kept. We hope this message is clear and has been heard!
/Karen and Walter
Aug
14th
The Fort Independence Park Neighborhood Association already has the story, so check it out.
http://www.fipna.org/2008/08/12/blasting-causes-rats/
Filed under Friends of Jerome Park Reservoir, Jerome Park Reservoir, Reservoir
Aug
5th
It is truly amazing that the City has no idea what they are doing. See the note from the City’s attorney:
. . . . “DEP is currently in the process of finalizing its environmental review of proposed project changes, including the possibility of shifting from hoe ramming to blasting for rock excavation at the Jerome Park Reservoir site, and will not make any final decision regarding the use of blasting until that review is completed,” said Susan Amron, deputy chief of the environmental law division of the city’s law department, in a statement. (Riverdale Press, July 31, 2008 online)
Where in the world did hoe raming come from? They forgot to mention the originally approved section of the FSEIS. See below:
. . . . . From Section 8.2.1.7.
“The construction of the New Shaft at this location would be done using
the raised bored construction method. This method involves drilling of a
pilot hole from the surface. A boring drill rig would be assembled at
the bottom of the shaft where the tunnel would terminate, and turned by
a machine at the top. The boring spoils would fall into the tunnel, and
would be removed as the drill is raised from the bottom of the shaft.
Using the new tunnel for access, all the debris would collapse into the
new tunnel and would be removed at the water treatment plant site for
either the Mosholu or the Harlem River Site alternatives. For the
Eastview Site, the material would be removed through the NCA from shafts
upstream of the Reservoir. This method would reduce the impact caused
by construction in the area.The drilling of the New Shaft via raised bore construction would take
place in the first summer of the scheduled construction period. The new
tunnel lining would be installed before the New Shaft Chamber
construction commences. In response to public comment, construction of
the New Shaft Chamber would occur during the school year with the
concrete pours taking place during the summer months, Saturdays, or
holidays to avoid disturbance of the nearby schools while they are in
session. The construction of the New Shaft Chamber would be
simultaneous with setting the piping in the New Tunnel from either the
water treatment plant or the NCA, depending on the site selection, to
the New Shaft Chamber.
Finally, remember the singlemost important line:
“There would be no surface drilling or blasting in relation to work at the Reservoir.”
Jul
30th
BCEQ Papers:
- Affirmation affirmationinsupport073008
- Order to Show Cause: the TKO osc-blasting-index-26028708
Other documents of interest:
- Letter from BP: bxbpcarrionletter_depblasting811081
- Page that says no blasting: 8-02jeromepark_unlocked-no-blasting
The City’s response: markpageaffopposing073008
Filed under Court related, Friends of Jerome Park Reservoir
Watch eight trucks meander through a few streets in just eight minutes.
Click below to view in flash. Use the mouse to click to the animated photo’s; the pages will advance but you need to use the mouse click to go through the presentation. FULL SCREEN IS THE LAST RIGHT BUTTON.
(Please click the image to advance the slides)
If you do not have flash, you can download the Acrobat (pdf) version by clicking here.
Filed under Friends of Jerome Park Reservoir, Jerome Park Reservoir
Community Boards 7, 8 and 12 will hold a meetingto hear from the public on whether or not the New York City Department of Environmental Protection can or should using blasting in work they propose to do in and around the Jerome Park Reservoir.
Tuesday, July 15, from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.
Lehman College’s Music Building, Faculty Dining Room
250 Bedford Park Boulevard West, at Paul Avenue and Bedford Park Blvd
The Final Environmental Impact Statement (issued by then DEP Commissioner Chris Ward in 2004) stated that they would be no impacts at the Jerome Park Reservoir based on the work method proposed. Now they want to switch in mid-stream. If they want to do this, they will have to do a supplemental study. The trucks associated with the blasting method will be driving through our streets!
Published in the June 26, 2008 Edition
The DEP Strikes Again
An annoying tendency regarding the filtration plant project is that the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is inclined not to listen to the ratepayers and citizens who are funding all of this.
Concerned residents, some of whom have become experts on the issue, turn up at hearing after hearing and tell the DEP important things.
Agency officials don’t really listen; they just “explain” why they’re right, as if all it would take for the community to agree is to have it explained in words we poor foolish citizens can understand.
Click on the link below to continue to read the article and comment to their blog, and/or return to our page for more chances to comment.
http://www.norwoodnews.org/story/?id=641&story=the+dep+strikes+again
Filed under Bronx Media, Friends of Jerome Park Reservoir, Jerome Park Reservoir
Reservoir Blasting Plan Bashed
by ALEX KRATZ
NORWOOD NEWS, June 26, 2008
Local residents came out in force last week to vigorously oppose a city plan to blast away rock with explosives at the Jerome Park Reservoir.
The controversial plan is the latest chapter in the ongoing saga of the Department of Environmental Protection’s (DEP) contentious Croton Water Filtration Plant project currently under way in Van Cortlandt Park. The project has been plagued by massive cost overruns, federal fines, construction delays and contractor turnover.
Click on the link below to continue to read the article and comment to their blog, and/or return to our page for more chances to comment.
http://www.norwoodnews.org/story/index.cfm?s=e&id=635
Filed under Bronx Media, Friends of Jerome Park Reservoir, Jerome Park Reservoir