Pol calls to relocate
Coney ferry stop
BY ROSE ADAMS
Coney Island Assemblywoman
Mathylde Frontus is
calling on the city to relocate
the terminal for the upcoming
Coney Island ferry, arguing
that the current location poses
health risks to the community.
“The Coney Island Creek is
simply not a safe or viable location
due to a myriad of environmental
concerns,” Frontus said
at an Aug. 26 press conference
in Kaiser Park, where city offi -
cials plan to build the ferry stop.
“Right behind us at this creek
are decades of illegal sewage
discharges, industrial waste,
stormwater pollution, and
known toxins.”
The ferry, which will make
stops in Bay Ridge and lower
Manhattan, will cut the travel
time from Coney Island’s west
end to Manhattan by about 30
minutes, offi cals say.
The new line is part of Mayor
Bill de Blasio’s plan to expand
ferry service citywide. Tickets
costs the same as a subway ride
and allows for one transfer — although
each requires a hefty $10
subsidy from the city, EDC said
in March.
In March, representatives
from EDC announced that they
“strongly recommended” building
the terminal on the Kaiser
Park pier by W. 30th Street and
Bayview Avenue. The agency
chose the spot, located on Coney
Island Creek, because of its relatively
deep water and its existing
pier, which reduces the cost
of construction, reps said.
The location has spurred
controversy among locals, who
charge that dredging in the fetid
creek puts the health of residents
and park-goers at risk.
“This is all about the issue of
possible exposure to toxins over
the long term,” said Ida Sanoff, a
local environmentalist who has
long opposed the terminal’s construction
in the creek. “There
are just so many unanswered
questions.”
The creek, which is currently
being considered for possible Superfund
status, contains dangerous
levels of mercury, lead, and
pesticides after nearby factories
used it as a dumping ground for
decades. The waterway also contains
fecal matter — in 2016, the
city busted a Gravesend apartment
complex for dumping more
than 200,000 gallons of raw sewage
into the creek per day, possibly
for years.
Swimmers and fi sherman
still frequent the canal, which
has become marginally safer
since the contaminants have
settled into a toxic silt on the
creek’s bottom. Dredging, however,
would suspend the toxins
once more, potentially harming
locals, Sanoff explained.
“It’s right on top of where
people are on the shoreline, of
people that are in the water,” she
said.
The creek may also contain
unexploded ordinances, Sanoff
warned.
“I heard during World War
II, warships used to unload their
emissions near Fort Lafayette,”
she said, adding that the
late scuba diver Gene Ritter
discovered bombs by the nowdestroyed
fort, located near the
Verrazzano Bridge.
However, a spokesman for
the Department of Environmental
Conservation, which
conducted a review of the terminal’s
location, said that the
agency found little evidence that
the creek contained dangerous
levels of contamination.
“Portions of the dredge area
were found to be relatively clean,
while other portions contained
chemical concentrations common
to many locations throughout
the harbor,” said Kevin Frazier.
Frazier added that the
agency did not extend the public
comment period, as community
leaders requested, because of
regulatory restrictions.
“To ensure ample opportunity
for the public to provide
input on the application, DEC
extended the public comment
period to Aug. 26, for a total of
35 days instead of the normal
15 days. Due to regulatory constraints,
DEC is unable to extend
the comment period for 90
days as requested,” he said.
Critics of the location have
also argued that the ferry stop
will overwhelm the surrounding
residential community
with tourists, who will have
to walk more than one mile to
reach the amusement park.
Frountus agreed, saying
that placing the ferry on the
Ocean side of the peninsula
would be worth any added
costs.
“I know that the pickings
are slim, I understand that,”
she said. “But the number one
location that stands out is the
ocean side.”
FARE! MTA’s ‘doomsday’ fare hikes
REUTERS/Lucas Jackson
COURIER L M BR B G IFE, SEPT. 4–10, 2020 3
by as much as a full dollar,
accompanied by a 40%
reduction in overall transit
service. That could be
avoided if the federal government
steps in with billions
of dollars in aid.
Transit advocate
groups have panned the
idea of a fare hike as counter
productive to increasing
ridership on the subways
and buses.
However, revenues from
fares dropped considerably
during the COVID-19
pandemic, which has kept
most riders away — leaving
the agency even shorter on
funds than usual.
Most riders inside the
subway at Atlantic Terminal
in Brooklyn rejected
the idea of a possible fare
hike, saying the additional
cost wasn’t acceptable for
a public transit system.
“We don’t like it,” said
resident Tanisha Alnon,
who was with her two children,
daughter Maya and
son Natay on Aug. 26. “It’s
too much money.”
Other locals bemoaned
the idea of a fare hike, but
understood the MTA had
a fi nancial problem maintaining
the transit system.
“It’s like everything
else, it’s greed, they’re
sucking us all dry. During
the pandemic, there
was a problem, yes, they
didn’t get the money and
they were giving a free
ride,” said Brooklynite
Kits Karth, who worried
that the subway could
soon become unaffordable.
“They will keep raising
it and raising it, where
are we supposed to get the
money?”
One traveler hoped that
an increased fare could
improve subway service,
which has lagged in recent
years.
“It may be worth the extra
dollar for better service,”
said straphanger
Marisa Lozano of the
Bronx. “But then, I don’t
ride the trains that much.
Maybe the extra dollar
will do something.”