Comment EI-17193
Received or sent (printed as 4/7/2009)
The most important thing is for a full Environmental Impact Statement to be made. Anyone who goes to look at the Embankment can see why this is necessary: trains ran atop this large mound of earth, blocks long, for many years, dumping oil and other toxins that seeped into the soil. The first effect of demolishing this would be air quality: in this densely populated neighborhood (with three schools, a nursing home, and two senior living centers within a couple of blocks), one can imagine the vast clouds of toxic dust that would swirl up into the air the neighborhood breathes. Those of us who developed asthma after being near the World Trade Center on 9/11 know full well the irreversible effects of toxic dust on our long-term health. Next, let’s consider the vibration caused by such huge excavation: downtown Jersey City already suffers frequent flooding due to an inadequate and crumbling century-old sewer system that was never designed to service such a dense population. Large delivery trucks already often cause breaks in sewer lines in our streets – imagine what the concentrated effect of this demolition would be. Further effects of vibration: damage to our homes themselves, many of which were built more than 120 years ago, and will not necessarily withstand the enormous impact of such demolition. These are the immediate and obvious effects of the proposed demolition: there are other issues – the loss of a potential light rail branch, which would help reduce the traffic that is choking our neighborhood; the loss of a last piece of open space and a delicate ecosystem that could be used for recreation and passive enjoyment (once open space is developed, there’s no way to get it back). Downtown Jersey City is in desperate need of open space, since every empty lot has been built on, and there’s no more park space to be had. I have lived in downtown Jersey City for 15 years, and now live one block from the Embankment – I know that the dreadful impact of demolition and housing development would ruin our neighborhood, just as it is in the process of being revitalized in a very positive way, combining the old and the new. There is a far better alternative that takes all our real needs into account: open space, light rail system to improve transportation while reducing traffic, sensitivity to the cultural needs of the neighborhood, maintenance of air quality – these are our neighborhood’s real needs. Why throw all that potential away so that one developer can make money and ruin a neighborhood that he doesn’t even live in?
Submitted by: Sally O'Driscoll, PhD · Jersey City, NJ
The Board publishes this comment in its environmental-comment table for this proceeding. It is quoted here as printed; nothing is inferred from it, and it states the commenter's own position in their own words, not this record's.
Permanent address docketyard.org/d/AB-167/sub/1189X/comment/EI-17193 · back to the docket sheet