(The following article by Maria Zingaro Conte was posted on the Jersey Journal website on July 1.)
JERSEY CITY, N.J. — Tradeoffs between environmental and economic concerns are shaping the debate over plans for a new freight rail tunnel that would connect the Greenville Yards in Jersey City and the 65th Street Yard in Brooklyn.
Supporters say the structure would mean more jobs for the area, decrease truck traffic by 1 million trips per year and help boost the economy by strengthening supply lines.
Detractors say the new rail line – which would empty into Jersey City’s Greenville and Lafayette sections and which might also be used to transport garbage out of New York City – is being forced on some of Hudson County’s poorest neighborhoods, where it will create noise, damage the air quality and displace businesses and historic landmarks.
The tunnel proposal was proposed as part of the Cross Harbor Freight Movement Project, a joint initiative by the Federal Highway Administration, the Federal Railroad Administration and the New York City Economic Development Corporation.
The project was established to examine how freight is transported through the New York metropolitan region and to identify ways of improving the flow of goods.
Four options – the Jersey City tunnel, a tunnel to Staten Island, a rail car float operation and improved transportation system management – were selected for study and the results were published in a draft environmental impact statement released in April.
The impact statement concluded that a tunnel stretching 51/2 miles beneath Upper New York Bay into Jersey City would be the best solution.
The Jersey City option, the study said, would have the most advantages with the fewest adverse effects on the environment, business and quality of life. It estimated construction costs being from $4.8 billion for a single tunnel to $7.4 billion for a double tunnel.
But at public hearing convened Tuesday at School 11 on Bergen Avenue, Jersey City officials came out strongly against the plan.
“It contains numerous errors and omissions, makes some faulty assumptions and blatantly favors the New York City side of the river in its level of detail,” said acting Mayor and City Council President L. Harvey Smith.
“The people who are administering this process have been sloppy in their work . They say that the tunnel to Jersey City is the preferred alternative, but they do not say how they made this decision, nor have they established any sort of objective decision-making criteria.”
During a news conference earlier in the day, Smith pledged to fight the tunnel using all legal means.
Doug Greenfeld, a planner with the city Department of Housing, Economic Development and Commerce, also criticized the study for failing to consider the impact the new rail line would have on Jersey City’s Newark Avenue business district, particularly if the line is used to move garbage.
“Where is the analysis of impact of passing municipal solid waste to the vitality of the commercial corridor and to the vehicular and pedestrian travelers who patronize this corridor?” he said.
Kabili Tayari, president of the Jersey City chapter of the NAACP, called the tunnel project an example of environmental racism because the new tracks would run primarily through low-income, largely minority communities.
“Why is it always in communities with people of color?” he asked. “The NAACP is directly opposed to this because of the environmental inequity.”
Support for the project was equally tenacious, with many, including Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-New York City, arguing that the current transportation infrastructure would not be able to handle future freight traffic.
“Our region’s total dependence on trucks for the delivery of all freight – everything we consume – also introduces a unique national security vulnerability,” Nadler wrote in a letter read by one of his aides.
The letter pointed out that 90 percent of all freight bound for New York City and Long Island crosses the George Washington Bridge.
“Closure of this bridge would strangle the region,” said Nadler’s letter. “The only real answer to this threat is to reintroduce redundancy into our freight transportation system so that freight can still be delivered even if one bridge or other facility is temporarily out of action.”
Damien Newton, a representative of the Tri-State Transportation Campaign, also spoke in support of the project, citing the impact statement’s prediction that by 2025, freight volume in the region will increase by 70 percent.
“For New Jersey residents, this means that congestion, pollution and dangerous accidents with trucks will vastly increase if we do not do something to get some trucks off of our roadways,” Newton said.
Members of several local trade unions also turned out to support the project, saying it would create jobs. Gerard Grossi of the Carpenters Union, Local 151, said the tunnel would create 1,000 construction jobs.
The NYCEDC will be accepting written comments on the tunnel project through Sept. 30. Once the public comment period ends, the impact statement will revised to incorporate the additional remarks and it will be reviewed by the federal highway and railroad administrations.