Long Island City - Toxic Waste Dump

Steve, honestly your crusade against one neighborhood is pathetic. Enough already. What's laughable about this post is you're talking about a study that hasn't even begun yet, hence no actual results, just total speculation. Yes, Newtown Creek is polluted, and it's unfortunate, but guess what? The vast majority of cancer rates are higher in Manhattan than in Greenpoint or LIC! Even your precious Chelsea has higher rates in most cancer categories. New York is not the healthiest city in the world (or country, or state) by a long shot. Get over yourself: http://www.health.state.ny.us/statistics/cancer/registry/pdf/volume1nycneighborhoods.pdf

lupus and fibromyalgia

Yes, one incidence of lupus and fibromyalgia - what's your point? Do you even know what causes these diseases? Because even doctors don't, and the hypotheses have more to do with genetics, stress, and medication. Ridiculous.

Feds mulling Superfund status for Newtown Creek

The creek, which runs between Greenpoint and western Queens, is polluted with petroleum and chemicals from decades of heavy industrial use.

"The list of contaminants in Newtown Creek reads like the periodic table. You've got arsenic, mercury, chromium, PCBs," said Riverkeeper investigator Craig Michaels.

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/brooklyn/2009/04/21/2009-04-21_feds_mulling_superfund_status_for_newtown_creek.html

And you want to live there?!

This is hilarious!!!
Steve, you talk about the risk of living by Newtown Creek and the potential cause of cancer, but YET Chelsea, NY have a higher reported cancer rate.

OMG!! I can't stop laughing!!

MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

SOMEONE HELP ME!

steve the clown is back!!

"And you want to live there?! "

I rather live there than Chelsea where the cancer rate is higher!!!

MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

SOMEONE HELP ME!

I'm embarrassed for all of you

bjw, you're full of it! The cancer rate is much higher in LIC than it is in Chelsea:

Chelsea:

http://www.health.state.ny.us/statistics/cancer/registry/vol1/v1nchelsea-clinton.htm

Long Island City / Astoria (why are they always grouped together if they're not the same place?"

http://www.health.state.ny.us/statistics/cancer/registry/vol1/v1nlongislandcity-astoria.htm

And I'm sure if you took out what LICC considers to be "Astoria," the rate would be higher.

The closer to the Newtown Creek....

steve, you do know the difference between average cases and actual rates, right? The RATES are what matter, and in the vast majority of cases, they're higher in YOUR neighborhood. Sorry.

steve, do you not know how to add? The links you just posted show that the Chelsea-Clinton area has significantly higher cancer rates!!!

steve, you are such a joke on these boards, for your own good, just stop with all your clownish antics already.

"lupus and fibromyalgia" also known as Citigroup and MetLife in LIC lingo.

Not in terms of cases, dude!

"bjw, you're full of it! The cancer rate is much higher in LIC than it is in Chelsea:"

Learn to read.
Reported cases are higher because it's more populated, but the rate is higher...which means, the chances are higher. Just proves what a complete moron you are.

Which is better?

500 out of 1,000,000,000,000,000.

or

400 out of 600

MUHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA!!!

"which means, the chances are higher."

It means no such thing. Look at the SPECIFIC cancers, too: melanoma higher in Chelsea because more white people live there. Colorectal cancer is higher in LIC - because it is associated with a poor diet.

"Just proves what a complete moron you are."

Yup.

Ericho, why are you trying to intelligently explain things to a clown? This whole post just shows how pitiful steve is.

stevejhx, yeah, I don't know what you're getting at. Your statement ("the cancer rate is much higher in LIC than it is in Chelsea") was just flat out wrong. The rates are significantly higher in Chelsea. I have nothing against Chelsea (in fact, it was one of the neighborhoods I seriously looked at, and there's lots to like there), but maybe this thread should be retitled?

Here's a good picture showing how close the "new parks" are to The Creek:

http://queenscrap.blogspot.com/2008/05/hunters-point-south-sucks.html

Those aren't where the new parks are located. Seldom right and wrong again steve!

Why don't you keep posting more idiotic things so you can be even more pathetic.

Oh no, LIC? Then where are they located?

Because that's all of Hunters Point. Go east to the rail yards, north to the projects, west to the East River.

Show us where they are! That's Gantry Park!

Right next to a creek as poisonous as the air on Venus.

witness the decline of western civilization right here on streeteasy

Steve, your basicly 100% correct. LIC was cleaned up for redevelopment through the magical process of legislation. I have written about this in the past.
Like the X-Men franchise? Move to LIC, have a kid and stand back...

Except that people have less of a chance getting cancer in LIC than they do in Chelsea . . .

So where are those parks, LIC?

You're right - there is a higher rate of melanoma in Chelsea than there is in LIC because there's a higher rate of white people.

Nothing like having a picnic on Venus!

The rates for:

Invasive malignant tumors - much higher in Chelsea than LIC;
Prostate cancer - much higher in Chelsea than LIC;
Lung cancer - higher in Chelsea than LIC.

Wow, I don't even want to walk through Chelsea anymore!

steve,
You idiot. The new park is the piece of land north of the 4 piers in your link.
The highlighted area in your link are for parks to be build in a future date. Jezz....

"i'm truly an idiot"
by Stevejhx

"You're right - there is a higher rate of melanoma in Chelsea than there is in LIC because there's a higher rate of white people."

And you're still all going at it? Steve, for someone who's shown to be pretty good with accounting and economics, you've not been very handy with stats. You're inferring an explanation without any real basis. Facts are, the cancer rates are significantly higher in Chelsea for ALL invasive malignant tumors, and in particular for oral, rectal, liver, pancreas, lung, skin, prostate, testicles, bladder, brain, Hodgkin, non-Hodgkin, plasma cells, and leukemia. That's quite a list. And yet you go on...

Should clarify that those are for males only. It's actually almost worse for females, especially with respect to breast cancer. Nice work steve!

"The new park is the piece of land north of the 4 piers in your link."

And that makes a HUGE difference, doesn't it?! Like the difference between the Chelsea Piers and the Christopher Street Piers. Chelsea MUST be cleaner since it's upstream!

lol
This is a funny thread. The whole cancer thing argument and bickering is a bit distasteful.

Stevejhx, you're really showing your true colors here. Facts show that Chelsea is worst than Newton Creek's neighborhood. Your reference to the new park was wayyy off and your reference to WHITE people having higher risk to CANCER is a bit troubling.

"Invasive malignant tumors - much higher in Chelsea than LIC;
Prostate cancer - much higher in Chelsea than LIC;
Lung cancer - higher in Chelsea than LIC."

No surprise.
City have more cars which translate to dirtier air. Forget about air circulation since all these tall buildings are stacked right on top of each other.

"melanoma higher in Chelsea because more white people live there."

Is this even a fact? Does white people have higher risk of melanoma? I get the sense you are trying to say that white people are less healthy in comparison to asian, blacks, latinos, etc?

"Steve, for someone who's shown to be pretty good with accounting and economics"

When was this shown?

I'll give steve credit that he is very good with financial statement accounting. However he has always consistently shown a lack of understanding of economics and economic analysis. He also is terrible at simple rational thinking, honesty, reading numbers from a chart, etc.

Sorry JuiceMan, was giving him the benefit of the doubt. But yes, some of his set-in-stone formulaic approach is a bit self-serving at times. Point is, his interpretation of stats here is quite poor.

Also tired of the anti-LIC crusade, which is really based on his dislike for one poster in particular.

"However he has always consistently shown a lack of understanding of economics and economic analysis."

Funny that my honors undergraduate degree is in economics.

Waiting for your sources, LICC: given the projects and the toxic waste, why are Long Island City properties being offered for Manhattan prices?

"Does white people have higher risk of melanoma? "

"Do white people...?"

Yes they do.

"ebony and ivory, side by side together in harmony"....

steve, there was an article in the NYTimes many years ago, in the '80s, that would make your point much better, I think. I'm sorry I can't be any more specific or quote to chapter and verse, but it was about sites in Queens specifically, as well as Brooklyn, that had hidden environmental hazards such as warehouses where toxic wastes were stored or had been stored at one time, including radioactive wastes (yes), and sites where underground oil tanks had existed, as well as former factories that once used large amounts of dangerous materials and had been found to have left residues under the ground.

The reason I think of that article is that it had a map with dots pointing to the spots, and they were nothing so obvious as Newtown Creek, and they were not limited to Long Island City. One of the worst I recall being in Woodside.

I have always wondered about those gas tanks near Elmhurst or Maspeth that were demolished. Could they have left stuff under the ground?

And now........ the incinerators that Greenpoint residents fought so hard to have not built. And let's not forget that huge waste water treatment plant..... in Greenpoint. There are many factors that could be the cause of those cancer rates in Greenpoint.

lowery, you're right - there's a lot of just gnarly stuff in those areas, and it's at least encouraging that there's a push for federal money now to clean it up. But the fact remains, despite the pollution, Greenpoint and LIC's cancer rates are significantly below Manhattan's. I can't definitively explain it, but them's the facts.

"I can't definitively explain it, but them's the facts."

Some of the cancers are hereditary - where there are more Jews there will be a higher rate of breast cancer. Where there are light-skinned whites there will be a higher rate of melanoma and prostate cancer.

The cancers to look for are the ones that are likely triggered environmentally: brain cancer, for instance.

Also - those figures are normalized for the population. So if there is an unusually large population group the rate will not be as high as the case numbers would suggest.

Well Steve, even brain cancer rates are higher in Chelsea! The bottom line is cancer rates are higher in Chelsea.

If you read the website it says that because of the normalization the "rates" cannot be compared.

This thread takes the cake...by far!
Keep trying Steve...

"If you read the website it says that because of the normalization the "rates" cannot be compared."

Please link to where, because I see no such thing. In fact, they've adjusted for age to avoid confounding there, so the rates are indeed more comparable than raw rates would be.

How about this - don't buy real estate in former industrial waste lands. No matter how cool and trendy the idiots living there think old factories are, it is obviously bad for your health. People on this thread are arguing which neighborhood has more cases of cancer. I don't know about you, i would just stay away from both if they have higher rates of cancer then the rest of the city.

I don't have much opinion on Long Island City one way or the other. Probably last time I was there was 3 years ago for an evening event, and then I can't remember the time before.

But a cancer discussion? Do we have no shame?

And, honestly, stevejhx, didn't you post this yesterday about --> YOUR OWN FAMILY RELATIONSHIP in LIC <--

stevejhx
1 day ago
And Long Island City borders Astoria. I don't know that there is an "official" boundary between the two of them. As I said, I spent a lot of time in both places over the years, and never did like them.

My grandmother who lived in LIC and Astoria in fact grew up in Chelsea. And my father was born in Chinatown. We go back a long way.

weird ... repost:

Steve, your own family relationship in LIC:

stevejhx
1 day ago
I have been to Long Island City - it's an urban desert that's vastly overpriced.

And Long Island City borders Astoria. I don't know that there is an "official" boundary between the two of them. As I said, I spent a lot of time in both places over the years, and never did like them.

My grandmother who lived in LIC and Astoria in fact grew up in Chelsea. And my father was born in Chinatown. We go back a long way.

Also, there are a lot more people living in Manhattan then in LIC. I think that might explain why there are more cases there then in queens. After all smart people usually avoid living near smoke stacks and toxic waste when they choose a place to call home. I would also imagine that most of the people that lived in LIC in the past worked in the area. Everyone else looked beyond it toward the open lush land of Long Island and chose to live there instead.

Chelsea is a former industrial wasteland? Decades ago there were warehouses by the piers at the waterfront, but otherwise what are you talking about?

I don't know if Chelsea has higher rates of cancer than the rest of Manhattan. I think someone noted above that generally, LIC has lower rates of cancer than all of Manhattan, not just Chelsea.

Chelsea has higher rates of men who own cats.

When you are comparing the rates of cancer in Chelsea to LIC, you have to remember to factor in the tax deductions you get from owning vs the opportunity costs of the money used for the downpayment.

C'mon...it's only a matter of time before it goes here....

Not sure why it's shameful to discuss public health stats, but frankly I brought up the data to show Steve how dumb these neighborhood-bashing threads are. That he's spinning, deflecting, and outright wrong makes it pretty clear that his motives are silly.

ootin - are you suggesting there is a link between cat ownership and cancer?

waverly, hilarious. I wonder if there's a marginal cancer rate versus an effective one too...

Medical expenses for cancer treatment over a certain percentage of your income are tax deductible. Now this is a difficult one, because you get a benefit on your taxes, not on your cancer which is both a COST to society and to you personally, but also a source of income for the healthcare system.

The math and economic treatment is hard to figure out in other ways, for instance, if you are unemployed you aren't paying any taxes so you don't get the benefit, and even if you are taking a standard deduction and the cancer treatments wouldn't bump you up to taking itemized deductions, you won't get a benefit. If you make a lot of money, the threshold is very high, so you get less tax benefit from having cancer expenses under a certain amount. In the middle, you might be on the lower end of the tax brackets, so the deduction is worth less even though the threshold kicks in at a lower value. Also, would you be using your marginal rate or your average rate? AND, if you say skip a cancer treatment, that is a savings in cost but then you don't get a deduction, but a cost saved is not the same as income earned or cancer treatment received. You'll have to hire a tax professional or a former auditor of Price Waterhouse and Bank of America to help you figure it all out.

It's also possible that ootin is suggesting cat ownership somehow wards off cancer, in which case we are all going down to the ASPCA and getting a cat (w67th, you can take that as "go and get some p***y", as I know that will make you happier;)

waverly
5 minutes ago
ignore this person
report abuse
ootin - are you suggesting there is a link between cat ownership and cancer?

No, BUT, cats have been proven to be hazardous to laboratory rats. And we all know that first they test on lab rats as a window into what might move up the evolutionary ladder to humans.

OK, don't buy in LIC as it is still an industrial waste land with high rates of cancer.

"Comparisons of incidence statistics for total cancers or categories that include tumors with revised behavior must be made with caution, especially when looking at statistics over time."

http://www.health.state.ny.us/statistics/cancer/registry/notes.htm

http://www.health.state.ny.us/statistics/cancer/registry/age.htm

If a community is 100% people over 75 and another community is 100% people under 25, the way the "rate" figures are presented - age adjusted - will lead to the cancer rates being the same in both populations as long as the average rates of cancer occur in each population. Just like adjusted for seasons, the temperature doesn't change from December to July.

Because of this, if you look at the age-adjusted statistics for the state as a whole, places where you would not expect to find high rates of cancer - the Adirondacks, for instance - show up with a much higher rate than the Bronx.

Based on this, Queens has a lower rate of cancer than Manhattan even though there is much more industry in Queens. If they adjusted for income distribution and education, the rates would be different, as well.

Which is why I refer to the absolute number of cases.

"If they adjusted for income distribution and education, the rates would be different, as well."

Is cancer higher or lower if you have an Associates degree?

Sorry i meant toxic "In the early 1940s tons of Uranium for the Manhattan Project were stored in the Baker & Williams Warehouse at 513-519 West 20th Street. The uranium was only removed and decontaminated in the late 1980s/early 1990s." Story from NY Time.

"Is cancer higher or lower if you have an Associates degree?"

I don't know, ootin. How are you doing with that GED?

If you have filtered water, what's the difference guys? These condos are a different breed than the past houses

Some day LIC High School will be populated with mutants that have extraordiary powers!
Can you just imagine what the trophy case is going to look like!
GO LIC MUTANTS!!!!

""Comparisons of incidence statistics for total cancers or categories that include tumors with revised behavior must be made with caution, especially when looking at statistics over time.""

Steve, I can't believe we're arguing biostats on this board, but here goes - that note specifically mentions changes made to the coding of malignant tumors prior to 2001. These rates are all after that, so your point is really a load of hooey - rates are indeed comparable. As for the age-adjusting, your example is so far from reality - you're really grasping at straws, unless you can demonstrate that age distributions are so far out of whack in Chelsea or LIC as to make this a valid point. And they're not, so... If you don't want to believe that cancer rates are higher where you live, fine, but while you're right to call out some people for being in denial about real estate prices, you're doing the exact same thing here. The data are plain as day.

I don't know what the school colors will be but, I'll bet something glows.

Just some Long Island City highlights:

"Unlike many gentrified neighborhoods in brownstone Brooklyn that where originally middle class, Long Island City has always been an Archie Bunker blue-collar enclave."

"The 108 and 114th Precincts serve Long Island City. Things get pretty sketchy underneath the Queensboro Bridge unless you're looking for a hooker. As of October 9 murders were up from 7 to 12 and rapes were up 31 to 47 from the same time last year."

"Long Island City won't be transitioning from Next Big Thing to Big Thing quite as quickly as some were planning. In August 2006, Alan and Stuart Suna, the brothers who run Silvercup Studios near the Queensboro Bridge, unveiled city-approved plans for Silvercup West. And now that the builders have gotten into the dirt, they've discovered that the bedrock was not where they expected it to be. Is there something toxic in there? Nobody will say. So when will we get this handsome new neighborhood? “We really can't give a target date at this point,” says Silvercup spokesperson Cara Marino Gentile."

"7 percent of houses in QUEENS County have a high risk of lead hazards."

"Based on EPA's most current data, Queens ranked among the dirtiest/worst 10% of all counties in the US in terms of an average individual's added cancer risk from hazardous air pollutants."

"that note specifically mentions changes made to the coding of malignant tumors prior to 2001"

As one example.

"unless you can demonstrate that age distributions are so far out of whack in Chelsea or LIC as to make this a valid point."

If we had the raw data we could do it, but we don't. Normalized for sex, the rate of infection with chlamydia is the same for men and women. If you were to see a 100% spike in the normalized rate for men, it may be that just one extra man contracted chlamydia, doubling the percentage. Normalized data - including economic data and housing data - must be taken with a grain of salt.

Which is PRECISELY my point when dealing with real estate means and medians and prices per square foot: in that case they don't adjust for the changes in the population of apartments sold. I have repeatedly stated that you need to look at more than just one figure.

"As one example."

The data are all from 2002-2006, so it's more like no example.

"If we had the raw data we could do it, but we don't."

Well, it is available by county, which isn't good enough either, and frankly I don't have the time or inclination. Regardless, you're completely assuming the distributions are extremely different, which I highly doubt. Unless you can demonstrate that I see no reason not to compare the rates, but like I said, if you want to be in denial, go nuts. I usually find you to be fairly level-headed Steve, but your whole anti-LIC thing is really quite nutty and petty.

Typical steve. He makes an ignorant comment, is proved completely foolish and wrong, then tries to change the subject and makes petulant and even dumber comments to try to defend his original wacko comment.

Yes, LICC - and Long Island City isn't on Long Island. That remains your claim?

It remains your claim that the parks are nowhere near the Newtown Creek, which they border?

It remains you claim that there are no rail yards in Long Island City?

It remains your claim that Long Island City is bounded by Hazen Street, which is Astoria, close to LaGuardia Airport?

I could go on (and I might!).

Typical steve. He makes an ignorant comment, is proved completely foolish and wrong, then tries to change the subject and makes petulant and even dumber comments to try to defend his original wacko comment.

Typical LICC - doesn't address the issues, goes for the ad hominem.

Let's hear it for the Newtown Creek and those lovely southerly breezes that waft across Gantry State Park!

"Regardless, you're completely assuming the distributions are extremely different, which I highly doubt."

I don't. Astoria is mostly single-family Archie-Bunker homes, Long Island City is mostly projects and abandoned factories, Hunts Point is mostly overpriced yuppie pads sitting on toxic waste, and many if not most of the people living in Queens as a whole were not born in the US. Whereas Chelsea and Hell's Kitchen have a very large and young gay population, some but not a lot of projects, almost no single-family dwellings, very few children, and is much more expensive on the whole. How you can say that the populations are homogeneous is beyond me.

IF the populations were homogeneous then what you're saying about the cancer rates as reported would be true. But the premise is more than questionable.

The other thing that is now obvious about steve, is that he is a flat-out liar. He just lies about things when he knows he is looking stupid, like in this discussion. He lies about things that other people have said, he makes things up when he has no idea what he is talking about. He is just a very annoying, devious guy. Any normal person who reads this thread can plainly see that steve is just full of crap.

I call bs, steve. I never said the populations are homogeneous - everything but age is actually fairly irrelevant here. What you're arguing is that the age distributions (what is being adjusted) are very different, but you yourself say that Hunts Point is full of "yuppies" and Chelsea and Hell's Kitchen is full of "young" people. Not that different to me.

Let's look at this another way: if the rates confirmed your odd fascination that LIC is a "toxic waste dump," you certainly would not be brining up this kind of minutia and questioning the data; you'd be citing it every chance you got.

"if the rates confirmed your odd fascination that LIC is a "toxic waste dump," you certainly would not be brining up this kind of minutia and questioning the data; you'd be citing it every chance you got."

Absolutely not. Those data ARE of some use, when looked at in context - as age-adjusted data. The "young people" who live in Hell's Kitchen are in their 20's and 30's; the "young people" who live in Astoria are children. If you think there is no difference in age distribution between a place that is mostly high-rises and extremely wealthy versus a place that is predominately single-family homes and people with immigrants, you're ... entitled to your opinion.

I said the same thing with property means and medians - the way to adjust for the sampling error is to use the Case-Shiller methodology: follow the same property over time. It is akin to a cohort study, which is what would be needed in the cancer (or other) statistics instead of adjusting for age.

LICC - I'm still waiting for you to find that ONE apartment in Manhattan that you could rent out to an unrelated third party and break even, or ONE apartment that didn't sell for 3x as much in 2008 as it did in 2000. You add nothing to the board, just accusations of lying, when you are the one who has yet to say one useful thing!

Let's go through this, AGAIN, for the sake of the liar clown steve:

Other than physical geography, NO ONE references Brooklyn (Kings County) or Queens (Queens County) as Long Island. People who live in Nassau or Suffolk counties reference it as Long Island. Real New Yorkers know this.

The parks in Hunters Point, LIC on the East River are about half a mile north of Newtown Creek. They do not "border" Newtown Creek in any possible sense. You either know this and are a liar, or you are completely stupid, or a combination of both, which is my guess.

I said there is one train yard in LIC. It is about one block long and can hold about ten trains. They are only there in weekdays, during the day only. Unless you are standing near the train yard, it isn't a problem. You refer to LIC being bounded by rail yards to the east, which is clueless because there are no rail yards bordering the east of LIC. Are you talking about the Sunnyside Yards? They have no effect on anything in LIC.

I never claimed anything about Hazen Street. This is another lie by steve. Again, when people reference Long Island City in this day and age, they are talking about the Hunters Point area, and the area up Jackson Avenue. When people reference Astoria, they are referencing the neighborhood north of LIC. If you ask someone in Astoria where they live, they don't say LIC. Why are you so dense about this?

steve, you really are even more pathetic than usual on this thread, for your own good just give up while you're way behind. You had a laughable reputation on these boards to begin with, and this thread has just made it worse.

"Absolutely not. Those data ARE of some use, when looked at in context - as age-adjusted data. The "young people" who live in Hell's Kitchen are in their 20's and 30's; the "young people" who live in Astoria are children. If you think there is no difference in age distribution between a place that is mostly high-rises and extremely wealthy versus a place that is predominately single-family homes and people with immigrants, you're ... entitled to your opinion."

Steve, Astoria is a popular residential destination for many kids out of college and has been for a while now. LIC attracts a significant amount of yuppies and young artsy types. Those are all people in their 20s and 30s (not "children"), exactly what you ascribe to Chelsea and Hell's Kitchen. The point, again, is that the age distributions are not that significantly different for your point to hold any real weight. I don't always agree with LICC, but your credibility takes a serious hit when you're constantly trying to bash his neighborhood. It's petty man, let's move past that.

"Real New Yorkers know this."

Where were YOU born, LICC, and if what you're saying is true, why ON EARTH would they call it "Long Island City"?

Because - IT'S ON LONG ISLAND!

"The parks in Hunters Point, LIC on the East River are about half a mile north of Newtown Creek. They do not "border" Newtown Creek in any possible sense."

Dude, here's an AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH of Gantry State Park. Notice how it borders the NEWTOWN CREEK!

http://queenscrap.blogspot.com/2008/05/hunters-point-south-sucks.html

If mine eyes didn't see it myself....

"there is one train yard in LIC. It is about one block long and can hold about ten trains."

OMG! LICC, you are deceiving yourself:

"Hunters Point residents say diesel engine at railyard run 'all day'"

Residents who live near a Hunters Point rail yard are steamed about noisy, pollution-spewing diesel trains idling for more than seven hours a day.

The Daily News observed several Long Island Rail Road diesel engines idling for hours Wednesday at the yard near Vernon Blvd. and Borden Ave.

One engine was on for 9 hours and 25 minutes, arriving at the yard about 8 a.m. and departing at 5:31 p.m.

"It's ridiculous that these engines are running all day," said Community Board 2 Chairman Joe Conley, who has been leading the fight against idling trains.

"It went unnoticed for years because no one was living there," Conley said of the once-industrial area that is now home to new residential towers.

"I can hear them humming four blocks away," said Mark Christie, a Manhattan office manager who lives nearby. "Sometimes you can hear it as early as 4 a.m

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/queens/2009/07/03/2009-07-03_hunters_point_residents_say_diesel_engine_at_railyard_run_all_day.html

Dude - YOU'RE OUT OF YOUR MIND!

steve, you are completely stupid. That aerial photograph is not of Gantry State Park. The park is NORTH of the highlighted area in the picture, and extends north beyond the top of the picture.

And steve the liar clown just keeps spinning and spinning . . .

Maybe Steve's parents gave him swimming lessons in Newton Creek when he was a kid at the height of the contamination. Or all that cancer agent in Chelsea is making it's way to his peanut brain.

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=474+48th+Avenue+Long+Island+City,+NY+11109&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&split=0&gl=us&ei=0wFWStPuFpX4Nd-gnZ0I&sa=X&oi=geocode_result&ct=image&resnum=1

You're nuts.

And what about the train yard?

Them's a lot of tracks for 4 trains!

No, ericho - it was the auto exhaust and noise wafting from the LIE into Hunters Point.

Oh, sorry, that's LICC!

"Dude, here's an AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH of Gantry State Park. Notice how it borders the NEWTOWN CREEK!"

The Gantry park is about half a mile up you moron. We already gone through this. Maybe those cancer agent from Chelsea already infiltrated that peanut brain of yours.

Ericho, according to Google it's 500 feet from the LIE. It's included on the aerial, is is HUNTERS POINT, which is where all of those nice trees are. Next to the Newtown Creek.

Sorry you don't want to admit it - it's there on an aerial and on a map. Don't know what else you want.

You idiot.

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=474+48th+Avenue+Long+Island+City,+NY+11109&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&split=0&gl=us&ei=0wFWStPuFpX4Nd-gnZ0I&sa=X&oi=geocode_result&ct=image&resnum=1

The Gantry park start at 49tth & 48th Ave. going UP.
It's about 2500-3000 feet away.

The new park which LICComment posted is between 47th rd and 45th rd.

Those trees on the 'OPENING' of Newton creek are closed to public. No one goes there. It's paved for the new development. You have absolute NO knowledge of this area.

"No one goes there."

Because they'd be poisoned.

Steve, if you want to be a jerk, fine, go nuts, but don't expect people to put much trust in or respect anything you post on this forum. Good luck brother.

No, because it's paved for New Development as outlined by the Queenswest housing plans.

You my friend are so focking dumb, i'm no longer going to reply again on this thread.

What kind of idiot talks about being poisoned when he lives in a neighborhood that has SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER CANCER RATES than the one in which he is trying to criticize?

I really hope steve keeps going on with this because all he is doing is showing how much of a fool he is.

> The Gantry park is about half a mile up you moron.

Not unless they changed the definition of mile recently, genius.

According to Google scale on the map (I actually used a piece of paper on this) from the creek to "Gantry Plaza State Park" is very close to exactly 1500 feet (three lenghts of the scale).

Thats significantly less less than a third of a mile, and actually closer to a quarter mile.... and if you did it in as the crow flies blocks (20 to a mile), its 5.7 blocks.

1 mile = 5280 feet

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=474+48th+Avenue+Long+Island+City,+NY+11109&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&split=0&gl=us&ei=0wFWStPuFpX4Nd-gnZ0I&sa=X&oi=geocode_result&ct=image&resnum=1

The actual PARK with the TREES start at 48th ave....are about 2,000-3000 feet depending on where you start the measurement.

"i'm no longer going to reply again on this thread."

Too bad!

"What kind of idiot talks about being poisoned when he lives in a neighborhood that has SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER CANCER RATES than the one in which he is trying to criticize?"

The kind that live in the Adirondacks, where those (statistically adjusted) rates show cancer at twice the level of Queens.

Where cancer goes underreported because the poor lack health insurance, and they just die.

"don't expect people to put much trust in or respect anything you post on this forum"

If your point is that Long Island City is NOT a toxic waste dump, just say that. And when Newtown Creek is declared a Superfund Brownfield, get back to me:

http://www.epa.gov/history/topics/lovecanal/01.htm

http://www.envirojustice.org/community/casestudies.html

Enjoy reading!

I just checked the scale with a ruler. I set it at 1 inch=500 feet. From the very start of Gantry Park by 50th Avenue to the creek was 4-1/4 inches. That is 2,125 feet from the creek to the very beginning of the park. The park extends probably 1500 feet or so north.

Beside, what is your point? The creek does not negatively affect anything at the park.

"http://www.epa.gov/history/topics/lovecanal/01.htm

http://www.envirojustice.org/community/casestudies.html"

1979...omg!