In our July issue we wrote about the concrete recycling plant that temporarily occupies part of the Columbia Street Waterfront District docks. At the time, the NYC Department of Transportation (DOT) told us that they “take all the necessary steps to mitigate dust and keep the public safe.” That is important because crystalline silica, a compound present in concrete, poses serious health issues for humans if inhaled. Those issued include the lung disease silicosis and lung cancer.
Following publication, we received a large number of photos and videos from neighbors of the plant that disagree with the DOT assessment, and we relayed these concerns to independent experts. All this, plus some emails from Councilmember Shahana Hanif’s office combine to tell a very different story, one that challenges the city’s claims of effective dust mitigation and care for public health.
DOT says that its current strategy—spraying water on the concrete during the crushing process and when it’s moved, as well as on the stockpiles—is enough to keep dust settled.
However, Denys Schwartz, a civil engineer in Sydney, Australia, with over 15 years of experience working on large-scale construction projects involving recycling concrete, does not believe the veracity of DOT. “It appears that not enough is being done to mitigate dust dispersion. Given its location in an urban area, I would expect the implementation of at least large-scale water spray systems and dust control barriers,” he wrote in an email after reviewing videos of the plant in operation.
Other mitigation ideas
Schwartz, who runs constructionfront.com, a construction news website, explained that other measures beyond water could be taken to mitigate dust. Barriers could be used to stop dust from spreading and blocking the wind, and certain chemicals can be used to suppress dust. These chemicals, Schwartz said, “bind dust particles together, making them heavier and less likely to become airborne.”
There is no evidence at the Columbia Street Waterfront District site of barriers or enclosures to block wind or stop dust from dispersing. Photos and videos, most taken this summer, show that the current strategy of only using water to reduce dust is inadequate.
On June 15, wind speeds reached nearly 11 miles per hour (with gusts of 18 mph) — defined by the National Weather Service as a “gentle breeze” — along Brooklyn’s northwestern waterfront. A video from that evening, taken from a rooftop close to the plant, shows a thick cloud of dust continuously blowing from the uncovered and unenclosed piles of crushed concrete into the dense residential neighborhood.
“The whole neighborhood was covered in thick clouds of dust. It was unusual circumstances, but it happens often enough, and you could smell it,” said David Gray, a resident of the Columbia Street Waterfront District, who recorded the video. “It was dense, and it was blowing right over the residential area. It was thick in the air. And that went on for as long as the storm lasted.”
An earlier photo, also on a windy day, shows a cloud of dust hanging over the Waterfront District, given a slight yellow tint by the setting sun. Colin Gardner, a neighborhood resident, was on the roof of his building when he took the photo.
“I was surprised because I knew it was a concrete recycling plant, and I knew there were toxins in it, and I knew there was silica in it, which causes a lot of problems in humans,” he said.
But even on calmer days, dust can be seen dispersing from practically every step of the recycling process, including when the concrete is processed into smaller chunks and powder, when it’s loaded onto barges, moved around by excavators, and unloaded from trucks.
Visual evidence of the piles of crushed concrete, the largest of which is at least two stories high, shows that large parts of the upper halves of the piles are routinely dry. The light gray-colored tops of the piles, contrasted with the dark gray bottoms, which look better watered, raise questions about the effectiveness of the dust mitigation systems.
Several community members living on or near Columbia Street keep getting their windowsills covered in concrete dust. Some say the dust is so bad that they can’t keep their windows open anymore.
“We have bought an air purifier. We are keeping the windows closed, which means we have to use air conditioning more,” said Gray, who has two teenage children.
A shared concern is the plant’s location. It was moved earlier this year the South Brooklyn Marine Terminal, which is in Sunset Park, to accommodate the city’s offshore wind program. Residents want to know “why here?”
When the concrete recycling facility opened, it did so with little fanfare — no notice, no public outreach.
“There was nothing. We didn’t even realize until somebody saw the sign. We had no input; they didn’t tell the community at all that it was coming. There was just a sign there and then trucks started coming in and out,” said another local, John Leyva.
Several neighbors of the plant have echoed the sentiment: one day, suddenly, the plant was just there. After months with little information and transparency, the community demands answers.
“I’ve sent lots of emails, to the DOT, to different people and community boards, representatives. No one’s gotten back to me yet,” explained Brendan Caramante, who lives across the street from the plant.
According to a technical brief written by Dr. Tara Cavalline, Professor of Civil Engineering Technology and Construction Management at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, there are several environmental considerations when operating a concrete recycling plant, which, in the case of this recycling facility, seemingly weren’t deciding factors.
The technical brief notes that concrete recycling facilities should be located “away from sensitive areas, businesses or homes.”
In addition to apartments, restaurants and bars in the area, PS 29 is a few blocks away.
A 2018 guide on concrete recycling from Iowa State University’s National Concrete Pavement Technology Center states, “Dust control strategies should account for prevailing wind conditions and utilize the natural topography or vegetation.” The agency chose a spot on the western shoreline of Brooklyn with no natural or man-made wind barriers, even though the prevailing winds in the New York area blow from west to east into the city.
Not just lungs, but ears too
There is also nothing blocking the noise.
“It’s constant noise. We cannot open our windows anymore. It’s impossible to keep the windows open, not just because of the pollution, but just the sound,” said Caramante. “It’s almost like a symphony of beeping, honking and grinding.”
His apartment also vibrates sometimes when concrete is processed. When the earthquake shook New York in April, Caramante was outside talking to a neighbor. It was only once people started coming out of their homes and told him that he realized it wasn’t just the concrete recycling plant.
“I said, ‘Was there an earthquake just now?’ We thought it was the recycling plant across the street because that’s how it feels,” he said.
After concerns about the concrete recycling operations were raised with the office of local Councilmember Shahana Hanif, she toured the facility with a group of DOT officials as her guides.
On July 15, she wrote on Instagram, “My office has received concerns from constituents about the Columbia Waterfront Concrete Recycling Facility. Last week I had an opportunity to tour the site myself and get on the ground clarity about DOT’s proactive measures to address dust and air quality, reduce trucks and truck traffic, and improve street safety and add signage.”
Not a great visit from Hanif
But the councilmember’s visit only raised more questions about the transportation department’s concrete recycling operations. In an email to David Gray sent a week after the tour, a staff member of the councilmember explained what they had learned. She wrote, “There is a dust mitigation plan in place that waters down the facility several times an hour and the dust is non-hazardous to humans.”
We reached out to Hanif’s office and all she would tell us is that she toured the plant, offering no more information that she had already posted online. She did confirm, however, that the DOT had assured them the dust was safe. Multiple questions that were sent to her office were ignored.
DOT did not respond to why its officials didn’t disclose the dangers associated with inhaling concrete dust. In her email to us, Hanif did say that she, too, was awaiting a DOT response to some of these concerns.
The councilmember, while stating that “the health and safety of my constituents is my top priority,” has not provided any evidence in support of that statement when it comes to the recycling plant. Her office also did not respond to an offer to respond to comments of her constituents that we have written about in this article.
All the while, silica dust continues to escape from the concrete recycling plant into the communities surrounding it.
“We appreciate those occasions when it’s watered down. But the videos that we have, showing dust blowing, are genuine. It’s not the good days that we’re concerned about. It’s all the hours of the day when there’s dust coming off these heaps,” said Gray. “I don’t want my kids breathing in silica for two years.”
To contact the writer of this story email oscarfock9@gmail.com
