City agrees to consider Canarsie, Coney for future ferry expansion

The city has officially agreed – in writing – to consider two transportation-starved Brooklyn ‘hoods for future NYC Ferry routes.

The city has formally committed to looking into both Coney and Canarsie – two nabes recently pushing for ferry service – in future studies, “to understand how they may best fit into future phases of expansion,” according to a letter penned to Councilmember Mark Treyger by Seth Myers, executive vice president and director of project implementation for the New York City Economic Development Corporation (NYCEDC) sent at the end of August.

The forthcoming research, Myers wrote, will mirror that which the agency did in its 2013 Citywide Ferry Service, out of which came the updated system’s roll-out routes.

NYCEDC, the bureau behind the waterway expansion, is still undergoing its first batch of line openings, having just celebrated its most recent launch in Astoria at the end of August.

“We understand that different neighborhoods face unique transportation challenges, and we see the recently launched NYC Ferry as one way to address those needs,” Myers wrote. “Now three months into the implementation of NYC Ferry, we are focused on initial rollout of existing NYC Ferry routes and successfully launching identified routes in 2018.”

However, he went on, “Once the system is fully built out, we believe it will generate a wealth of information that could help inform a future study of additional sites and routes.”

Treyger – who penned letters to both the NYCEDC and the office of Mayor Bill de Blasio requesting immediate consideration of the neighborhoods in future service – called the response a positive step forward in the fight.

“That is the initial step towards expansion,” he wrote on Facebook, noting however, “we still have work to do to make this happen, but I thank my colleagues from Coney to Canarsie, advocates, and residents for their continued push to make this a reality.”

Constituents of Treyger’s were quick to applaud the agreement.

“That is awesome to hear,” wrote one user, while another noted that the two should have been studied the first time around.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.