To support student journalism and the content you love, become a member of The Daily Orange today.

As a Syracuse native, the news of the lawsuit demanding to put a pause on the construction of the community grid is positive. It has turned my attention to the holes within the Community Grid project. Concerns brought forward within the lawsuit are enough to reflect on how the Community Grid project does not consider how to combat environmental racism. The community grid alternative is meant to right wrongs in history but without addressing any solutions to prevent an increase in pollution to those living next to I-81, restorative justice is no longer the outcome.

The lawsuit petition was sent in October to the New York State Supreme Court by Renew 81 For All – an independent association composed of members of the community and entities. Renew 81 For All would like Syracuse to be proactive and not reactive when implementing plans for families living next to the viaduct, such as thinking about environmental impacts on the community before construction begins. While there is an intention with I-81 to not repeat history, that intention is lost without a careful, thought out plan to implement it.

Renew 81 For All challenges the Department of Transportation of New York State (DOT)’s proposal for a highway modification. The group argues that the demolition would violate the New York Climate Law and Green Amendment and contribute to negative environmental impacts such as greenhouse gas emissions and an increase in respiratory illnesses in residents living by the viaduct. Therefore, this lawsuit should draw attention and question whether the Community Grid Project truly takes into consideration the community living right next door.

The highway’s history itself is complicated and needs to be heavily understood from all angles. The same can be said about the politics of I-81, those who benefit from the highway staying and why there is a lawsuit being petitioned against the DOT.

Onondaga County Legislator Charles Garland currently supports the petition sent to the Supreme Court. His family’s funeral home, Garland Brothers Funeral Home, was impacted by the construction of highway I-81. Garland argues that the original plan for I-81 did not address the community members surrounding the highway. While the current plans center on the idea that the community grid is a form of restorative justice, the state still needs to implement a solution to sustain quality standards for homes next to the viaduct before the Community Grid Project can do more good than harm. The pause on the construction of the Community Grid Project would allow time to reconsider alternatives to highway I-81 that create less environmental pollution and traffic.

Garland explains that a study looking into Southside Transportation was the New York State DOT and Syracuse Metropolitan Transportation Corporation. “The NYSDOT and SMTC signed off on this study, which is why they are reluctant to contradict anything or entertain a compromise now, even during a global pandemic that disproportionately affects people and communities of color with highest rated of upper respiratory illness and other chronic illnesses and no end in sight.”

Groups similar to Renew 81 For All, such as Save I-81, are pushing back against the current demolition of highway I-81. Renew 81 For All and Save 81 have a common goal but the latter focus on the immediate consequences for the community. The difference between Renew 81 For All and Save 81, is that Save 81 is concerned that the demolition of I-81 and the creation of a community grid would slow the momentum Syracuse will gain from future and current projects. The lawsuit submitted against the Department of Transportation is to reconsider and take a look at the risk the community grid can bring to the surrounding communities.

The focus of this project should address the environmental impact and high traffic near the very neighborhoods next to highway I-81 that are supposed to receive justice. Renew 81 For All’s lawsuit shines a light on the importance of the city needing to be less reactive. Careful consideration of the community surrounding the viaduct should have been kept in consideration throughout the decision making. Community is only prioritized once that community fights back and makes its voice heard.

Sarhia Rahim is a Sophomore Policy Studies Major. Her Column appears bi-weekly. She can be reached at slrahim@syr.edu.

Published on November 1, 2022 at 12:33 am