DOCSLIB.ORG

Fat Usr" by Email and Mail

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fat Usr ?6 THE CITY OF NEW YORK MICHAEL A. CARDOZO LAW DEPARTMENT tel: (212) 788-1574 Corporation Counsel 100 CHURCH STREET fax:(212)788-1619 NEW YORK, NY 10007 April 30, 2004 fat usr" By Email and Mail Hon. Jaclyn Brilling, Secretary NYS Board on Electric Generation Siting and the Environment Three Empire State Plaza Albany, New York 12223-1350 Re: Case Ol-F-1276 - TransGas Energy Systems, LLC Dear Secretary Brilling: Pursuant to Your Honor's Notice of Schedule for Filing Exceptions, issued April 1, 2004, I haye enclosed an original and twenty-fiye copies of the City of New York's Brief Opposing Exceptions. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully submitted. William S. Plache Assistant Corporation Counsel Enyironmental Law Division Exhibit Exchange List ^Wd i~m mi -ijOiSSiPvfcs^50 Case Ol-F-1276 NEW YORK STATE BOARD ON ELECTRIC GENERATION SITING AND THE ENVIRONMENT In the Matter of Application of TransGas Energy Systems, LLC for a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need to Construct and Operate a 1,100 Megawatt Combined Cycle Cogeneration Facility in the Borough of Brooklyn, New York THE CITY OF NEW YORK'S BRIEF OPPOSING EXCEPTIONS MICHAEL A. CARDOZO Corporation Counsel of the City of New York Attorney for the City of New York 100 Church Street New York. NY. 10007 Of Counsel: William S. Plache Tel: (212) 788-1574 NEW YORK STATE BOARD ON ELECTRIC GENERATION SITING AND THE ENVIRONMENT IN THE MATTER ofthe- Case Ol-F-1276 Application filed by TransGas Energy Systems LLC For a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need to Construct and Operate a Nominal 1,100 megawatt generating facility in the Borough of Brooklyn, New York City THE CITY OF NEW YORK'S BRIEF OPPOSING EXCEPTIONS PRELIMINARY STATEMENT Pursuant to the Secretary's Notice, issued April 1, 2004, the City of New York (City) submits this brief in opposition to TransGas Energy Systems, LLC's (TGE) Brief on Exceptions. TGE seeks a certificate of environmental compatibility and public need under Article X of the Public Service Law to construct a 1,100 megawatt electric and steam cogeneration plant on the East River waterfront on the border of the Greenpoint and Williamsburg sections of Brooklyn, New York. The City generally supports the construction of new, clean and efficient sources of power. However, because siting a power plant at the location proposed by TGE is fundamentally at odds with existing and planned land uses in the surrounding area, including the City's plan to acquire the site itself to create a public park, the City opposed the TGE project in this proceeding. In a Recommended Decision issued April 1, 2004 (RD), the Hearing Examiners held that the Board should deny TGE's application for a certificate. Significantly, the Examiners' determination was based largely on the fact that the project conflicted with the City's 'land use plans for the area, as well as other major flaws inherent in the proposal. In its brief, TGE takes exception to several aspects of the RD. In this brief, the City responds to four of the exceptions raised by TGE: Exception C - in which TGE takes exception to the RD's assessment of reliability benefits of the proposed project; Exception H - in which TGE takes exception to the RD's analysis of the project's steam component; Exception J - in which TGE takes exception to the RD's finding that the project conflicts with future land uses; and Exception K - in which TGE takes exception to the RD's determination that the project is not consistent with the City's New Waterfront Revitalization Program (NWRP). PROCEDURAL HISTORY AND STATEMENT OF FACTS The City respectfully refers the Board to the RD for a complete and accurate statement of facts and procedural history. ARGUMENT POINT I TGE EXCEPTION C: THE EXAMINERS' ASSESSMENT OF THE PROJECT'S ALLEGED RELIABILITY BENEFITS WAS PROPER In the RD, the Examiners found that while "the New York City market requires new electric capacity, and reasonably soon, .... it is not apparent that the acquisition of such capacity should come at the expense of the City's plans for redeveloping a scarce resource, namely the East River waterfront in Greenpoint and Williamsburg." RD at 116. In challenging this well-reasoned conclusion, TGE contorts the facts in an attempt to portray its project as essential to fulfill the City's energy needs. First, TGE greatly overstates the City's need for additional capacity. TGE claims that the RD "exposes NYC to a potential, and unneeded, energy crisis." TGE Brief at 14. This statement mischaracterizes the City's future energy requirements. The New York City Energy Policy Task Force recently issued a Report to Mayor Bloomberg titled, "New York City Energy Policy: An Electricity Reserve Roadmap," dated January 2004 (Task Force Report). The Task Force Report concludes that the City will need about 3,780 megawatts of new electricity resources by 2008. Task Force Report at 9. Only 665 megawatts of that total projected need, however, are necessary to accommodate load growth. Id. The remaining need requirements are not necessary to ensure reliability. Instead, they are included to reflect the goals of reducing energy and capacity prices (1000 megawatts) and replacing potential power plant retirements. The only scheduled retirement is the 875 megawatt NYPA Poletti plant, which, if circumstances permit, is scheduled to go off line in 2008. Even the Poletti retirement, however, is contingent upon there being sufficient replacement capacity. Otherwise, Poletti will remain operational until 2010. The 665 megawatt load growth requirement will be provided by plants already completed or under construction. These include: KeySpan Ravenswood, which is complete (250 MW); Con Edison's East River repowering, which is under construction (125 MW); and the NYPA Poletti expansion, also under construction (500 MW). Task Force Report at 11. That total of 875 megawatts of additional supply from projects under construction exceeds the projected 2008 load growth demand of 665 megawatts. Distributed resources provides for another 300 megawatts. Accordingly, even if only those plants that are currently under construction or already completed are in service by 2008, the City will nonetheless meet projected demand growth need. There is no risk of the "energy crisis," despite TGE's alarmist statements. r Second, TGE disregards all remaining transmission and in-City generation projects that are not yet under construction. Proposed power plants, excluding TGE, will provide 2082 megawatts. See Task Force Policy at 19 (as corrected by the TGE Brief on Exceptions at 14). In addition, proposed transmission projects will provide an additional 2550 megawatts, for a total of 4632 megawatts of additional capacity from proposed transmission and generation projects (exclusive of TGE). This 4632 megawatts plus the 875 megawatts already under construction and the 300 megawatts provided by distributed resources, is more than sufficient to address the City's need for an additional 3,780 megawatts by 2008. The RD properly took these projects into account. As stated in the RD, the Task Force Report "has identified many anticipated generation, transmission and distributed resources that could be used to meet a net need of 2,605 megawatts (3,780, less 1,175 representing projects under construction and distributed resources) of additional capacity by 2008, and that need could be met without construction of the proposed facility." RD at 122. TGE, however, claims that the Examiners should not have relied on other projects because they are "very uncertain." TGE Brief at 15. TGE's claims are a smokescreen. There is no reason to believe that the TGE project is any more viable than any of the other proposed projects. Throughout this proceeding, TGE has used its status as a merchant generator as both a sword and a shield. It does so again in its Brief on Exceptions. While an applicant under Article X is not required to provide financing information, TGE consistently portrays itself as more economically sound than other proposed projects. Relying on the Article X exemption, however, TGE has refused to provide any basis for this assertion. TGE has merely hidden behind unfounded claims that its steam component provides the financial incentive that other projects dack. It was shown in the proceedings, however, steam is not the magic bullet that TGE has portrayed it to be. The Examiners saw through TGE's tactic, and stated: there has been no showing that the applicant has any greater access to financing. To be sure, there was no requirement that TGE, as a merchant developer, provide such information in its application, but the lack of that information in this proceeding undermines a finding that the proposed facility would be a demonstrably available resource whose construction should be authorized to the detriment of implementing the City's LUAWP [Greenpoint/ Williamsburg Land Use and Waterfront Plan]. RD at 116-17. The Examiners thus recognized that TGE is no more viable than other proposed projects. Because planned projects and projects already under construction will provide sufficient capacity to address the City's future energy needs, and because TGE is no more certain to get underway than other projects, TGE's project should not be certified "to the detriment of implementing the City's [land use plans]." RD at 116-17. POINT II TGE EXCEPTION H: THE EXAMINERS' DETERMINATION WITH RESPECT TO THE STEAM COMPONENT OF TGE'S PROPOSAL WAS PROPER The Examiners held that "the proposed facility, viewed as a combination of electric and steam plant," was not consistent with the most recent State Energy Plan and could not be selected pursuant to an approved procurement process." RD at 19-20. In support of this conclusion, the Examiners cited the PSC's Order Concerning Phase II Steam Plant Report in Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Development News Highlights MANHATTAN - MID-1ST QUARTER 2020 PLUS an OUTER BOROUGH SNAPSHOT Looking Ahead
    Development News Highlights MANHATTAN - MID-1ST QUARTER 2020 PLUS AN OUTER BOROUGH SNAPSHOT Looking Ahead Climate Mobilization Act’s Local Law 97: The Next Steps In April 2019 New York City enacted what has been described as “representing some of the most ambitious climate legislation enacted by any large municipality in the world to date.” The centerpiece of the (9) bill Climate Mobilization Act signed by Mayor de Blasio on Earth Day is Local Law 97 (LL97) which will require buildings citywide that exceed 25,000 square feet to begin reducing carbon emissions relative to 2005 base year levels by 2024, with reductions of 40% by calendar year 2030, and 80% by calendar year 2050. A New York City Climate Advisory Board was reportedly appointed by the mayor in December as per the law; and its members represent “a broad cross-section of real estate, environmental and organizational expertise” according to reports. The board has been tasked with putting together a report “addressing all manner of questions around just how LL97 will work — ranging from how landlords should report emissions data to how the city should penalize owners for non-compliance to how it might structure an emission offset program.” Although the board’s recommendations to be outlined in a report and delivered to the mayor and speaker by the start of 2023 aren’t legally binding, they are “expected to be influential, especially given how many of the law’s finer points remain to be nailed down.” Some cited examples of the difficult issues to be addressed, which weren’t completely sorted out include: • How exactly building owners will be instructed to calculate and report their properties’ carbon emissions, for instance: – Accounting for tenant space that was unoccupied in a building during the year they were reporting, which is going to impact calculations and could, in this case, skew results and deliver an inaccurate representation of how the building is being used.
    [Show full text]
  • Revitalizing a 19Th Century Industrial Complex Into a 21St Century Research and Learning Technology Center
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 8-2013 Revitalizing a 19th Century Industrial Complex into a 21st Century Research and Learning Technology Center James Lawrence Wines [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Part of the Architectural Technology Commons, Cultural Resource Management and Policy Analysis Commons, Curriculum and Instruction Commons, Environmental Design Commons, Historic Preservation and Conservation Commons, and the Urban, Community and Regional Planning Commons Recommended Citation Wines, James Lawrence, "Revitalizing a 19th Century Industrial Complex into a 21st Century Research and Learning Technology Center. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 2013. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/2477 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by James Lawrence Wines entitled "Revitalizing a 19th Century Industrial Complex into a 21st Century Research and Learning Technology Center." I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree
    [Show full text]
  • A New Tower Opens on the Domino Site in Williamsburg the 45-Story Building Has Two Legs, with Offices in One and Rental Apartments in the Other
    September 12, 2019 https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/12/realestate/a-new-tower-opens-on-the-domino-site-in-williamsburg.html A New Tower Opens on the Domino Site in Williamsburg The 45-story building has two legs, with offices in one and rental apartments in the other. By Kaya Laterman Domino Park opened last summer to rave reviews on the site of the former Domino Sugar refinery in Williamsburg, and the transformation of the sprawling industrial site continues this month with the opening of a 45-story, mixed-use tower on the edge of the East River. One South First is the second building to go up on the Domino site. It has a defining presence, partly because it towers over everything around it and can be seen for miles from most directions, including an unblocked view from East Houston Street in Manhattan. But it is also striking for its design, by COOKFOX Architects: two interlocking towers connected by about a dozen floors at the top of the structure. The northern leg will have 150,000 square feet of office space, while the southern leg, as well as the connecting portion on top, will house rental apartments. The tower’s visual prominence on the northern edge of the Domino site helped boost interest in the apartments before marketing officially began, said Rebecca Epstein, director of residential leasing at Two Trees Management Company, the developer: “We’ve had a lot of people come to us asking, ‘What is that and how can I get in there?’” The award-winning facade design is an ode to the former refinery, with the white, chamfering precast concrete window frames intended to resemble the molecular structure of sugar crystals.
    [Show full text]
  • Domino Sugar Refinery Redevelopment Williamsburg, Brooklyn, NYC, USA (2016)
    CASE STUDY Domino Sugar Refinery Redevelopment Williamsburg, Brooklyn, NYC, USA (2016) BACKGROUND Once a Sugar Refinery, this Domino redevelopment project will integrate many of the historic features DISTRIBUTOR: of the sugar factory that once functioned on this site. This megaproject along the new quarter-mile of Dry Concrete, LLC the Williamsburg waterfront will transform this dilapidated area into: a mix of market-rate and affordable housing; creative office space; neighborhood retail; community facilities; elevated walkway/skybridge; PRODUCTS: and an enormous waterfront public park. Learn more at kryton.com Krystol Internal MembraneTM (KIM®) The proposed buildings will be porous, featuring large openings that allow light and air to penetrate Krystol Waterstop Grout through the site and into the neighborhood beyond. The hub of this megaproject is the renovated Krystol Waterstop TreatmentTM Domino Sugar refinery and required proper protecting and waterproofing from the areas extreme weather conditions. SOLUTION The developer chose Krystol Internal Membrane™ (KIM®) for the first of the five towers on this site based on a positive experience with KIM’s effectiveness in waterproofing concrete. KIM is a hydrophilic crystalline admixture used to create permanently waterproof concrete and is the benchmark in crystalline waterproofing admixtures. As the exclusive distributor for the Northeast Greg Maugeri of Dry Concrete LLC was instrumental in providing consultative services, site visits and after sales support. Using Krystol® technology greatly lowers the permeability of concrete and eliminates the need for surface applied waterproofing membranes, therefore Kryton’s waterproofing admixture KIM was the ideal choice for the shotcrete walls. Then the Krystol Waterstop System, consisting of Krystol Waterstop Grout and Krystol Waterstop Treatment™, was applied to all the construction joints in the walls.
    [Show full text]
  • Roebling Chap. Newsletter, 14-1
    Society for Industrial Archeology ROEBLING CHAPTER NEWSLETTER July 2005 Vol. 14 No. 1 TOURS Remember that tour space is often limited, please cancel your reservation if you find you cannot attend so that another may go. Fireboat Harvey Cruise Sunday, August 28, 2005, 12:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Depart Pier 63 (at 23rd St.), Manhattan e will be joining the Suffield Historical Society Wand Suffield Fire Department for an afternoon aboard the fireboat John J. Harvey. The cruise will circle south around Manhattan and travel as far north on the East River as time permits, saluting the bridges on the East River with water displays. Historical narration will be provided. Photo by Huntley Gill Lunch will be served on board and will feature food The John J. Harvey at Direktor's Shipyard about to undergo cooked on the charcoal grill on deck. Cost to Roebling major repairs completed June 22, 2005. chapter members for food and drink is $20. Since space is limited, this cruise is only open to from Greenpoint to Maspeth, will be discussed. Meet at chapter members and their families. To reserve space, Fulton Ferry Landing, foot of Old Fulton Street, opposite contact Mary at 212-769-4946 or [email protected]. the River Café (exit west end of High Street station on A, Payment may be made by check to RCSIA and mailed to C subway line). Sponsored by the Brooklyn Center for Mary Habstritt at 40 W. 77th St., #17B, New York NY the Urban Environment (BCUE), 718-788-8500. Fees 10024, or by check or in cash on the day of the tour.
    [Show full text]
  • 07DCP094K: Domino Sugar Project – TM 0051
    TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM CEQR Number 07DCP094K: Domino Sugar Project – TM 0051 May 13, 2020 I. INTRODUCTION The Applicant (Domino Site A and Domino Site B LLC) is seeking a minor modification of the CPC approved plans for the Domino Sugar Large-Scale General Development (C 140132 ZSK), to facilitate the construction of a fourteen-story glass barrel-vaulted building, with a mechanical penthouse, within, and set back from, the historic facades of the former Domino factory (“Modified Refinery Building”). On October 16, 2019, the NYC Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) approved the design of the Modified Refinery Building when it issued Certificate of Appropriateness COFA-20-02358. The purpose of this Technical Memorandum is to determine whether the proposed change to the massing of the Refinery Building would result in any significant adverse environmental impacts that were not previously identified in the May 2010 Domino Sugar Rezoning Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and subsequent Technical Memoranda dated June 4th, 2010, July 10th, 2010, October 31, 2013, and March 5, 2014 (CEQR No. 07DCP094K). As discussed below, this technical memorandum concludes that there would be no additional significant adverse impacts in any of the analyzed CEQR technical areas as a result of the proposed modification. II. BACKGROUND The Domino Sugar project originally proposed in 2010 (the “2010 Project”) was intended to revitalize and reactivate a vacant waterfront industrial site (see Figure 1 for site location) with publicly accessible open space, a restored and adaptively reused historic building, and new residential buildings. As part of the 2010 Project, the landmarked building along the waterfront known as the Refinery Building was to be adaptively reused.
    [Show full text]
  • Read the Full Report
    Open Space Dialogues: A New Perspective New Yorkers for Parks 55 Broad Street, 23rd Floor New York, NY 10004 212-838-9410 [email protected] Letter from Executive Director Letter from Executive Director At New Yorkers for Parks (NY4P), we believe that parks and open space are critical city infrastructure. In fact, we’ve centered our work around this. Our data-driven research, our community organizing, and our advocacy all support our conviction that parks and open space are a necessary component of a vital and equitable city, just as essential as schools, streets, and sewers. Today, our work focuses on ensuring that open space is protected, improved, and expanded as our city grows and evolves. Simply put, parks are the soul of our city. Neighborhood by neighborhood, parks are where we go to relax, exercise, celebrate birthdays, hold family reunions, observe religious holidays, and so much more. Throughout the city, open space plays important environmental and ecological roles, helping us mitigate and adapt to the effects of climate change. But as our city rapidly transforms and is shaped to respond to the need for more jobs, more transit, and more housing, parks aren’t always treated with the same weight as other critical city infrastructure. When the City rezones a piece of land, big or small, it changes the existing zoning which dictates how that land can be used. Often, the intended purpose of rezoning is to increase density to serve the needs of our growing population, and to adapt or change how land is used to create a more livable and resilient city.
    [Show full text]
  • City Planning Commission
    CITY PLANNING COMMISSION June 7th, 2010 / Calendar No. 3 C 100187 ZSK IN THE MATTER OF an application submitted by The Refinery LLC pursuant to Sections 197-c and 201 of the New York City Charter for the grant of a special permit pursuant to the following sections of the Zoning Resolution: 1. Section 74-743(a)(1) - to allow the distribution of floor area within the general large scale development without regard for zoning lot lines; and 2. Section 74-743(a)(2) - to modify the requirements of Section 23-532 (Required rear yard equivalents), 23-711 (Standard minimum distance between buildings), 23-852 (Inner court recesses), 23-863 (Minimum distance between legally required windows and any wall in an inner court), 62-332 (Rear yards and waterfront yards) and 62-341 (Developments on land and platforms), to facilitate a mixed use development on property bounded by Grand Street and its northwesterly prolongation, Kent Avenue, South 3rd Street, a line 100 feet westerly of Wythe Avenue, South 4th Street, Kent Avenue, South 5th Street and its northwesterly prolongation, and the U.S. Pierhead Line (Block 2414, Lot 1 and Block 2428, Lot 1), in R6/C2-4, R8/C2-4 and C6-2 Districts, within a General Large-Scale Development, Borough of Brooklyn, Community District 1. This application for a special permit pursuant to Section 74-743 ―Special Provisions for Bulk Modification,‖ was filed by The Refinery, LLC, on December 24, 2009, to facilitate a 2.75 million-square-foot general large-scale development located at 264-350 & 317-329 Kent Avenue, Community District 1, Brooklyn.
    [Show full text]
  • Reimagining New York City's Underutilized Building Stock And
    Reimagining New York City’s Underutilized Building Stock and Infrastructure 8th Conference of the International Forum Urbanism Catherine Park Photo by Miru Kim THE UNEMPLOYMENT RATE IN THE U.S. DURING 1910 ~ 1960 (Estimatd) NEW YORK CITY’S HISTORICAL POPULATION 9M - 1.4 % Loss of Population 8.4 M 1960 30% 8M 7 M +25% 25% 7M Unemployment Rate Great Depression - 10.4 % Loss of Population 1980 20% 6M 15% 5M +126.8% Growing of Population 3.4 M 10% 4M 1900 5% 3M GREAT DEPRESSION 1929 ~ 1939 0% 2M 1.5 M WORLD WAR I WORLD WAR II 1914 ~ 1918 1939 ~ 1945 1M 0 1698 1712 1723 1737 1746 1756 1771 1790 1800 1810 1820 1830 1840 1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2014 Data Sources: United State Census Bureau. Retrieved March 30, 2015 COTTON, WOOL GARMENT INDUSTRY ENGLAND STANDARD OIL OIL INDUSTRY CLEVELAND, OHIO U.S. STEEL STEEL INDUSTRY PITTSBURGH, PA RAW-SUGAR CANE SUGAR REFINING CARIBBEAN REGION U.S. REGION NEW YORK STATE MANUFACTURING FACILITIES RAILROAD I RAILROAD II RAILROAD III RAW-MATERIAL ROUTES RAILROAD EXPANSION 1920s Data Source : U.S. Department of Transportation COTTON, WOOL GARMENT INDUSTRY ENGLAND STANDARD OIL OIL INDUSTRY CLEVELAND, OHIO U.S. STEEL STEEL INDUSTRY PITTSBURGH, PA RAW-SUGAR CANE SUGAR REFINING CARIBBEAN REGION U.S. REGION NEW YORK STATE MANUFACTURING FACILITIES RAILROAD I RAILROAD II RAILROAD III RAW-MATERIAL ROUTES RAILROAD EXPANSION 1920s Data Source : U.S. Department of Transportation COTTON, WOOL GARMENT INDUSTRY ENGLAND STANDARD OIL OIL INDUSTRY CLEVELAND, OHIO U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • New Life for the Sugar Re Nery
    ARCHITECTURE DESIGNITA ENG HABITAT RESEARCH LOGIN GALLERYREGISTER VIDEO CONTACT SEARCH Abitare Architecture Projects New life for the Sugar Reˆnery PROJECTS 17 May 2020 New life for the Sugar Reˆnery Paolo Lavezzari A centrepiece of the Brooklyn skyline, in New York, in 2021 the Domino Sugar Refinery will transform into an office building. Thanks to the daring project by PAU Studio, which nests a new volume entirely made of glass inside the old brick building Built in 1882, the Domino Sugar Refinery has long stood out not just in the Brooklyn skyline but in the economy as a whole, having been the largest sugar refinery in the world. Closed since 2004, the complex on the Williamsburg waterfrond is at the centre of the 11-acre Domino Park redesigned by James Corner Field Operations (the firm that transformed the High Line, and which is now giving new life to the South Street Seaport). Williamsburg waterfrontARCHITECTURE is at the centre ofDESIGN the 11-acre HABITAT Domino RESEARCHPark, GALLERY VIDEO redesigned by James Corner Field Operations (the ˆrm that transformed SUBSCRIBE Get Abitare delivered direct to your door or browse it on your computer, smartphone, or tablet (app available for Android and iOS). Click here to see all print and digital offers. EVENTS Shenzhen pays tribute to Kartell Currently suspended Countryside, unnatural nature Overall view of the project. The large windows on the ground ˜oor will be open: they will house ↑ Currently suspended businesses and serve as pedestrian pathways leading to the park. Chilean home, universal The conversion of the Domino Reˆnery’s 40,000 square metres into ofˆces home – designed by PAU Studio – involves the nesting of a new glass building inside the original envelope.
    [Show full text]
  • Domino Park, Williamsburg
    BSL CLASSROOM LOCATION GUIDE DOMINO PARK, WILLIAMSBURG A BIT OF HISTORY FIRST! Domino Park is built on the grounds of the former Domino Sugar Refinery, a site of incredible significance to the growth and development of Williamsburg and the entire Brooklyn waterfront. Dating back to 1856, the Domino Sugar Refinery was once the largest and most productive sugar refinery in the world. At its peak of productivity, it refined 4 million pounds of sugar daily. This site was the “jewel in the crown” of the Domino Sugar empire that at one point produced up to 98% of the sugar consumed in the United States. This site was also central to the growth of the surrounding Williamsburg area, to the industrialization of the Brooklyn waterfront and to the rise of New York City as a global economic powerhouse. As a result of economic, political and global changes, industrial activity in Brooklyn began to drop off dramatically beginning in the 1950s. Closing its doors in 2004, the Domino Sugar Refinery was the last major active industrial operation on Brooklyn’s once bustling East River waterfront. The park spans a quarter mile along the East River near the Williamsburg Bridge, at the Domino Sugar Refinery site. Along the five-block riverside walk, various salvaged factory equipment is displayed, including four syrup collection tanks, that pay tribute to the history of the Domino Sugar Refinery An elevated walkway extends much of the length of the park, resembling the interior of the old refinery. The crane tracks that were used in the original refinery now houses gardens with roughly a hundred different species of plants.
    [Show full text]
  • 30 44 Full Magazine
    Musical robots invade Gowanus P.7 Brooklyn’s Real Newspaper BrooklynPaper.com • (718) 834–9350 • Brooklyn, NY • ©2007 BROOKLYN HEIGHTS–DOWNTOWN EDITION AWP/16 pages • Vol. 30, No. 44 • Saturday, Nov. 10, 2007 • FREE INCLUDING DUMBO DOWNTOWN MOVIN’ UP Skyscrapers tower over same old infrastructure By Dana Rubinstein The Brooklyn Paper Downtown Brooklyn’s biggest booster MIT News Office said this week that the development the area will experience in the next five years — adding more than 14,000 apartments, 1,800 hotel rooms and 1.6 million square feet of office space — is happening faster than some of the neighborhood’s basic in- frastructure can handle. GEHRY SUED! But Downtown Brooklyn Partnership President Joe Chan, who showed off the Cracks at MIT cast doubt on ‘Miss Brooklyn’ glitzy new face of the borough’s gateway in an Ian McKellen-narrated video presenta- tion last week, said he and his staff were on By Gersh Kuntzman complex in Prospect Heights, is so rid- opened in spring, 2004. Globe that the fault was in Gehry’s top of it. The Brooklyn Paper dled with cracks that mold has formed But its janitors were never fans. flawed plans, not in Skanska’s execu- “There’s a need for ongoing attention and and drainage is backing up inside. Almost immediately, according to tion of them. problem solving to Massachusetts Institute of Technolo- “Gehry breached its duties by pro- the suit, the center’s outdoor amphithe- “This is not a construction issue, gy has sued Frank Gehry — the vision- happen,” said Chan. viding deficient design services and ater began to crack due to drainage never has been,” said Paul Hewins, “And that’s some- ary behind Bruce Ratner’s Atlantic drawings,” says the suit, which seeks problems.
    [Show full text]