MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES.1 INTRODUCTION
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA), in cooperation with the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), MTA Capital Construction (MTACC) and New York City Transit (NYCT), proposes the construction and operation of the Fulton Street Transit Center (FSTC) to improve access to, from and within Lower Manhattan—the area south of Chambers Street in Manhattan.
The Proposed Action consists of the construction and operation of a rehabilitated, reconfigured and enhanced multi-level, street-level, and subsurface station complex in Lower Manhattan that would serve 12 NYCT subway lines. The complex would extend from Church Street in the west to William Street in the east. The entry facility (“Entry Facility”) to the FSTC would be located on Broadway between Fulton and John Streets with a subsurface pedestrian passageway extending on Dey Street west to Church Street. The FSTC would include improvements to the following four (4) existing connected subway stations that comprise the existing Fulton Street – Broadway Nassau Subway Station Complex (Existing Complex):
• 45 Fulton Street; • AC Broadway-Nassau; • 23 Fulton Street; and, • JMZ Fulton Street.
In addition to the four (4) existing connected subway stations, the Proposed Action would also include improvements to the RW Cortlandt Street Station and the E World Trade Center (WTC) Station. In aggregate, the Proposed Action involves six (6) principal elements:
1. A new prominent Entry Facility at street-level, with a subsurface level passenger concourse (i.e. the Central Station Concourse), centrally located on Broadway between Fulton and John Streets that: integrates horizontal connectivity between the AC and 45 service with vertical connectivity between the street and different levels; and, provides improved street-level access and visibility.
2. Rehabilitation of the 45 line Fulton Street Station and the 23 line Fulton Street Station.
3. A subsurface pedestrian passageway (i.e. the Dey Street Passageway), beneath Dey Street between Broadway and Church Street connecting the Entry Facility to the WTC site with an access structure on the south side of Dey Street at Broadway (i.e. the Dey Street Access Plaza).
4. Improvements to the mezzanines and platform access at the AC line Fulton Street Station and JMZ line Fulton Street Station, improving circulation and reducing overcrowding conditions.
5. A pedestrian and passenger connection between the RW and E service.
6. Improved street access to the subway, including wider and more direct stairways, access for disabled customers, and new street entrances.
The FSTC would provide direct access to the future concourse at the WTC site, from which access to a variety of transit options similar to those existing prior to September 11 is anticipated to be available, including:
• The reconstructed 19 line Cortlandt Street Station; • The reconstructed Permanent WTC Port Authority Trans-Hudson (PATH) Terminal to the west; and, • The ferry terminal at the World Financial Center (WFC) further to the west.
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-1 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation Improvements to transit facilities, particularly to the existing complex of stations encompassed by the Proposed Action, are not only needed to restore transportation functionality in support of the revitalization of Lower Manhattan, but to accommodate the range of changes that September 11 has triggered in the broader context of Lower Manhattan’s recovery. This includes the redevelopment of the WTC site, changes in the uses of certain buildings from commercial to residential, and anticipated substantial increases in visitor activity. Improvements to Lower Manhattan’s existing transportation facilities would substantially improve the quality of daily life for the area’s residents and workers and improve visitor experiences. These advances are important in retaining and developing Lower Manhattan’s commercial base.
The FSTC is one (1) of three (3) currently identified priority transit projects meant to address the urgent need for comprehensive transit improvements in Lower Manhattan in response to the events of September 11. The two (2) other priority projects are the WTC Transportation Hub (also referred to as the Permanent WTC PATH Terminal), sponsored by the Port Authority of New York New Jersey (PANYNJ), and the South Ferry Subway Terminal Project, sponsored by the MTA and NYCT. These priority projects were formally identified by New York Governor George Pataki as the “Lower Manhattan Transportation Recovery Projects” through a coordinated process conducted in late 2002 and early 2003 by the Transportation Working Group, a group of decision-makers including the State of New York, the City of New York, MTA, PANYNJ and the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation (LMDC).
On February 27, 2003, U.S. Transportation Secretary Norman Y. Mineta announced the selection of these projects as a group of nationally recognized transportation projects designated to receive high-level attention under President Bush’s September 18, 2002 Executive Order 13274, Environmental Stewardship and Transportation Infrastructure Project Review. This designation is intended to help expedite the rebuilding of the transit system damaged in the terrorist attacks as the projects advance through the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review process.
The Proposed Action represents a much-needed enhancement of the transit facilities in key Lower Manhattan locations and also forms an essential node within the larger context of the regeneration of Lower Manhattan. As such, the Proposed Action would continue to be developed in close consultation with the other planning entities in Lower Manhattan.
ES.2 PROJECT PURPOSE AND NEED
The events of September 11 destroyed critical portions of the Lower Manhattan transportation system, compounding existing deficiencies and jeopardizing the area’s sustainability as a Central Business District, emerging residential area, and key tourist destination. Rebuilding the Lower Manhattan transportation network— restoring service, eliminating deficiencies and anticipating future needs—is a critical basis for the successful revitalization of Lower Manhattan. The New York City’s Vision for Lower Manhattan (the Mayor’s Vision) outlines the transportation needs of Lower Manhattan as well as the importance of connecting Lower Manhattan to the rest of the Tri-State area as part of the revitalization process. The concentration of subway lines at the centrally located Existing Complex makes it integral to this revitalization process. In order for the Existing Complex to realize its potential for contributing to the revitalization of Lower Manhattan and the region, its existing and anticipated operational deficiencies need to be addressed and its connectivity with other transit services and the street network needs to be improved.
The Existing Complex is critical to the restoration and revitalization of the local and regional economy for the following reasons:
• The Existing Complex houses the largest concentration of subway services in Lower Manhattan; • The Existing Complex is located in close proximity to other transit services (such as the PATH service) and to existing and future centers of activity, including the redeveloped WTC site and Memorial; and, • The Existing Complex is located centrally within the Lower Manhattan street network. October 2004 Executive Summary ES-2 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation In order for the Existing Complex to maximize its contribution to the economic recovery of Lower Manhattan and the region, and meet the increased transportation demand anticipated with the regeneration and growth in Lower Manhattan, substantial improvements are needed, including:
• Improved connectivity of the Existing Complex with the WTC site and Memorial, WFC and PATH service; • Elimination of existing operational problems of the Existing Complex (including resolution of congestion); and, • Enhanced street-level wayfinding and access to the subway system.
The proposed FSTC would be able to adequately accommodate present customer demands and anticipated year 2025 levels of demand for movement to, from, and within the FSTC.
ES.3 ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK
This FEIS has been prepared pursuant to NEPA, 42 U.S.C. Section 4321 et seq., and the New York State Environmental Quality Act (SEQRA), Article 8 of the New York Environmental Conservation Law, Section 8-0101 et seq., and their implementing regulations, to assist decision-makers in evaluating the environmental consequences of the Proposed Action and its alternatives, and to identify feasible measures to mitigate any adverse environmental impacts. The application of NEPA to mass transportation projects is reinforced in the Federal surface transportation statutes (23 U.S.C. Highways and 49 U.S.C. Transportation) that require the Secretary of Transportation to ensure NEPA mandates have been met before approving applications for Federal financial assistance.
NEPA and SEQRA requirements necessitate a comparison between future conditions without the project (No Action Alternative) and future conditions with the project fully constructed and operational (Build Alternative). The incremental difference between these two (2) conditions is then considered to be the impact of the Proposed Action. The No Action Alternative is included for consideration pursuant to 40 C.F.R. 1502.14(d) of Council on Environmental Quality regulations and includes other projects, actions or changes that are anticipated in the foreseeable future in the study area independent of the Proposed Action. The No Action Alternative also reflects the continuation of existing conditions, deficiencies, and/or problems that the Proposed Action is intended to address. The Build Alternative is typically characterized by projecting existing conditions out to the year when the project would be fully operational and, thus, when operational impacts are likely to be most intense and mitigation measures would have to be in place. In addition to impacts during operation, this FEIS addresses impacts during construction. The construction impact analysis identifies a period during which construction is expected to be most intense and when analysis of potential impacts would, therefore, be most conservative.
Because of the complexity of the planning context of the recovery of Lower Manhattan, this FEIS presents four (4) reference periods of potential conditions, detailed below, under which the FSTC is evaluated, thereby providing a framework for full consideration of impacts associated with the project alternatives.
ES.3.1 PRE-SEPTEMBER 11 REFERENCE CONDITION AND 2003 RECOVERY CONDITION
The analysis of the FSTC includes a pre-September 11 “Reference Condition,” defined as the existing conditions in Lower Manhattan on September 10, 2001. The pre-September 11 Reference Condition provides a context for assessing and understanding impacts in 2005/2006, 2008, and 2025 in addition to the existing 20031 Recovery Condition. This Reference Condition was defined based on commitments by the Lower Manhattan Recovery Project sponsors in the document Environmental Analysis Framework for
1 2003 represents the time when the data, analysis and evaluation and attending preliminary engineering, environmental and economic analyses were performed to support this FEIS.
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-3 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation Federal Transportation Recovery Projects in Lower Manhattan (October 2003), based on FTA guidance, and reflecting coordination between the FTA and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the development of this approach.
The events of September 11 resulted in extensive impacts to the economy, transportation infrastructure, and environment in Lower Manhattan. The 2003 condition represents a “Recovery Condition” with a lower level of economic activity, transit service and demand, as well as different patterns of vehicular traffic and pedestrian activity, than existed pre-September 11. Due to the effects of September 11, the conditions in 2003 are not considered truly representative of normal conditions in Lower Manhattan. It is expected that this recovery condition would continue for several years.
ES.3.2 ANALYSIS YEAR FOR ASSESSING CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS: 2005/2006
Construction of the FSTC is anticipated to start in late 2004 and be completed in 2007, with the peak construction period occurring between 2005 and 2006. This period coincides with the construction of other projects in the area, including, among others: the Permanent WTC PATH Terminal at the WTC site; other projects at the WTC site (memorial and high-rise buildings); the Route 9A project running from immediately adjacent to the WTC site to the west and south to Battery Park; and the South Ferry Subway Terminal near the southern tip of Manhattan. The 2005/2006 conditions are established by analyzing 2003 conditions and projecting these conditions out to 2005/2006. Construction impacts are identified by comparing future conditions in 2005/2006 including the major projects noted immediately above, but without the FSTC project, to 2005/2006 conditions with the FSTC project and the other projects under construction.
ES.3.3 ANALYSIS YEAR FOR ASSESSING INITIAL OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: 2008
The FSTC is expected to be in its first full year of operation in 2008. At that time, the area of Lower Manhattan served by the project would still be subject to continued rebuilding efforts. As the area would not yet have been fully restored, it would not yet be functioning at the level of economic activity and associated transit demand that would have existed based on projections for 2008 if those projections were made pre-September 11. Consequently, the FSTC would not be expected to operate with full patronage in 2008.
Several large-scale Recovery Projects would still be under construction in 2008 and the construction activities associated with those projects would create an environmental setting different from the current setting. In addition to the large-scale recovery projects, several other projects are expected to be in place by 2008, including several commercial projects and a large number of residential projects. The residential projects include both new residential buildings and conversions of existing non-residential buildings to residential use. In recognition of the substantial changes in environmental context anticipated to occur by 2008, the potential operational impacts of the Proposed Action in 2008 are analyzed in this Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS).
ES.3.4 ANALYSIS YEAR FOR ASSESSING FULL OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: 2025
It is assumed that current and planned revitalization efforts for Lower Manhattan would be successful and that, therefore, the level of development and activity in 2025 would reflect the economic growth up to that year, as would have been projected pre-September 11 for 2025. Thus, the year 2025 was selected for the full operational impact analysis. Conditions in 2025 were established by identifying the conditions existing pre-September 11 and projecting these conditions to 2025, taking into account anticipated local land use changes through 2025 for each resource. For the purposes of this analysis, it was assumed that the land uses that existed pre-September 11 would be reconstructed back to the same or similar conditions October 2004 Executive Summary ES-4 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation existing pre-September 11. Where it is expected that replacement land uses could differ substantially from those which existed pre-September 11, land use projections for 2025 were adjusted appropriately. Adjustments were made by excluding actions and projects that were expected pre-September 11 to occur by 2025 but are no longer considered likely, and including those that were not known or considered pre- September 11 but are now likely to occur by 2025. Where 2025 conditions were uncertain, those conditions existing or projected pre-September 11 were assumed to prevail.
ES.3.5 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ANALYSIS
As Lower Manhattan would be subject to several construction and rebuilding efforts over the next decade, the potential for cumulative effects has been identified by the transportation recovery project sponsors (MTA, NYCT, the PANYNJ and New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT)) and the FTA, as a key matter in the consideration of environmental analysis. The cumulative effects analyses include the effects of those actions that overlap with the Proposed Action in time and space, affect the same resource as that affected by the Proposed Action, and represent a change from conditions existing pre-September 11. The project sponsors identified a number of resource areas that could have unique potential for adverse cumulative effects. These categories form the basis of the cumulative effects analysis performed for the FSTC and are as follows:
• Air quality; • Pedestrian and vehicular access and circulation; • Noise and vibration; • Cultural and historical resources; and, • Business and economic interests.
To maintain a consistent approach to the cumulative effects analysis of Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects, the project sponsors and FTA committed to the development and implementation of a coordinated cumulative effects analysis as presented in the FTA’s Approach to Cumulative Effects Analysis for the Lower Manhattan Recovery Effort (July, 2003). Key aspects of this approach are: environmental stewardship, as reflected in Environmental Performance Commitments (EPCs), and a “building block” approach to multi-project impacts.
Environmental stewardship includes the implementation of EPCs that would contribute to lowering the potential of an individual sponsor’s project for adverse environmental impacts and, as a consequence, also lessen the potential for the contribution of all projects to overall adverse cumulative effects in Lower Manhattan. These commitments would contribute to reducing the potential for a sponsor’s project to create adverse environmental impacts while reducing each project’s cumulative adverse effects in Lower Manhattan. This approach recognizes that improvement of access to Lower Manhattan in support of economic recovery and resumed growth may cause short-term impacts before all potential benefits of improved public transportation on the Lower Manhattan environment and economy are realized. To minimize the burden on the environment when improving access to Lower Manhattan, EPCs are being incorporated into each project. The EPCs consist of measures that would be proactively implemented to avoid or minimize potential adverse effects of the Lower Manhattan projects on the environment. The EPCs would be particularly focused on the five (5) resource categories identified above as most sensitive to cumulative effects.
The “building block approach” would ensure that opportunities for reduction in potential adverse cumulative effects are made on all projects. This would be achieved through the sequential completion of cumulative effects analysis for each project within a single evaluation framework comprising consistent analysis assumptions and methodologies. The delivery of projects using the “building block approach” would allow each project to advance at its own pace, with identified impacts of completed analyses being incorporated into the “background” of future projects.
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-5 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation For the purposes of this FEIS, the geographic area used as the basis for the cumulative effects analysis is the area of Lower Manhattan below Chambers Street. NYCT has and would continue to closely coordinate with the sponsors of the prospective major projects in this area, including the PANYNJ, NYSDOT, LMDC and City of New York, to understand the characteristics of these actions.
ES.4 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
NYCT commissioned a concept study in 2002 to investigate potential approaches to improving transit services in order to contribute to the successful revitalization of Lower Manhattan which had suffered extensive economic, transportation, infrastructure and environmental impacts as a result of September 11. This study indicated that the most effective way to integrate existing transit services with potential improvements involved the construction of:
• A street-level facility on Broadway (the Entry Facility) incorporating a subsurface station concourse (the Central Station Concourse); • A pedestrian passageway beneath Dey Street connecting the WTC site with the Entry Facility; • Rehabilitation of the 23 and 45 Fulton Street stations; • Improvements to the AC mezzanines and platform; • Construction of a pedestrian connector between the RW and E routes; and, • Improved street access to the subway, including Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant access.
This combination of elements was presented as the Proposed Action, or Full Build Alternative, in the EIS Draft Scoping Document issued for public review and comment on April 3, 2003. The Draft Scoping Document also included a No Action Alternative and a request for public input into variations on Partial Build Alternatives. The public scoping process generated a number of additional comments relevant to the development of alternatives which suggested that the process:
• Consider variations of the Full Build Alternative that would avoid impacts on historic resources and on the historic Corbin Building in particular. This building, located at 192 Broadway, is a National Register-listed property of considerable historical interest, and would need to be demolished under the Full Build Alternative as proposed in the FSTC Conceptual Design Study (Arup, 2002); • Consider a reduction of the property acquisition and demolition proposed within the Full Build Alternative, thereby reducing the potential socioeconomic impacts associated with the elimination of existing commercial and retail uses; • Expand the Proposed Action to enable the acquisition and development of the entire city block between Broadway and Nassau, John, and Fulton Streets with a mix of commercial, retail and residential land uses in addition to the improved transit functions; and, • Expand from the Full Build Alternative to include broader subway and intermodal connections. Suggestions included connecting to a future Second Avenue Subway (SAS) station on Water Street; connecting the PATH tracks with the 6 subway at City Hall Station; and connecting the E line tracks with the RW line tracks at Church Street.
Using information from previous planning studies, and with public outreach and agency work groups, the alternatives proposed in the Draft Scoping Document were further developed and refined during the environmental review process to generate alternatives for the Proposed Action that were responsive both to public and agency comments and to the project goals and project Purpose and Need. Particular attention was paid to avoidance and/or minimization of historic and retail impacts and property acquisition. These revised or new preliminary alternatives comprised seven (7) partial Build Alternatives and three (3) Full Build Alternatives, as well as a No Action Alternative. An overview of the preliminary alternatives and their characteristics is provided in Table ES-1.
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-6 Table ES-1 Overview of Preliminary Alternatives and Associated Improvements
PARTIAL BUILD ALTERNATIVES FULL BUILD ALTERNATIVES WTC Connection Central Station Concourse Central Station Concourse Connection to AC Mezzanine with Plaza Above with Entry Facility Above Only No Corbin No integration Integration Corbin Building Removal of Building Removal of of Corbin Fulton Dey Long Diagonal of Corbin Integrated with Corbin Integrated Corbin Building and St. St. Tunnel Tunnel Building and Entry Facility Building with Entry Building Entry Facility Entry (Alternative 10) Facility (Alternative 9) Facility 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PROJECT ELEMENTS
Paid-zone passageway from the WTC Complex (RW – E) to the x Fulton Street Station Complex (45), (23), (AC), (JMZ) x ADA Elevators at Fulton and Church
Connector between the northbound platform of the RW and the Fulton x Street passageway Free-zone passageway from the WTC Complex (RW – E) to the xx x x x x x x x Fulton Street Station Complex (45), (23), (AC), (JMZ) New entrance at Millenium Hotel to provide RW Street Access Stairs xx x x x x x x x New entrance structure at the southwest corner of Broadway and Dey xx x x x x x x x Street Stairs from Passageway to street (at John Street) xx x Stairs from Passageway to north bound 45 platform xx
Paid connector between Dey Street Concourse and lower AC mezzanine - Running North-South Under x Northbound 45 Platform Paid connector between Dey Street Concourse and lower AC mezzanine - Running Diagonally from NE to SW - including a vertical x circulation element midblock on east side of Broadway
No Corbin integration Removal of Building Below grade Central Station Concourse bounded by John, Broadway and of Corbin Corbin Integrated Fulton Streets with Plaza Above Providing Vertical Access Building and Building with Entry Entry Facility Facility AC mezzanine widening between Broadway and Nassau xxxx x x East-West Tunnel at 195 Broadway beneath 45 Tracks providing xxxx x x access to SB 45 Platform from Central Station Concourse
No integration Removal of Corbin Building Below grade Central Station Concourse bounded by John, Broadway and of Corbin Corbin Integrated with Fulton Streets with Entry Faciliy Above Providing Vertical Access Building and Building Entry Facility Entry Facility COMMON STREET/PLATFORM ACCESS ELEMENTS New entrances on the west side of Fulton and Broadway xx x x x x x x x x New stairs on the southeast and southwest corner of Broadway and xx x x x x x x x x Cortlandt Street Entrances on south side of John Street between Nassau and William xx x x x x x x x x Entrances on north side of Fulton to the east of William Street xx x x x x x x x x Entrance on west side of Nassau to the south of Fulton Street xx x x x x x x x x New stairs connecting the east end of the AC platform to the 23 xx x x x x x x x x COMMON STATION REHABILITATION ELEMENTS 23 Fulton Street Rehabilitation xx x x x x x x x x 45 Rehabilitation xx x x x x x x x x AC Rehabilitation xx x x x x x x x x COMMON ADA ELEMENTS JMZ/Nassau Street – ADA connectivity xx x x x x x x x x ADA elevator on John Street for the 23 Fulton Street Station xx x x x x x x x x ADA Access at RW-E stairs xx x x x x x x x x OTHER COMMON ELEMENTS RW-E Connector xx x x x x x x x Source: MTA NYCT, Arup, The Louis Berger Group. MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation With the exception of the No Action Alternative, all preliminary alternatives include the following elements:
• A subsurface pedestrian passageway connecting the WTC site with the Fulton Street – Broadway Nassau Station Complex (Existing Complex); • Rehabilitation of the 23 and 45 Fulton Street stations; • Improvements to the AC mezzanines and platform; • Construction of a pedestrian connector between the RW and E routes; and, • Improved street access to the subway.
The Full Build Alternatives included an Entry Facility in addition to the elements above, whereas the Partial Build Alternatives did not include an Entry Facility. All preliminary alternatives proposed to locate the subsurface pedestrian passageway between the WTC and the Existing Complex beneath Dey Street, with the exception of Alternative 1, which located the pedestrian passageway below Fulton Street.
The ten (10) preliminary alternatives were evaluated based on the project’s goals, constructability, cost effectiveness and environmental considerations, especially with regard to historic and socioeconomic resources. Among the ten (10) preliminary alternatives analyzed, Alternative 8 represented the original 2002 Full Build design concept; it occupied the entire Broadway frontage between John and Fulton Streets and required demolition of the Corbin Building. This alternative was rejected in the course of the preliminary alternatives evaluation because its impacts on the Corbin Building, a historic resource, were deemed unacceptable under Section 4(f). From among all preliminary alternatives considered, the evaluation resulted in the identification of Alternative 9 and Alternative 10 as the only reasonable alternatives to be considered for detailed analysis in this FEIS. Both alternatives address and meet the Project Goals and Purpose and Need while avoiding or minimizing impacts to the Corbin Building. Based on conceptual level engineering analysis, both alternatives are considered technically feasible and cost effective. These alternatives were, therefore, selected for further analysis regarding their potential environmental impacts and have been carried forward for analysis detailed in this FEIS. The No Action Alternative, and Full Build Alternative 9 and Alternative 10, are briefly described below.
Since the publication of the DEIS, components of the rehabilitation of the 23 Fulton Street Station and the 45 Fulton Street Station were advanced separately. These rehabilitation activities met the requirements for a categorical exclusion under NEPA: rehabilitation or reconstruction of existing rail and bus buildings and ancillary facilities where only minor amounts of additional land are required and there is not a substantial increase in the number of users. Environmental analysis of these rehabilitation activities confirmed that these activities would not individually or cumulatively involve significant social, economic or environmental impacts. For impact analysis purposes, however, these rehabilitation activities are still included in this FEIS as part of the analysis of the Proposed Action.
ES.4.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
The No Action Alternative assumes that the Existing Complex would remain as is, in its existing operation and configuration, except for routine maintenance repairs that would not be subject to environmental review. Under this alternative, none of the project elements described as part of the Proposed Action would be undertaken.
Future conditions analyzed under the FSTC No Action Alternative include reasonably foreseeable actions and land use changes anticipated to occur between 2004 and 2025. These include background growth during this period, as well as the construction and operation of other Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects, including the following:
• The WTC Memorial and Redevelopment Plan (construction expected mid 2004 to end 2014); • The Permanent WTC PATH Terminal (construction expected early 2005 to end 2008); • The West Street/Route 9A Reconstruction (construction expected mid 2004 to end 2008); and,
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-8 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation • The reconstruction of the South Ferry Subway Terminal (construction expected mid 2004 to end 2006).
Both construction and operational aspects of these projects are taken into account for the 2005/2006 and 2008 analysis years of the FSTC No Action Alternative. By 2025, all these projects are expected to have been completed for several years. Also taken into account in the analysis are roadway reconstruction activities planned by New York City Department of Transportation (NYCDOT) in Lower Manhattan to the extent that these activities would affect vehicular and pedestrian access and circulation.
ES.5 BUILD ALTERNATIVES (ALTERNATIVE 9 AND ALTERNATIVE 10)
The two (2) Build Alternatives (Alternative 9 and Alternative 10) consist of the construction and operation of a rehabilitated, reconfigured and enhanced multi-level, subsurface station complex in Lower Manhattan that would serve 12 NYCT subway lines. As indicated previously, each of these alternatives include the following elements:
1. A new prominent Entry Facility at street-level with a subsurface level passenger concourse (i.e. the Central Station Concourse), centrally located on Broadway between Fulton and John Streets, that integrates horizontal connectivity between the AC and 45 service with vertical connectivity between the street and different levels and provides improved street-level access and visibility.
2. Rehabilitation of the 45 line Fulton Street Station and the 23 line Fulton Street Station.
3. A subsurface pedestrian passageway (i.e. the Dey Street Passageway) beneath Dey Street between Broadway and Church Street, connecting the Entry Facility to the WTC site and including an access plaza on the south side of Dey Street at Broadway (i.e. the Dey Street Access Plaza).
4. Improvements to the mezzanines and platform access at the AC line Fulton Street Station and JMZ line Fulton Street Station, improving circulation and reducing overcrowding conditions.
5. A pedestrian and passenger connection between the RW and E service.
6. Improved street access to the subway, including wider and more direct stairways, access for disabled customers, and new street entrances.
In aggregate, the integrated complex of six (6) subway stations (23, JMZ, AC, 45, RW and E) and associated connecting corridors would include: improved platforms, mezzanines and connection corridors and a new Central Station Concourse, with surface presence distinguished by a street-level Entry Facility on Broadway. The FSTC would extend the Existing Complex one (1) block westward to Church Street through a new pedestrian passageway below Dey Street. This new passageway would connect to the future concourse at the WTC site from which access to a variety of transit options, similar to those existing pre-September 11, is anticipated to be available.
The primary differences between Alternatives 9 and 10 are directly related to the way each alternative engages the Corbin Building and connects the Dey Street Passageway with the Central Station Concourse and the street network east of Broadway. With respect to the Central Station Concourse, Alternative 10 allows for a larger Central Station Concourse which provides a more direct and intuitive connection between the Dey Street Passageway and the Central Station Concourse; this is because the FSTC extends into the basement of the Corbin Building and implements adaptive reuse2 of the building to minimize harm to the building.
2 For the purposes of discussion, “adaptive reuse” is defined as making use of some or all of the Corbin Building for subway operations without unduly changing the important historic features or appearance of the building. These
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-9 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation Alternative 9 has a smaller Central Station Concourse, as it does not extend into the Corbin Building at any level; thus, it is, in concept, isolated from the Corbin Building. With respect to John Street access, Alternative 10 provides street access from John Street to the FSTC through the ground level of the Corbin Building; Alternative 9 does not provide such access.
Subsequent to the completion of the DEIS, NYCT continued to refine Alternatives 9 and 10, based on continuing engineering investigations and coordination and, taking into account the comments received on the DEIS, identified a Preferred Alternative, as described below.
ES.6 IDENTIFICATION OF THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
Following the publication of the DEIS, the public environmental review process and interagency coordination generated comments relevant to the selection of alternatives. Comments were received throughout the 45-day public comment period, which ended on June 28, 2004. Comments received after the 45-day review period were also considered. A total of 58 commenters expressed a preference for a specific alternative analyzed in the DEIS. Of those, 11 indicated a preference for the No Action Alternative and 47 indicated a preference for a Build Alternative. Of the 47 commenters who expressed a preference for a Build Alternative, a total of 36 expressed support for a Build Alternative in general, while 11 commenters expressed explicit support for Alternative 10. None of the commenters who expressed support for a Build Alternative expressed such support explicitly for Alternative 9. Pursuant to review of the comments received during the public comment period between May 14, 2004 and June 28, 2004, interagency coordination and input from SHPO and the overall superior performance of Alternative 10 with regard to the Purpose and Need (as described below), Alternative 10 was selected by FTA and MTA NYCT as the Preferred Alternative. In the interest of full disclosure of potential environmental impacts and the basis for selecting Alternative 10 as the Preferred Alternative, this FEIS continues to include Alternative 9 and the No Action Alternative in addition to the Preferred Alternative. ES.7 CONSTRUCTION METHODS
Because the design of the FSTC would affect the construction methods for the FSTC and because the design would continue to evolve over the next year, this FEIS assumes a “peak” construction scenario for the purposes of impact analysis. More specifically, where a variety of alternative construction methods or techniques could be utilized, the analysis evaluates the methods that are considered to have the greatest potential for adverse environmental impact. By analyzing construction methods with the greatest potential for adverse impacts, this conservative approach ensures that the analysis considers construction methods that have the same or worse potential environmental impacts than those that would ultimately be used for the construction of the FSTC. The assumption of a sustained construction “peak”, overlaid with the construction peak of other Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects, ensures that the construction impact analyses performed in the resource chapters of this FEIS evaluate the highest potential level and combination of construction activity that could reasonably be assumed to occur. During compilation of the DEIS, the timing and duration of this peak was assumed to be during 2005/2006 for up to one (1) year. As indicated in the DEIS, the actual timing and duration of this peak could shift, without affecting the substance and validity of the analyses. Since the DEIS was published, the construction schedule has been further refined and the peak construction activities will generally occur during the latter part (fourth quarter) of 2005, and during 2006. The refinement of the schedule was evaluated and found not to result in substantive changes to the impact analyses. Future substantive changes in activities will be evaluated for their potential to change the results of environmental impact analyses conducted as part of the environmental review process.
uses might include pedestrian entry into the FSTC via the Corbin Building, or pedestrian circulation space through lower levels of the Corbin Building. The specific details of the “adaptive reuse” proposal can be found in Chapter 11: Cultural Resources.
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-10 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation Construction is expected to start in late 2004 and be concluded by mid-2008, with the peak construction activity occurring within a 12-month period from late (fourth quarter) 2005 through 2006. This construction peak coincides with the combined construction peak of the other Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects.
The following construction activities would occur over the three (3)-year FSTC year construction period:
Deconstruction and removal of buildings: Removal of existing buildings at 189, 194, 196, 200 and 204 Broadway would be required to clear the sites for the construction of the FSTC Entry Facility and Dey Street Access Plaza. Building removal would be achieved via a process of controlled demolition termed “deconstruction.” Due to the proximity of other buildings, deconstruction activities would be performed using low vibration construction equipment. Blasting techniques would not be used.
Relocation of utilities: Some utility relocation would be required prior to the commencement of any cut- and-cover construction process. Other utility relocations would take place along with excavation operations or after final structures are in place. For the FSTC, utility relocation activities would be completed prior to the construction of lateral support and subsurface excavation. It is expected that utilities would be either temporarily supported in place during construction or temporarily or permanently relocated, depending on the project design.
Building stabilization and underpinning: Construction of the Dey Street Passageway, the Dey Street Access Plaza, the 45 underpasses, widening of the AC mezzanine, isolation from or adaptive reuse of the Corbin Building, and the creation of new vertical circulation access points would entail excavation immediately adjacent to existing buildings, possibly requiring the use of underpinning.
Cut-and-cover construction and lateral earth support: The use of cut-and-cover construction is a likely method of construction for the Dey Street Passageway and AC mezzanine widening. Central to cut- and-cover construction methods is the stabilization of the side walls of the excavation prior to the removal of subsurface material. There are several different types of lateral earth support systems (e.g. slurry wall, secant piles) that may be used depending upon site conditions, depth of water table, type of soil and proximity of adjacent building foundations.
Construction of new buildings and structures: New buildings and structures to be constructed for the FSTC include the Entry Facility, the Dey Street Access Plaza and minor elements including stairways, elevators and other project structures. Based on currently available engineering information, both Alternative 9 and Alternative 10, the Preferred Alternative, would be feasible, although Alternative 10 will require more extensive structural support for the Corbin building. Two key issues require further evaluation prior to assessing the feasibility of Alternative 10: structural integrity and subsurface conditions of the Corbin building. Final engineering investigations will be conducted prior to construction to determine the structural integrity and subsurface conditions of the Corbin building. If unanticipated engineering conditions are discovered, NYCT will assess the feasibility of constructing Alternative 10. Should the construction of Alternative 10 prove infeasible, Alternative 9 will be advanced. Until these factors are resolved, Alternative 9 and Alternative 10 remain under consideration and the project impacts of each Build Alternative are discussed in this FEIS.
Tunneling: Tunneling would be used for constructing the underpass beneath the 45 line under Broadway and the RW line under Church Street, for constructing the new subsurface pedestrian and passenger connector beneath Church Street that would connect the RW and E stations to the Dey Street Passageway and for constructing the stairs between the AC platform and the 23 platform. To maintain traffic on Broadway, and to limit disruption to subway service, the tunneling operation would likely require an incremental underpinning sequence of adjoining station structures along the east side of Broadway between Fulton and John Streets, in conjunction with careful monitoring of vibration and subway track movement. Access for construction of the underpass beneath the 45 line would be provided from the Dey Street Passageway. Underpinning of the RW line and the 45 line subway structures would be required during construction of the underpasses beneath these subway tracks. Spoils October 2004 Executive Summary ES-11 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation from tunneling operations would be removed through the tunnel excavations to street-level for hauling from the site. Grouting and underpinning operations would most likely be performed overnight and on weekends to minimize disruption to transit operations.
Station rehabilitation: The rehabilitation and extension of platforms, new stairway access and connection of the 45 Fulton Street Station to the proposed FSTC would be integral to the construction of the FSTC and would be sequenced to maintain passenger operations of the existing station. The rehabilitation of the 23 Fulton Street Station is assumed to occur largely within the confines of the existing station. Improvements to street entrances, removal of demolition debris and delivery of new interior construction materials would occur at street-level. The construction of new elevators, escalators and stairs to provide access, including ADA access, to the JMZ platform at the east end of the AC mezzanine would be performed from within the confines of the existing station.
The construction activities described above would be undertaken to construct the various project elements of the FSTC. Construction would begin in 2004 with the Dey Street Access Plaza. In 2005, the buildings on the site of the proposed Entry Facility would be deconstructed and the site cleared and construction would commence on the Dey Street Passageway. As the structures are removed, construction would start on the Entry Facility. After construction of the Entry Facility retaining wall, the site would be excavated to the design elevation and foundations constructed in 2006 and construction of the Dey Street Passageway would be completed. Other construction activities associated with the widening of the AC mezzanine between Broadway and Nassau Street, the new subway entrance at 195 Broadway, and the 45 line underpasses would also start during 2006, and would be concurrent with the ongoing construction of the Entry Facility. The AC mezzanine widening would be sequenced to minimize the overall disruption to NYCT operations and passengers. A detailed construction schedule is provided in Chapter 4: Construction Methods and Activities, and summarized below.
2004
• 23 Fulton Street Station Rehabilitation
2005
• Dey Street Passageway and Dey Street Access Plaza: Utility relocation, lateral earth support installation; deconstruction and removal of 189 Broadway; cut-and-cover excavation of passageway; and passageway construction; • AC mezzanine: Construction of east portion, relocation of utilities; • RW Underpass: Tunneling and construction of underpass; • 23 Fulton Street Station Rehabilitation; and, • JMZ ADA Access: Construction of elevators.
2006
• Dey Street Passageway and Dey Street Access Plaza: Complete construction of passageway, Dey Street surface restoration; • Entry Facility: Complete construction of lateral earth support, excavation, construction of foundations; • AC mezzanine: Construction of east portion, relocation of utilities, lateral earth support construction, mezzanine widening and street surface restoration; • 45 underpasses: Construction and underpinning; • Access for southbound 45 at 195 Broadway; • 23 Fulton Street Station Rehabilitation; • 45 Fulton Street Station Rehabilitation; • JMZ ADA Access: Complete construction; and, • ERW Construct access stairs/elevators/escalators at Millenium Hotel. October 2004 Executive Summary ES-12 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation 2007
• Entry Facility: Complete construction of building, interior fitout; • AC mezzanine: Completion of mezzanine widening and street surface restoration; • Access for southbound 45 at 195 Broadway; • ERW Construct access stairs/elevators/escalators at Millenium Hotel.
2008
• Entry Facility: Interior fitout.
Construction activity would be carried out in two (2) eight (8)-hour shifts, six (6) days per week for the majority of construction tasks. Some activities, particularly subsurface construction, safety-related work and activities that require coordination with NYCT services, would occur anytime within a 24-hour/seven (7)-day per week period. Truck movements may occur at any time within a six (6)-day week, including some essential truck movements during morning and evening peak hours. Due to the need to maintain peak hour services to the existing Fulton Street subway stations during the construction period, certain construction activities must be scheduled between 10 PM and 6AM. Such activities will be generally related to peripheral project elements such as the new 45 entrance stairs, 23 station rehabilitation, AC mezzanine widening, and other entrances and stairwells used to access the JMZ, 23, and AC lines.
Construction activities would affect pedestrian and vehicular circulation due to potential street-level disruption. If the entire width of a street were excavated, the street would be closed to vehicular traffic. Pedestrian access to excavated areas may be disrupted or prevented during cut-and-cover operations. Additional streets may also be required to incur full or partial lane closures in order to provide staging areas and to allow the relocation of utilities and other infrastructure. Traffic and pedestrian impacts can be managed using construction sequencing and lane closure management measures within an overall Maintenance and Protection of Traffic Plan (MPT Plan). The MPT Plan would be developed in coordination with NYCDOT and in conjunction with the MPT Plans of other project sponsors in Lower Manhattan, such as the PANYNJ and LMDC with respect to the development of the WTC site, and NYSDOT for the proposed modifications to Route 9A. NYCDOT approvals would assist the coordination of the construction projects that would be occurring simultaneously in Lower Manhattan. Since the technical analyses were conducted, the Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects participating in the Lower Manhattan Construction Coordination Group have continued to coordinate their refined construction schedules. As a result of this process, the extent of overlap of construction activities is being reduced from that originally assumed for the analyses, when few details on the projects’ design were available and highly conservative assumptions had to be made to account for uncertainty. MTA NYCT will continue this construction coordination process during actual construction to avoid logistical interference
All construction would be guided by a Construction Environmental Protection Program (CEPP) and related plans. The Construction Environmental Protection Program (CEPP) describes the environmental requirements to be met by the contractor for the FSTC. The CEPP assigns specific responsibilities for environmental compliance and communication, addresses monitoring procedures, and provides an overview of the types of mitigation measures and coordination necessary to limit potential impacts to the environment, protected resources, and communities within and abutting the construction area. This reflects commitments made in the EIS, permit requirements, and NYCT’s registration and commitment to ISO 14001. This international standard includes a commitment to continual improvement to benefit the environment through establishing environmental policies, determining environmental aspects and impacts of products/activities/services, planning environmental objectives and measurable targets, implementing programs to meet objectives and targets, checking work and taking corrective action if necessary, and management review.
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-13 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation Where mitigation is required, planned actions are identified and/or applicable EPCs and other commitments are made, it would be essential to develop and implement a unified approach among the Recovery Project sponsors to the extent practicable. Under FTA auspices, these commitments would be documented, implemented, monitored, continually reviewed with the stakeholders, and improved as required. NYCT plans to continue to work with the other Recovery Project sponsors throughout the course of the design, construction, commissioning and operation of the FSTC to ensure minimizing the cumulative effects that are adverse and maximizing environmental stewardship and economic recovery. This continued cooperative effort would be based on the past and current cooperative efforts and process, characterized by the:
• Development of the Lower Manhattan Environmental Analysis Framework, co-signed by the Recovery Projects sponsors.
• Formal Adoption of the Lower Manhattan Federal Transportation Recovery Projects Common EPCs by sponsoring agencies. The EPCs provide performance commitments from agencies to be implemented prior to and during the construction period.
• Formation of the Lower Manhattan Construction Coordination Group (LMCCG) consisting of sponsoring government agencies and key stakeholders, that would ensure that Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects move forward expeditiously while minimizing the impact to residents, businesses, workers, commuters, pedestrians, and vehicles. The LMCCG’s mission includes providing the framework or vehicle for a command center or similar entity that would: coordinate the work of the participants in the rebuilding process on a daily basis and throughout the planning process; institute and implement construction coordination protocols and requirements for all government agencies, developers, construction managers, general contractors, and contractors to follow for all Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects; mediate conflicts in schedules and street and site access among construction projects, agencies, and the Lower Manhattan community; and utilize technology to facilitate coordination of Lower Manhattan Transportation Recovery Projects.
• Enactment of the Coordinated Construction Act for Lower Manhattan. The Coordinated Construction Act includes the following provisions: o Allows public agencies to pre-qualify bidders, which ensures speed and high quality; o Allows the City and the utility and telecommunications companies to bid together on infrastructure projects, which greatly reduces the need to rip up streets repeatedly; o Requires the use of contractors with state-certified apprenticeship programs on large projects, which increases safety on the worksite, ensures minority access to construction jobs and trains a future skilled workforce; o Requires the City to follow the State's laws on the hiring of minority- and women-owned businesses, which ensures wide opportunities; o Allows the use of owner-controlled insurance programs and the use of alternate dispute resolution if so desired, which would help win insurance at an affordable rate and reduce costs; o Requires all public agencies to use ultra low diesel fuel with construction vehicles, which keeps the air clean and the workers healthy; o Makes it easy for public agencies to purchase construction goods, cooperatively and thus, more inexpensively.
ES.8 PUBLIC OUTREACH AND REVIEW PROCESS
The environmental process for the FSTC project was officially initiated on April 3, 2003, when the FTA published a Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in the Federal Register (see Appendix P). The NOI also invited the public to participate in the Project Scoping process, including attendance at a Project Scoping Meeting. The general public and interest groups were also invited to participate in the Scoping process via a variety of advertising and outreach mechanisms, October 2004 Executive Summary ES-14 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation including newspaper notices and the MTA’s web site. In addition, Federal, State, regional and local agencies were invited by letter to participate in the Scoping process.
A formal Project Scoping Meeting was held on April 29, 2003 at the U.S. Custom House at One Bowling Green in Lower Manhattan. The Project Scoping Meeting included a formal presentation by NYCT, followed by an opportunity for the public to provide comments on the scope of the issues to be addressed in the DEIS. An informal session staffed by MTA and NYCT personnel, including poster boards providing project information, was held at the same location immediately prior to the formal Project Scoping Meeting. Comments received from the public, agencies and other interested parties were used to focus the analyses of potential environmental impacts presented in this FEIS. Formal written responses to the comments received are included in this FEIS in Appendix P: Part II.
Public involvement has been sought via attendance at general public meetings and presentations to local civic and community groups and stakeholders in order to achieve full and comprehensive public participation in the planning of the FSTC. These meetings, which began with the Project Scoping Meeting, provide a way for citizens to receive information about the project, provide their opinions, and contribute to the ongoing decision-making process. Every effort has been made to ensure that the widest possible range of public participants attend these meetings. Attendance has been, and would continue to be, encouraged through advertising and press releases. A mailing list related to the FSTC project was established from the outset and has been amended to include additional stakeholders and interested parties as they are identified. All names included on the mailing list would continue to be notified about future project information updates.
A Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) was established by NYCT as a forum to keep agencies informed about the FSTC project and to solicit input from agencies as the environmental analysis of the project progresses. The TAC consists of representatives of all of the major transportation, environmental and planning agencies having planning and/or regulatory jurisdiction in Lower Manhattan, as well as local elected officials and City agencies and services. TAC members contribute to the environmental review process by sharing technical expertise, presenting the interests and concerns of their organizations, and assisting with the distribution of study information to their constituent groups. In addition to the role of the TAC as a whole, working groups including individual TAC members have been assembled to provide specific technical input in support of the environmental analyses.
In addition to the TAC meetings, working coordination sessions were held by NYCT with various stakeholders. These included sponsors of other Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects, such as LMDC, PANYNJ, NYSDOT, the New York Police Department (NYPD), the Fire Department of New York (FDNY) and public agencies such as the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC). Regular working sessions were also conducted with specific groups such as the Downtown Alliance, New York City Economic Development Corporation and NYCDOT to discuss a wide range of issues. These issues included EPCs, technical analysis methodologies, pedestrian circulation, economic development, street reconstruction, air quality, noise, cultural resources, safety and security, construction traffic coordination and access to local businesses. The technical methodologies and baseline data used for the environmental analyses in this FEIS reflect the conclusions and outcome of this coordination.
The FSTC project is located within the boundaries of Manhattan Community Board 1 (CB1), covering the area from the southern tip of Manhattan island to as far north as Canal and Baxter Streets. During this FEIS process, NYCT held three (3) meetings with CB1. These meetings enabled CB1 to obtain information on the FSTC and provide input into the environmental review process.
Further advice from recognized experts in performing NEPA reviews for similarly complex projects was implemented through a peer-review of this FEIS. The peer reviewers consisted of representatives from other major transit organizations (Boston, Chicago, Washington D.C.) and the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (Penn DOT).
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-15 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation Upon completion of the DEIS, a Notice of Availability (NOA) was published in the Federal Register. The DEIS was circulated to those agencies with jurisdiction by law, parties that expressed an interest, either through the scoping process or in response to the NOA, and other entities potentially affected by any of the alternatives. Copies of the DEIS were made available for public review on the MTA website and at designated locations (CB1 office and the offices of local elected officials) throughout the study area. Following the publication of the DEIS on May 14th 2004, a public hearing on the DEIS was held on June 8th, 2004 at NYCT’s offices at 2 Broadway in Manhattan. The hearing provided a formal, additional opportunity for public and agency review of the FSTC. The Public Hearing included a poster session staffed by MTA and NYCT personnel providing project information. To reach the widest possible audience prior to the hearing, notifications were published in the Federal Register and placed in local and citywide newspapers, including those used for the earlier NOI; the New York Post, the Daily News, the Amsterdam News and El Diario, and posted in local subway stations. A total of 85 members of the general public, including public officials and agency staff, signed the attendance sheet at the Public Hearing. At the hearing 28 speakers participated by making statements for the record. Written comments on the DEIS were accepted until June 28th, 45 days after the release of the document. A total of 23 written comment letters were received during that period. Two more letters were received after June 28th.
A summary of input received at the hearings, which itemizes issues or areas of concern that required follow-up and/or response, is included in Chapter 25 of this FEIS. This summary includes comments received as testimony during the public hearing as well as those received in writing during the comment period. Responses have been prepared to address the comments received and are available to the agencies and the public as part of the Final EIS (FEIS) process. The full testimony of the hearing and copies of comment letters are included in Appendix P.
This FEIS addresses the comments made on the DEIS during the DEIS public hearing and comment period. The FEIS identifies the comments received and provides responses in Chapter 25: Response to Comments on the DEIS. In addition, several chapters of the FEIS have been revised, where appropriate, in response to the comments received. This FEIS identifies a Preferred Alternative, reflects minor refinements to the project design that have emerged since publication of the DEIS, and provides detail on the project design as preliminary engineering has advanced. These refinements are delineated in appropriate chapters of this FEIS. In addition, the FEIS analyzes the results of these refinements as appropriate.
The NOA of this FEIS was published in the Federal Register and also in the same newspapers used for the NOA for the DEIS. This FEIS identifies the Preferred Alternative, mitigation measures that will be developed to minimize significant adverse impacts, and EPCs to further minimize environmental effects associated with the implementation of the FSTC. The FTA may prepare a Record of Decision no sooner than 30 days after the publication of a NOA of this FEIS, stating FTA’s basis for their decision on the Proposed Action.
The public outreach program for the FSTC complies with the requirements of: NEPA and those of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (as implemented by Federal regulations appearing at 36 C.F.R. 800); Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 (49 U.S.C. 303(c)); and, Executive Order 12898 which addresses environmental justice issues in Federal decision making. This FEIS provides an opportunity for the public to review and comment on the project’s environmental effects (NEPA), effects to historic and archaeological resources (Section 106), and effects on parks and historic properties (Section 4(f)).
ES.9 KEY AGENCY PERMITS AND APPROVALS
The Proposed Action may require or involve the following regulatory agency notifications, actions, permits and/or approvals:
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-16 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation FEDERAL
• National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. §§4321 et seq.; 40 C.F.R. 1500; 23 C.F.R. 771): NEPA requires Federal agencies to assess the environmental impacts of major Federal actions that may significantly affect the environment before taking such an action through an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement unless the action is excluded or exempt from NEPA. FTA is the lead Federal agency for the NEPA review for the Fulton Street Transit Center.
• National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. §470A; 36 C.F.R. 800): Projects potentially affecting historic and archaeological resources must comply with the National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 review process. FTA is responsible for carrying out the Section 106 review for the Fulton Street Transit Center. This includes Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) review under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.
• Department of Transportation Act Section 4(f) (49 U.S.C. §303(c); 23 C.F.R. §771.135): Section 4(f) prohibits the Secretary of Transportation from approving any program or project that uses any publicly owned land from a public park, recreation area, wildlife and waterfowl refuge, or historic site of national, state or local significance unless there is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of such land, and unless the program includes all possible planning to minimize harm to the site or resource. FTA would make the determination of consistency with Section 4(f).
• Environmental Justice (Executive Order 12898 of 1994, 59 C.F.R. 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994); 1997 USDOT “Order to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations,” 62 C.F.R. 18377 (April 15, 1997): These Orders require that impacts and benefits from a Federal transportation project are equitably distributed among all population groups and that minority or low-income areas are not overburdened with the adverse aspects of proposed project alternatives. FTA is responsible for complying with this Executive Order.
• Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. §7506(c); 40 C.F.R. 93; ECL Article 19; 6 NYCRR Part 201): Transportation projects must conform to the applicable state implementation plan.
• Coastal Zone Management Act (16 U.S.C. §1451 et seq.; 15 C.F.R. 930; NY Executive Law Art. 42; 19 NYCRR Part 600): Projects affecting New York’s coastal zone must be consistent with the Coastal Zone Management Act, through the New York State Department of State’s (NYSDOS) Coastal Management Program and New York City’s approved Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan. The New York State Department of State, in consultation with the New York City Department of City Planning, makes a determination of the project’s consistency with the Coastal Zone Management Act.
• Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as codified in Title 42, Section 4601 et seq. of the United States Code, and the applicable implementing regulations set forth in Title 49, Part 24 of the Code of Federal Regulations (collectively, the “Uniform Act”): This Act relates to relocation services, moving payments, replacement housing payments and other allowable payments related to commercial and residential moving costs and displacement.
STATE
• New York State Office of Parks Recreation and Historic Preservation (NYSOPRHP): Review is required pursuant to the National Historic Preservation Act and State Historic Preservation Act.
• NYS Department of State: Coastal Zone Consistency Determination is required.
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-17 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation • Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC): Stationary source and indirect source air permits may be required.
• Eminent Domain (NY Eminent Domain Procedure Law; N.Y. Public Authorities Law §§1266, 1267): Property acquisition procedures apply to the acquisition of property by eminent domain.
ES.10 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
A large-scale infrastructure project such as the FSTC would necessarily result in unavoidable disruptions during construction. Once completed, the operating FSTC would have a range of beneficial effects on its immediate and surrounding neighborhoods. It is anticipated that the effects of the operation of the FSTC would be predominantly beneficial, though some construction-related adverse impacts would be expected, as summarized in this section. Cumulative effects are also summarized. A summary of mitigation and other planned actions that are proposed or are being evaluated to address the project’s impacts are included at the end of this Chapter; Table ES-3 at the end of this Executive Summary provides a summary of impacts, planned actions and mitigation for the project by resource category.
The No Action Alternative would not result in construction impacts, but would also not generate the benefits anticipated to be associated with the FSTC. Continued operation of the Existing Complex in its current condition would not as readily support the revitalization of Lower Manhattan, as it would not improve access to and from Lower Manhattan and thereby would not support increased economic development.
ES.10.1 TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION
The Proposed Action would not result in any adverse impacts to traffic and parking, or to transit and pedestrians in the 2005/2006, 2008 and 2025 analysis years. Following is a summary of the analysis. Unless otherwise noted, the impact discussion applies to both Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative.
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
The No Action Alternative would not result in any impacts to traffic, parking, or transit and pedestrians in the 2005/2006, 2008 and 2025 analysis years, but would also not provide the operational benefits associated with the Build Alternatives. Under the No Action Alternative, there would not be enhanced pedestrian flow in the study area in 2008 and 2025, as would occur under the Build Alternatives. All elements projected to operate at Level of Service3 (LOS) E or F in the No Action Alternative would remain as such, and would not benefit from the substantial improvements associated with either Build Alternative.
The No Action Alternative would also not provide the travel time savings anticipated in 2025 under the Build Alternatives. The anticipated travel time savings in the Build Alternatives would not be achieved, and travel time would be expected to increase as the number of subway patrons increase in future years. Non-subway pedestrians would also not benefit from the convenience and travel time saving offered by the Dey Street Passageway under either Build Alternative.
3 LOS is a qualitative assessment of the quality of pedestrian circulation through passageways and on platforms and the “Volume to Capacity” ratio on stairways and escalators. LOS is expressed in the range from A (excellent) to F (very poor) and provides an indicator of pedestrian congestion. At LOS A or B, passengers enjoy free movement unaffected by the presence of other pedestrians. However, at LOS E or F, passenger densities are high and movement is extremely restricted.
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-18 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation BUILD ALTERNATIVES - TRAFFIC AND PARKING
Construction Impacts
Construction of the FSTC would require the temporary closure of Dey Street to through traffic and parking between Church Street and Broadway, and the temporary closure of Fulton Street between Broadway and Nassau Street. Temporary vehicular access restrictions would occur near the intersection of William Street and John Street and on John Street between Nassau Street and Broadway. None of the intersections analyzed would experience an impact as a result of truck traffic generated by the construction vehicles or related lane and roadway closures. Delay increases would be relatively minor and all would be within the established threshold. All of the roadway and lane closures proposed as part of the FSTC construction activities would remove curb loading and unloading from the study area. Since no on- street parking spaces for vehicles would be lost as a result of these curb closures, no impacts are anticipated for the off-street parking facilities. The closure of Dey and Fulton Streets to through traffic would limit truck access to businesses. A portion of the total right-of-way width on these roads would be used to maintain emergency access and destination deliveries. Except for curb loading and unloading for the Century 21 Department store, no through traffic would be permitted on Fulton Street or Dey Street during the construction period. Traffic projected to use Dey and Fulton Streets is expected to use alternate routes in the study area. Alternative loading areas could be established to accommodate truck deliveries during construction. An overview of illustrative MPT plans is included in Appendix C to this FEIS.
Operational Impacts
In 2008 and 2025, a portion of the pedestrians currently traversing Broadway and Church Street would be expected to use the Dey Street Passageway. As the amount of pedestrian traffic crossing these streets would be reduced, relative to the 2008 and 2025 No Action Alternative, circulation conflicts between pedestrian and vehicular traffic would be less likely to occur, especially during peak hours. This benefit would contribute to a better flow of vehicular traffic, including construction traffic associated with the Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects still under construction in 2008. The reduction of potential circulation conflicts between pedestrians and vehicular traffic would also contribute to greater pedestrian safety.
Since minimal to no vehicular traffic is projected to be generated by either Alternative 9 or the Preferred Alternative in 2008 or 2025, no adverse impacts on traffic or parking conditions are anticipated as a result of operation of the FSTC. Since there would be no adverse impacts, no mitigation measures would be required.
BUILD ALTERNATIVES - TRANSIT AND PEDESTRIANS
Construction Impacts
Pedestrian flow along Fulton and Dey Streets and William and John Streets would be maintained throughout the duration of construction. Because of construction activity, a portion of the pedestrian flows would shift from Dey Street to Cortlandt and Fulton Streets. As a result, some crosswalk flows would increase and some would decrease. The congestion increases at some crosswalk locations in 2005/2006 (as a result of pedestrian diversions during the construction period) would be temporary and would be offset by improvements at other crosswalk locations.
During construction, strategic construction phasing would be used to reduce impacts to the patrons of the subway stations by providing new pedestrian pathways before the existing ones are removed. Construction would be advanced early in those areas of the stations that are not currently well utilized in order to provide refuge for passengers away from necessary construction in the congested areas of the stations in later stages.
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-19 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation Operational Impacts
The FSTC project would enhance pedestrian flow throughout all of the subway elements in 2008 and 2025 in comparison to the No Action Alternative. The diversion of pedestrians using the crosswalks in the No Action Alternative to the subsurface Dey Street Passageway for the Build Alternatives would reduce street-level pedestrian flow and improve crosswalk LOS. Pedestrian flows would shift from Dey Street, Cortlandt Street, Fulton Street and Vesey/Ann Streets to the Dey Street Passageway, thereby reducing pedestrian crosswalk flows across Church Street and Broadway.
Under Alternative 9, passage through the Corbin Building would not occur and pedestrians would need to either access the Dey Street Passageway west of Broadway or walk around the northeast corner of Broadway and John Street. This would result in higher pedestrian volumes at these locations in Alternative 9 compared to the Preferred Alternative. Alternative 9 would thus result in poorer pedestrian circulation at these locations than the Preferred Alternative, although even under Alternative 9, pedestrian circulation would still, in almost all cases, be better than under No Action conditions.
ES.10.2 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONS
The social and economic conditions analyzed include: land use, zoning and public policy; economic conditions such as employment and business; and community character. Following is a summary of the analysis for the No Action and Build Alternatives.
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
The No Action Alternative would not create adverse impacts on land use, economic conditions and community character in the study area. It would be compatible with current zoning and public policy, as the Existing Complex would remain in its existing configuration and operation. The current land use of the FSTC site would be expected to continue.
Under the No Action Alternative, the City and regional economies would not benefit from the incremental purchases, employment, and indirect economic activity related to construction activity of the FSTC. The operational benefits associated with the Build Alternatives would not be achieved. Existing and new residential, transit and commercial developments in the study area would not be supported by the improved transit access, wayfinding and system efficiencies expected under the Build Alternatives.
Under the No Action Alternative, there would be notable changes in local and regional accessibility within the primary study area by 2008. New transit infrastructure at the WTC site would be built to route pedestrians through a network of sub-grade concourses to simplify and shorten the pedestrian paths of transit passengers and to alleviate street-level sidewalk congestion. Central to this redevelopment would be construction of the Permanent WTC PATH Terminal and concourse network. The Permanent WTC PATH Terminal would also act as a central hub for numerous subsurface pedestrian concourses. PATH passengers, shoppers, and tourists would be able to traverse the entire WTC site from Battery Park City, to the eastern side of Church Street, without the need to exit to street-level; new tunnels are proposed below West and Church Streets.
These access improvements are consistent with post-September 11 policies and plans for Lower Manhattan that identify the age, poor design and lack of sub-grade connectivity as critical factors that could hinder the revitalization of Lower Manhattan. In the absence of the FSTC within the Existing Complex, this connectivity would not extend to the several NYCT subway lines that converge at Fulton Street. The large volumes of workers employed in the new commercial developments at the WTC site who arrive at the Existing Complex would be required to ascend to street-level on Fulton Street or Broadway, merge with local retail pedestrian traffic, and cross Church Street and Broadway in order to access the WTC site. Similarly, the existing transfers among subway lines would remain unchanged and would continue to hinder wayfinding and the utility of MTA transit facilities.
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-20 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation The No Action Alternative would not contribute to the anticipated revitalization of Lower Manhattan, or to potential future improvements to land use as proposed in the Mayor’s Vision, or the enhancements under consideration by the LMDC for the Fulton Street Corridor. These proposals would be greatly enhanced by the presence of the FSTC. Large volumes of commuters arriving and departing from the existing Fulton Street stations would create substantial pedestrian congestion at existing entrances. The existing stairwell entrances, presently recessed into alcoves within buildings or located in the center of sidewalks, would continue to create physical barriers to smooth pedestrian flow. In the absence of the proposed Entry Facility, wayfinding would continue to be compromised, and the immediate neighborhood would lack a visible and obvious portal to the various subway lines that converge at Fulton Street.
BUILD ALTERNATIVES - LAND USE, ZONING, AND PUBLIC POLICY
Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative would not create adverse impacts to land uses in the study area and would be compatible with current zoning resolutions.
Construction Impacts
The construction of the FSTC under both Build Alternatives would be consistent with the policies of the Federal, State, and City governments which have as their main objective the revitalization of Lower Manhattan. Alternative 9 would acquire and remove five (5) buildings on Broadway and Dey Street as a result of the construction of the FSTC Entry Facility and the Dey Street Access Plaza. These buildings are currently used for commercial purposes. The Preferred Alternative would acquire and remove these same five (5) buildings and would also require acquisition of the Corbin Building (following consultation with the NYSOPRHP) and its subsequent integration with the FSTC Entry Facility. Potential construction impacts on nearby land uses and community facilities would be minimized through implementation of the EPCs and the CEPP. The Corbin Building’s use under the Preferred Alternative would be converted from commercial office and retail to primarily public use with some retail elements.
Operational Impacts
During its operation, the FSTC would facilitate the planned transformation of the surrounding area into a 24-hour mixed-use community and would achieve the project’s goal to improve transportation systems through improvements to transit facility wayfinding, inter- and intra-modal connectivity and pedestrian access. Because of the high concentration of workers commuting to the area daily, the FSTC related operations would encourage the location of businesses to the area because of improvements in commuting efficiency and experience. Development of the FSTC would also be consistent with making the area more desirable for residential land uses in part by providing alternate subsurface pedestrian routes for commuters that would relieve congestion on the sidewalks used by community residents and other pedestrians.
BUILD ALTERNATIVES - ECONOMIC CONDITIONS
Construction Impacts
Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative would not create adverse impacts to economic conditions in the study area. Both alternatives would support economic activity in Lower Manhattan directly through the infusion of capital expenditure for construction. Over 1,300 construction-related and secondary jobs would be created during the estimated three (3) to four (4) year construction period of the FSTC and would generate total industry sales and earnings exceeding $700 million. Businesses permanently displaced or relocated from the FSTC site could be relocated in the vicinity; there is a large inventory of vacant space in the area to accommodate these relocations. Retail businesses in the area of construction that are not directly displaced would likely be disrupted to some degree, owing to temporary pedestrian and loading access changes. Site-specific maintenance and protection measures would be implemented during construction to mitigate these impacts. These include EPCs to maintain access and MPT Plans.
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-21 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation Operational Impacts
Some new retail businesses would be incorporated in both Build Alternatives and this would partially offset some of the loss of retail at this location due to building removal during construction. The number of businesses displaced would be larger under the Preferred Alternative, as the Corbin Building would be converted to public space. In Alternative 9, there would not be any permanent displacement of businesses in the Corbin Building. The estimated annual fiscal impact, i.e., loss of property tax revenue, is estimated at $1.0 million for Alternative 9 and $1.2 million for the Preferred Alternative.
BUILD ALTERNATIVES - COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Construction Impacts
Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative do not create adverse impacts to community character (i.e., population and demography, neighborhoods, and community facilities). Although construction is unlikely to directly affect overall land use, population and permanent employment in the area, localized construction noise, air quality, visual and circulation effects would cause temporary impacts. These impacts would be closely contained within the immediate area of construction and would not permanently impact community character in the larger area surrounding the FSTC.
Construction of the FSTC would not burden the use of, or access to, community facilities in the study area. No facilities are located adjacent to the proposed location of any construction activities. Normal vehicular, transit, and pedestrian access would be maintained to all community facilities.
Operational Impacts
The direct displacement of existing commercial tenants from the site of the FSTC is not expected to create adverse permanent impacts to the neighborhood surrounding the FSTC. The street-front retail establishments and small commercial and institutional offices displaced by the FSTC are part of a larger commercial district comprised of similar land uses and do not represent unique services or facilities. New retail space would be included within the Entry Facility along Fulton Street and Broadway, approximately where it is currently located in the community. The proposed FSTC would be a facility that houses public transit and public retail spaces; a land use that is similar to current land use on the site and one that is compatible and supportive of existing neighborhood character.
Although the FSTC would provide increased convenience and reduced crowded station conditions, the amount of subway service would not materially change. The FSTC would not adversely disrupt the existing vibrancy of the street-front retail district, nor would it discourage the area’s transformation into a 24-hour mixed-use residential and commercial community. It is expected that the FSTC would facilitate this transformation and its Entry Facility would act as a visual icon in the center of the revitalized district.
ES.10.3 PUBLIC OPEN SPACE AND PARKLANDS
No substantial adverse impacts on public open space would occur as a result of construction or operation of the FSTC under Alternative 9 or the Preferred Alternative. Although the FSTC Build Alternatives are not expected to generate increased passenger volumes, the FSTC is anticipated to increase the quality of access to local parklands and recreational facilities, such as the prospective WTC Memorial and associated open spaces and City Hall Park, as well as the open spaces in Battery Park City and South Street Seaport areas.
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
Under the No Action Alternative, the Existing Complex would remain as is, except for routine maintenance measures and repair activities. No impacts on public open space would occur. Open space conditions in the study area are expected to change in the future under the No Action Alternative, with
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-22 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation several additions and improvements being implemented by other agencies expected to be complete by 2005/2006. The No Action Alternative would not result in the benefits to public open space afforded by the Build Alternatives, which include improving conditions in daytime pedestrian zones by relieving pedestrian congestion, and provision of improved access to open space including new parks on the WTC site and along the Hudson River.
BUILD ALTERNATIVES
Construction Impacts
During construction, both alternatives would cause some disruptions to daytime pedestrian zones on Fulton, John, Dey and Nassau Streets. Under the Preferred Alternative, access to the pedestrian zone would be restricted for a longer period of time than would occur under Alternative 9, due to the additional effort required in the adaptive reuse of the Corbin Building. Under both alternatives, there would also be some construction related noise and dust impacts on St. Paul’s Chapel and Graveyard, although these would be managed consistent with the EPCs, the project CEPP, and NYCT’s ISO 14001 commitments. Portions of One Liberty Plaza and 55 Church Street Plaza would be occupied during the construction of FSTC entrances located at those sites. These impacts would be controlled and mitigated through EPCs and the CEPP.
Operational Impacts
The initial and full operation of the FSTC (analysis years 2008 and 2025) would benefit daytime pedestrian zones by relieving pedestrian congestion, and would provide improved access to open space including new parks on the WTC site and along the Hudson River and the East River.
ES.10.4 URBAN DESIGN AND VISUAL RESOURCES
The FSTC is anticipated to have a positive long-term effect on the area’s visual resources and urban design, through enhanced wayfinding and the establishment of an attractive and efficient transit hub. Nonetheless, there would be some temporary adverse impacts during the project’s construction phase. No permanent adverse urban design and visual resources impacts are anticipated.
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
The No Action Alternative would not allow the achievement of the operational benefits of the FSTC, and the associated improvements for wayfinding, urban design, and visual resources. The Existing Complex would remain in its current condition, and the potential for the creation of a visual focal point for Lower Manhattan subway transit would not be achieved.
BUILD ALTERNATIVES
Construction Impacts
During construction, both Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative would require the removal of five (5) buildings – four (4) along Broadway that would be replaced by construction of the Entry Facility, and one (1) on the south corner of Dey Street at Broadway which would be replaced by the Dey Street Access Plaza. The Corbin Building’s façade and existing uses would remain the same under Alternative 9. Under the Preferred Alternative, the same five (5) buildings would be removed and the Corbin Building would be acquired by NYCT and adaptively reused within the FSTC Entry Facility; the façade of the Corbin Building would be restored to reflect original conditions to the extent practicable. Other potential construction impacts include the visual presence of construction materials and equipment. These impacts would be temporary, as streets and sidewalks would be returned to their original state following the completion of construction. As such, the proposed FSTC under both Alternative 9 and the Preferred
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-23 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation Alternative is not expected to result in substantial adverse impacts to urban design features within the immediate and surrounding areas.
Operational Impacts
During operation, the FSTC would provide a visual focal point in Lower Manhattan, benefiting residents, workers and visitors, and improving the efficiency of the transit system in Lower Manhattan. The FSTC would strengthen the east-west connectivity in Lower Manhattan and act as a principal link to the rebuilt WTC and Memorial. The main Entry Facility and Dey Street Access Plaza would afford views from the facility to the surrounding streets, improving orientation for transit patrons. The FSTC would also contribute to historic preservation in Lower Manhattan, through the retention of the historic Corbin Building and improved subway access to the John Street-Maiden Lane Historic District. Under Alternative 9, no direct access through the Corbin Building would be provided. Under the Preferred Alternative, public access to parts of the Corbin Building would be provided and, through the Corbin Building, direct access between the FSTC and the Historic District would be provided.
ES.10.5 DISPLACEMENT AND RELOCATION
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
The No Action Alternative assumes that the Existing Complex would remain as is, except for routine maintenance measures and repair activities. As a result, no easements or properties would be acquired and no occupants or owners would be displaced.
BUILD ALTERNATIVES
Construction Impacts
Construction of the FSTC would result in adverse impacts to businesses and residents where access to building entrances is disrupted, where work nearby requires temporary relocation for safety reasons, where property is acquired for off-street staging areas, and where property would be acquired for permanent vent structures or station entrances. Construction-related disruptions to access would generally be short-term and temporary. Basement tenants in the Corbin Building could be temporarily displaced during the construction of Alternative 9 due to potential underpinning work. NYCT would employ all practicable and proven methods to avoid temporary displacements. Under the Preferred Alternative all tenants in the Corbin Building, approximately 50 businesses, would be permanently displaced.
Operational Impacts
Permanent acquisitions and easements would also be required for structures to support operation of the FSTC. Under Alternative 9, five (5) buildings would be permanently acquired on Broadway (189, 194- 196, 198, 200-202 and 204-210), and the occupants displaced and compensated in accordance with Federal and State requirements to permit the construction of the Entry Facility and the Dey Street Access Plaza. Under the Preferred Alternative the Corbin Building at 192 Broadway, in addition to the five (5) Broadway properties described immediately above, would be acquired; occupants would be displaced and relocated or compensated. Under both Build Alternatives, improvement of subway access inside or adjacent to the buildings at 95 Fulton Street, 135 and 150 William Street and 166-170 Broadway may affect the businesses operating in those buildings.
Under both Build Alternatives, a series of easements would be required, or existing easements would need to be modified, to facilitate construction of various project elements. These easement requirements are the same for both Build Alternatives with one exception, specifically, an easement may be required at 15 John Street under the Preferred Alternative for underpinning the Corbin Building.
All property acquisition would be undertaken within the framework of the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act, and in accordance with the New York State October 2004 Executive Summary ES-24 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation Eminent Domain Procedure Law. Most relocating businesses are likely to be successful in finding suitable alternative space near their current locations because the inventory of vacant office, retail, warehouse and other commercial space in Lower Manhattan is anticipated to be large enough to accommodate the needs of most displaced businesses.
The two (2) Build Alternatives differ primarily with respect to the use of the Corbin Building. Under Alternative 9, an underground retaining wall, possibly in combination with underpinning or similar method of support, would structurally isolate the Corbin Building from the FSTC Entry Facility and Dey Street Passageway.
ES.10.6 CULTURAL RESOURCES
The effects of the Proposed Action on historic and archaeological resources have been assessed in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and the New York State Historic Preservation Act of 1980. These laws, and the associated regulations which implement them, require Federal and State agencies to consider the effects of their actions on any properties listed on or determined eligible for listing on the State and National Registers of Historic Places. Historic properties are also protected by Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966. Among other things, Section 4(f) and 4(f) implementing regulations prohibit actions by the Secretary of Transportation that require the use of a historic property that is listed on or eligible for inclusion on the State and National Registers, unless a determination is made that there is no feasible and prudent alternative to such use, and all possible planning has been undertaken to minimize harm to the 4(f) property. A summary of the Section 4(f) evaluation is included at the end of this Executive Summary.
Study areas, known as Areas of Potential Effect (APEs), were identified in consultation with the New York SHPO; historic resources were identified through field surveys and documentary research within each APE in consultation with the SHPO. Based on research conducted, potential for archaeological deposits or features is considered possible within the study area, despite the extent of construction disturbance that has historically occurred in the area, both pre- and post-September 11. Potential for archaeological deposits or features is considered possible within the study area, despite the extent of construction disturbance that has historically occurred in the area and disturbance from the New York City Transit subway facilities. Archaeological resources could potentially exist in several areas: at the northeast corner of the intersection of Dey and Church Streets, along the eastern sidewalk of Church Street, north and south of Dey Street; Dey Street, under the sidewalks; Cortland Street, west of Broadway; Maiden Lane, east of Broadway; Fulton Street, between Broadway and William Street; William Street, between Ann Street and John Street; and John Street, east of William Street, as described in the Phase 1A Archaeological Study
Historic resources are those that: have been officially recognized (i.e., properties that are listed or have been found eligible for listing on the State and National Registers of Historic Places), are National Historic Landmarks or New York City Landmarks, and/or are properties that have been considered for designation as New York City Landmarks, including historic districts. Designated historic resources within the APE comprise:
• National Register listed or eligible resources - Corbin Building (192 Broadway), Fulton Street 45 Subway Station, the former AT&T Building (195 Broadway), the Bennett Building (139 Fulton Street), the East River Savings Bank (25 Dey Street), St. Paul’s Chapel and Graveyard, the WTC site, and the John Street-Maiden Lane Historic District; and, • New York City Landmarks listed or eligible - the Bennett Building, Fulton Street 45 Subway Station, and St. Paul’s Chapel and Graveyard, Keuffel & Esser Building (127 Fulton Street) and the Royal Insurance Building (150 William Street).
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-25 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
As a result of modern urban construction activities or lack of historic period occupation, intact archaeological deposits or features are unlikely to be present in the majority of the study area, although potential for archaeological resources does exist in several areas, including beneath the southern sidewalk of Dey Street and the northeast corner of the intersection of Dey and Church Streets as well as other areas in the Archaeological APE, as identified in the Phase 1A Archaeological Study (July 2004). Furthermore, as the No Action Alternative would not require ground disturbance within the archaeological APE, the No Action Alternative would not affect archaeological resources.
Under the No Action Alternative, the FSTC would not be constructed or operated. As the FSTC would not be constructed, the Corbin Building would not be affected. Long term benefits associated with the long-term preservation of the Corbin Building, and public access to the Corbin Building, as provided by the Preferred Alternative, would not be realized. Improved subway access to the John Street-Maiden Lane Historic District, and other historic resources in the area, as provided by the Build Alternatives, would also not be realized under the No Action Alternative.
BUILD ALTERNATIVES
Construction Impacts
Under Alternative 9, the Corbin Building may need to be modified in order to maintain fire emergency egress in accordance with applicable codes on the Corbin Building’s northern wall. Modifications to the Corbin Building under Alternative 9 would be designed to conform to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Properties and other relevant guidelines and management procedures. Indirect impacts related to vibration during construction could occur to the Corbin Building. These would be managed through a vibration monitoring program and/or subsurface construction, as appropriate and required.
Under the Preferred Alternative, the Corbin Building would be underpinned and would be adaptively reused as part of the FSTC Entry Facility and Dey Street Passageway. This would require the permanent displacement of certain tenants in the Corbin Building. While this alternative would cause adverse impacts on the Corbin Building, the impacts will be minimized and mitigated by designing the Entry Facility to conform to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Properties and other relevant guidelines and management procedures. NYCT is engaged in ongoing consultation with SHPO during the design process to ensure that the standards would be met.
Other historic resources that would incur construction impacts as a result of the FSTC under both Build Alternatives include the Fulton Street 45 Subway Station and the AT&T Building. These impacts would be addressed through compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Properties and other relevant guidelines and management procedures. The entire Fulton Street 45 Station will be recorded in accordance with HABS/HAER Level II guidelines prior to any alteration and the documentation of the station will be deposited by NYCT in publicly accessible repositories, including at the New York Historical Society and the New York City Public Library. The alterations of the station will adhere to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Properties, as practicable. Design plans for the alterations to the station will be developed in consultation the SHPO and submitted at the preliminary and pre-final completion stages for SHPO approval. If SHPO makes substantive comments during the pre-final design review, SHPO may request the opportunity to approve the final design. With respect to the proposed adaptive reuse of the Corbin Building under the Preferred Alternative, the alterations of the building will adhere to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Properties (codified in 36 CFR 68.3(b)), as practicable. Design plans for each of the alterations to the building and rehabilitations of the building will be developed in consultation with the SHPO and submitted at the preliminary and pre-final completion stages for SHPO approval. Therefore adverse impacts on the resources will be mitigated.
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-26 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation Historic sites that could incur vibration impacts from construction under both alternatives are the National Register-eligible East River Savings Bank, Bennett Building, the Keuffel & Esser Building (127 Fulton Street, the Royal Insurance Building (150 William Street) and some non-designated historic buildings located within the John Street-Maiden Lane Historic District. Under the Preferred Alternative, the Dennison Building, as a contributing element to the John Street-Maiden Lane Historic District, could also require underpinning and/or grouting. This would not affect any of the features that qualify it for inclusion in the John Street-Maiden Lane Historic District, nor would it affect the integrity of the District. Vibration impacts are not expected to compromise the structural integrity of any of these buildings or affect the historic features that lend them protection status or qualify them for inclusion in the Historic District. All appropriate and practicable measures would be taken during construction to avoid impacts to these historic resources, including those related to vibration, through a formal consultation process, the project CEPP and a Cultural Resources Management Plan (CRMP). As archaeological resources may be encountered during the construction of either Build Alternative, the CRMP would include an Emergency Action Program to address any potential archaeological impacts. This would include the requirement of an archaeologist certified by the Register of Professional Archaeologists on the preliminary engineering team to address any potential archaeological issues that may be relevant to the final design of the FSTC.
The FTA, MTA (on behalf of both NYCT and MTA Capital Construction Company), SHPO, and ACHP have signed and executed a Programmatic Agreement (PA) regarding the treatment of historic and archaeological resources within the APE that may be affected by the Proposed Action. The New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) and the Lower Manhattan Emergency Preservation Fund (LMEPF) are consulting parties in the Section 106 review process. The PA also contains specific measures by which identified impacts would be mitigated and sets forth the process and procedures for consultation, determination of effect and resolution of any as yet unidentified adverse effects that would govern the planning, design and implementation of the project from the date of the PA’s execution. The PA is included in Chapter 11.
Operational Impacts
Under Alternative 9, the Corbin Building would remain in private ownership; under the Preferred Alternative, the Corbin Building would be acquired by the MTA and would be provided increased long- term Federal preservation protection. Construction of the Entry Facility and Dey Street Access Plaza would not require the removal of any buildings within the John Street-Maiden Lane Historic District. Under both Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative, the Entry Facility would introduce new architectural elements into the existing setting of the John Street-Maiden Lane Historic District, in the vicinity of the Corbin Building, the AT&T Building, the Bennett Building and, potentially, St. Paul’s Chapel and Graveyard. The design approach for the new Entry Facility is, and would continue to be, receptive to and committed to achieving a design that respects the historic properties around it. The PA included with this FEIS establishes a consultation process and mitigation measures by which the design of the FSTC (including the new Entry Facility) will be developed in accordance with the Standards of the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Rehabilitation of Historic Properties, so as to avoid as practicable the introduction of visual elements that would diminish the integrity of the significant features of historic resources within the APE. Unlike Alternative 9, under the Preferred Alternative, direct public access to parts of the Corbin Building would be provided along with direct access through the Corbin Building to and from John Street, the John Street-Maiden Lane Historic District, and the Entry Facility.
ES.10.7 AIR QUALITY
As required by the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA), the EPA has set standards for six (6) major air pollutants: nitrogen dioxide and ozone, together a concern for regional levels of ozone; carbon monoxide; respirable particulate matter (referred to as PM10, indicating particulate matter with a diameter equal to or less than 10 micrometers, and fine particles, or PM2.5); sulfur dioxide; and lead. These standards are referred to as the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). On a regional basis, ozone levels are of concern, since the entire New York metropolitan area (NYMA) currently exceeds the Federal standard for ozone. Nitrogen oxides (NOx) and the volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emitted by motor October 2004 Executive Summary ES-27 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation vehicles contribute to the formation of ozone. PM2.5 is also of concern regionally, because it can remain suspended in the air for long periods of time and, therefore, can be widely dispersed. On a localized basis, pollutants of concern are carbon-monoxide (CO), which is produced predominantly by motor vehicles, and respirable particulate matter, which comes from diesel emissions, industrial sources, and dust, among other sources. New York City was designated in 2002 as in attainment for CO; however, Manhattan is designated as non-attainment for PM10. The CAA requires each state to submit to the EPA a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for attainment of NAAQS.
An analysis of the air quality effects of the project’s construction activities and operational conditions on nearby receptors was performed. Construction impacts associated with the FSTC could occur as a result of emissions from construction-related equipment, trucks and other traffic, and diversion of non- construction related traffic to alternative routes. The analysis of these impacts for the FSTC also includes potential traffic and construction equipment associated with other Lower Manhattan recovery and other projects, which reflects the potential for cumulative air quality impacts. During operation, the FSTC would not generate mobile source emissions, as it would not generate any traffic. The operational analysis, therefore, includes an evaluation of the potential benefits associated with a reduction in traffic as a result of increased efficiency of the FSTC, and the potential emissions associated with fossil fuel consumption utilized by the emergency generator during the operation of the FSTC.
Section 176(c) of the CAA of 1990, as amended (CAA), 42 U.S.C. 7506(c) requires all federally sponsored or approved activities in nonattainment or maintenance areas to conform to the applicable SIPs. EPA has developed criteria and procedures to determine conformity. The CAA established the criteria and procedures that Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), FTA, and Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) must follow to determine the conformity of federally funded or approved highway and transit plans, programs, and projects to the SIPs. Conformity is intended to ensure that transportation plans, programs, and projects do not produce new air quality violations, or delay timely attainment on NAAQS. All federally supported activities must conform to the implementation plan’s purpose of attaining and maintaining these standards.
To demonstrate conformity, a Proposed Action must not exacerbate or delay the achievement of attainment of standards in the NYMA. Accordingly, an area’s MPO, which is the entity responsible for transportation planning, is responsible for demonstrating conformity with respect to the SIP on metropolitan long range transportation plan (LRTPs) and transportation improvement programs (TIPs). The New York Metropolitan Transportation Council (NYMTC) is the MPO for the region. NYMTC approved the conformity determination for the LRTP, known as the Regional Transportation Plan entitled “Mobility for the Millennium”, on September 23, 1999, and the most recent 2002-2004 TIP was approved on September 20, 2001.
The LRTP and TIP have now lapsed. As a result of the events of September 11, the loss of NYMTC’s files containing regional transportation air quality data, and the damage incurred to the downtown mass transit system, the conformity requirements of the NYMA have been temporarily waived. This waiver expires on September 30, 2005, pursuant to Public Law 107-230; (Stat. 1469) enacted October 1, 2002. Following enactment of the waiver, the Interagency Consultation Group (ICG) was tasked with tracking the air pollution emission effects of transportation projects in the Downstate New York region including Lower Manhattan.
As a result of this law, project conformity analyses are substituted by following the ICG procedures which are established to ensure consistency with the region’s air quality goals. NYCT initiated consultation with the ICG in February 2004, indicating that the Proposed Action is intended to reconstruct and renovate transit buildings and structures and, according to the provisions of 40 C.F.R. 93.126 would be exempt from transportation conformity analysis. This was further corroborated by analysis which indicated that any increase in the station usage would be primarily attributable to transit customers shifting their station selection or transfer point to the FSTC and that the incremental effects of the improvements on transit and automobile trip preferences would be negligible. On March 3, 2004, the ICG subsequently concurred with the analysis and indicated that the FSTC project may be classified “exempt”
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-28 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation for the purposes of transportation conformity, based on the exempt category “Reconstruction or renovation of transit buildings and structures” under 40 C.F.R. 93.126.
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
Under the No Action Alternative, land use changes would occur in Lower Manhattan through 2005/2006, with associated changes in vehicular traffic volumes. It is anticipated that traffic volumes and associated emissions will increase between 2003 and 2006, as Lower Manhattan continues to recover from the events of September 11 and resumes its economic growth. In addition to the increase in emissions resulting from economic growth, emissions will increase in Lower Manhattan as a result of construction of Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects, including the WTC Memorial and Redevelopment project, the construction of the Permanent WTC PATH Terminal, the construction of the South Ferry Terminal and the Route 9A Reconstruction activities. Traffic flow in Lower Manhattan will also be affected by the Lower Manhattan Street Reconstruction Program by NYCDOT. Construction activities will generate emissions from construction equipment and construction trucks associated with a broad range of activities, including transportation of spoils and construction and deconstruction materials. Under the No Action Alternative, the Existing Complex would remain as is, except for routine maintenance measures and repair activities that would not be subject to environmental review. Adverse effects resulting from FSTC construction would not occur.
Through 2008, the trend of conversion of commercial buildings to residential uses and the transformation of existing retail/service establishments to address the needs of the residential population is expected to continue. While no substantial land use changes are expected to occur by 2008 in the immediate vicinity of the FSTC site, several major residential and commercial development projects are projected for completion from 2006 to 2008. Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects that will have been completed by 2008 include the South Ferry Terminal Project, the Memorial component of the WTC Memorial and Redevelopment Plan and certain construction activities associated with the reconstruction of Route 9A. Projects still under construction in 2008 include the Permanent WTC PATH Terminal (scheduled for completion in 2009), and several components of the WTC Memorial and Redevelopment Plan.
The main contributors to air quality at the receptor locations analyzed for the FSTC consist of the construction activities for the Permanent WTC PATH Terminal, south of Church Street and the construction of the WTC Memorial, further south toward Route 9A. By 2008, the Permanent WTC PATH Terminal would be past its 2005/2006 construction peak and the WTC memorial would have been completed. As construction emissions (from construction trucks and construction equipment) in the immediate vicinity of the analyzed receptor locations would be reduced past their 2005/2006 peak, air quality after 2006 is expected to improve over 2005/2006 conditions. In addition, by 2008, it is anticipated that due to more stringent nationwide emission controls, emissions per vehicle will decrease, further contributing to reduced emissions.
Under the No Action Alternative, the Existing Complex would continue to operate similar to current conditions. The Existing Complex would generate no traffic and any stationary emissions would be minor.
BUILD ALTERNATIVES
Construction Impacts
The analysis of the construction impacts of the FSTC during the peak construction period (2005/2006) indicated that the construction of the FSTC would not result in any regulatory exceedences of NAAQS under either Build Alternative. The ambient air quality impact analysis assumed the use of ultra low- sulfur diesel (ULSD) fuel for certain types of on-site equipment for construction of the FSTC and predicted no exceedances for the following pollutants:
• CO (one (1)-hour and eight (8)-hour)
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-29 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation
• NO2 (annual average); • PM10 (annual average); and, • SO2 (three (3)-hour, 24-hour, and annual average).
The ambient air quality impact analysis (which assumed the use of ULSD fuel) shows that the predicted PM10 (24-hour) concentrations would potentially exceed the NAAQS if no further emission management were performed. Planned mitigation for these potential exceedences is based on the assumed implementation of EPCs, and the application of a range of retrofit technologies, the CEPP, and related plans to minimize construction impacts. The analysis indicated that the implementation of such measures would continue to result in acceptable levels of NO2 in the vicinity of the project during construction and 4 that the 24-hour PM10 standard would no longer be exceeded. The analysis of PM2.5 emissions is presented in Chapter 20: Coordinated Cumulative Effects Analysis.
The Build Alternatives would be implemented with the incorporation of EPCs and in accordance with the provisions of the Coordinated Construction Act for Lower Manhattan. The EPCs consist of on-site measures that would include the use of ULSD fuel and retrofit technology in heavy-duty engines and off- road construction vehicles as operating during the construction of the FSTC, including during year 2005/2006, the peak period of construction. With regard to air quality, the Coordinated Construction Act for Lower Manhattan requires all public agencies to use ultra low diesel fuel with construction vehicles, thereby reducing pollutant emissions.
Although the EPCs require the use of ULSD for off-road construction equipment 60HP and above, NYCT is committed to the use of ULSD for nonroad vehicles of 50HP or above, consistent with the requirements of the Coordinated Construction Act for Lower Manhattan. Diesel engine retrofit technology will be required in off-road equipment to further reduce emissions. As required by the Coordinated Construction Act for Lower Manhattan, NYCT will require that non-road vehicles of 50 HP and above are retrofitted with Diesel Oxidation Catalysts (DOC), Diesel Particulate Filters (DPF) or technology that achieves lowest particulate matter emissions. Based on currently available data, Diesel Particulate Filters (DPF) will be the preferred retrofit technology, with Diesel Oxidation Catalyst (DOC) as a fallback when the use of DPF is not practicable. Other EPCs include a dust control plan related to the construction site through a soil erosion sediment control plan which would be part of the Construction Environmental Protection Program. The dust control plan could include: spraying of a (non-hazardous, biodegradable) suppressing agent on disturbed soil and other surfaces; containment of fugitive dust; and, adjustment of work practices to reflect meteorological conditions as appropriate.
An example of the construction specifications and the CEPP associated with the control of air quality during the construction phase of the project is included in Appendix C. This draft specification and CEPP addresses the emissions related to diesel powered non-road and on-road construction equipment, and dust control measures for both new construction and deconstruction-related activities.
Potential air toxics (asbestos and lead (Pb)), if present in any of the properties proposed for deconstruction, would be fully abated in compliance with all applicable federal and state requirements and NYCT established procedures. Further details are provided in Chapter 16: Contaminated Materials and Waste Management.
Operational Impacts
As indicated previously, FSTC project has been classified “exempt” for the purposes of transportation conformity, based on the exempt category “Reconstruction or renovation of transit buildings and structures” under 40 C.F.R. 93.126. Conformity is intended to ensure that transportation plans, programs, and projects do not produce new air quality violations, or delay timely attainment on NAAQS. The Proposed Action is intended to reconstruct and renovate transit buildings and structures; any increase in
4 PM2.5 are particulates with an aerodynamic equivalent diameter less than 2.5 micrometers (µm)
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-30 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation the station usage would be primarily attributable to transit customers shifting their station selection or transfer point to the FSTC. Therefore, the incremental effects of the improvements on transit and automobile trip preferences, and their resulting effects on automobile-related emissions, would be negligible.
The operational air quality impact analysis shows that the FSTC would not exceed the NAAQS for CO (one (1)-hour and eight (8)-hour), and SO2 (three (3)-hour, 24-hour, and annual average) during both the 2008 (Initial Operation) and 2025 (Full Operation) analysis years for both Build Alternatives. Steam would be used to heat the facility and the heating, ventilating and air conditioning (HVAC) systems and emergency generators that would be associated with the FSTC would not be expected to generate measurable levels of emissions. Operational emissions associated with HVAC systems are too low to be modeled to a quantifiable degree. Furthermore, as a beneficial public transit project, the FSTC would provide an environmentally friendly alternative to vehicular travel by improving transit system efficiency.
ES.10.8 NOISE AND VIBRATION
Following FTA’s guidance for predicting noise and vibration impacts for transit projects, an analysis was conducted of the potential for airborne and ground-borne noise and vibration impacts during the construction and operation of the FSTC. Existing noise levels in the project study area are relatively high during almost all hours of the day, reflecting the urban environment in which the project is located. The predominant sources of noise include vehicular traffic (including commuter buses, delivery and garbage trucks and other vehicles), emergency sirens, construction activities associated with ongoing recovery efforts (such as street reconstruction and utility installation) and recovery activities at the WTC site.
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
Under the No Action Alternative, existing commercial land uses in the study area in 2005/2006 would continue and the Existing Complex would be maintained in its current state. No major construction activities at the FSTC site would be anticipated. Construction activities associated with the Permanent WTC PATH Terminal and WTC Memorial and Redevelopment Plan would result in elevated noise and vibration levels in the vicinity of the Existing Complex, particularly at properties located along Church Street, such as the Millenium Hotel.
Without the Proposed Action, no major construction activities are anticipated at the Existing Complex. Minor maintenance and rehabilitation activities could occur, including typical station and transit infrastructure maintenance and repair during this analysis year. As a result, there would be no adverse impacts from mobile (construction traffic) or stationary (including movable and stationary construction equipment) sources attributable to the No Action Alternative upon noise conditions or vibration levels in the study area.
In 2008 and 2025, the Existing Complex would be maintained in its current state and configuration. Minor maintenance and rehabilitation activities could occur, including typical station and transit infrastructure maintenance and repair. These activities would not have any significant impacts on noise or vibration levels in the study area.
BUILD ALTERNATIVES
Construction Impacts
The construction noise analysis indicates that Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative would result in similar noise levels primarily because the construction activities associated with both are very similar. Under both Build Alternatives, adverse impacts on airborne noise would result in several locations during construction periods because of the proximity of construction to certain sensitive land uses. Noise levels at receptor locations where no mitigation is employed would exceed one or more of the FTA construction impact criteria at most locations. These impacts would occur for distances of between 10 to 170 feet from
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-31 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation where construction operations would take place. Construction activities would shift along the project corridor during different phases of work. Some locations would necessarily be noisier than others, particularly where equipment and machinery is required for aboveground portions of the construction activity.
Under Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative, construction vibration levels at four (4) of the five (5) identified historic properties would exceed FTA criteria during the construction period.
Currently, three (3) categories of noise control measures are being explored: design considerations and project layout; sequence of operations; and alternative construction methods. The CEPP and related plans, to be developed prior to construction and implemented throughout construction, will incorporate these measures. Potential relevant elements of the CEPP include: emission limits and performance standards; designated truck routes; noise monitoring; and design considerations and project layout (e.g., temporary acoustic barriers or enclosures, equipment silencers, electrically operated equipment, and acoustic truck liners, among other potential measures). Many of these are already required during an NYCT construction project pursuant to standard NYCT construction specifications. A draft outline of the CEPP and draft noise specifications for construction contracts for NYCT’s Lower Manhattan Recovery projects are included in Appendix C of this FEIS for illustrative purposes. These requirements will be finalized as the design process continues. When finalized, these requirements will be incorporated into construction contracts for the FSTC to ensure that the EPCs are committed to and will be enforceable.
Operational Impacts
The FSTC would not generate substantial traffic increases, so there would be no associated increases in traffic-related noise. There would be no increase in train operations and associated operational noise levels. Under both Build Alternatives, the potential stationary sources of noise would be the HVAC and mechanical systems. Although future noise levels would not be substantially different from existing ambient levels, there is the potential for noise impacts associated with operation of rooftop mechanical equipment. Although the FSTC would be structurally designed to accommodate HVAC and mechanical within the buildings to minimize noise impacts to adjacent uses and public areas, some equipment would need to be located within the roof area of the Entry Facility. This could result in noise levels impacting occupants of 15 John Street and 144 Fulton Street, due to the proximity of rear facade windows in these properties. Although silencers and/or enclosures would be used to minimize these impacts, further mitigation is expected to be necessary to achieve compliance with the New York City Noise Code. As part of ongoing design, opportunities are being explored to avoid or mitigate impacts. These include investigation of the technical feasibility of using quieter equipment types, noise barriers and window replacement/insulation.
Under Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative, there would be no changes to the existing subway alignments and profiles, in the type of trains using the track (i.e., suspension and wheel conditions would remain the same) and track structure. Therefore, the alternatives are not anticipated to result in a change in vibration levels at adjacent sensitive receptors, and there would not be any vibration or ground-borne noise impacts by the Proposed Action, as outlined in Chapter 13: Noise and Vibration.
ES.10.9 INFRASTRUCTURE, ENERGY, AND SOLID WASTE
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
Under the No Action Alternative, the Existing Complex would remain as is, except for routine maintenance measures and repair activities. No improvements to infrastructure would be required. As a result, there would be no impacts to infrastructure. Under the No Action Alternative, current demand for energy, telecommunications, water, and solid waste disposal capacity in the study area would remain essentially the same. The existing utilities and infrastructure would not be subject to the beneficial replacement and upgrading with more sustainable and energy efficient facilities that would be associated
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-32 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation with the construction of the FSTC (with the exception of improvements associated with NYCDOT street reconstructions).
BUILD ALTERNATIVES
Construction Impacts
The construction of both Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative would require utility replacement and relocation throughout the area directly affected by construction of the FSTC, including relocation of sewer, water, gas and steam mains, and telecommunications and electricity cables. Several of the utility replacements would also occur under the No Action Alternative, as part of NYCDOT’s street reconstruction program for Lower Manhattan. These replacements and relocations are not anticipated to result in any adverse impacts to service, as relocations and replacements would be located within utility corridors established during construction, and temporary replacement supply could be obtained from local services unaffected by construction. Fuel and energy requirements during construction would not be substantial and could be obtained from the local supply without adverse impacts. The construction of Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative would require minor modifications to subsurface vaults and basement structures. The affected utilities in these areas would have to be relocated to other available areas within the basements and sub-basements of affected buildings. It is not anticipated that this would result in any adverse impacts.
Operational Impacts
The operation of Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative would not have any adverse impacts on infrastructure, energy consumption, or solid waste generation in the study area. Water, electricity, telecommunications, gas and solid waste demands would not be substantial and would be accommodated within the existing supply network in the study area without adverse impact. Steam would be used for heating purposes in the operation of either alternative. NYCT would also implement Design for the Environment (DfE) sustainable design guidelines within the engineering and design of the FSTC to improve environmental performance and reduce energy consumption. Operation of the FSTC would also result in beneficial operational impacts, as existing water, sewer and gas mains and telecommunication conduits and ducts would be newly built to current engineering and environmental standards. This would have the substantial benefit of reducing the probability and frequency of failures within the affected existing infrastructure system.
ES.10.10 NATURAL RESOURCES
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
Under the No Action Alternative, the FSTC would not be built and no adverse impacts to natural resources would occur. The Existing Complex would remain as is with the exception of routine maintenance and repairs. By 2006, several large scale development projects in the study area are expected to be under construction in Lower Manhattan under the No Action Alternative. These projects are not expected to impact existing natural resources.
BUILD ALTERNATIVES
Construction Impacts
Construction of the FSTC would not alter the underlying geology on Manhattan, nor would it be expected to have any impacts to groundwater, floodplains, terrestrial vegetation and wildlife, or endangered, threatened and special concern species. Construction activities would be controlled through the CEPP. The State protected peregrine falcon, although present within the vicinity of the FSTC, would not be adversely impacted by construction.
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-33 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation Operational Impacts
The initial and full operation of FSTC (in 2008 and 2025) would alleviate pedestrian and commuter congestion in the study area without any adverse impacts on natural resources, and would make a positive contribution to the revitalization of Lower Manhattan.
ES.10.11 CONTAMINATED MATERIALS AND WASTE MANAGEMENT
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
Under the No Action Alternative, minor upgrades and maintenance to the Existing Complex would be performed that could impact potential asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) and lead-based paint (LBP) surfaces. These activities may also impact polychloro-biphenyl (PCB)-containing equipment and mercury-containing light bulbs. Prior to initiating these activities, comprehensive surveys would be performed and ACM and LBP surfaces would be identified. Suspect PCB-containing equipment and mercury-containing light bulbs would also be surveyed. Prior to initiating the work, the potentially contaminated materials, identified through the surveys, would be abated or removed consistent with NYCT specifications.
Under the No Action Alternative, the FSTC would not be operational in 2008 nor 2025 and potentially contaminated materials would remain in situ. Any ACMs and/or LBP surfaces encountered during upgrades to and maintenance of the Existing Complex would be identified and removed prior to the maintenance/upgrade activities consistent with NYCT specifications.
BUILD ALTERNATIVES
Construction Impacts
The preliminary investigation undertaken for this FEIS identified an initial list of locations in and along the project corridor that may have contaminated soil, soil gas, or groundwater. The potential for presence of asbestos, LBP and mercury in buildings, steam lines and other utilities was also assessed. During construction, there is a potential that contaminated materials could be uncovered, either in locations where research indicated a potential problem or in other unexpected locations. Based on the results of the analysis, no subsurface contaminated materials conditions currently exist at the FSTC project site. Nonetheless, to protect workers and the public and to reduce the potential for their being exposed to these contaminants, a site-specific Health and Safety Plan (HASP) would be developed and implemented by contractors for each construction phase, defining mandatory health and safety requirements that the contractors and subcontractors would meet. Any contaminated materials encountered during construction would be handled, stored, and disposed of in accordance with all applicable regulations and in compliance with the HASP.
Operational Impacts
No adverse impacts from contaminated materials are expected during initial and full operation of the FSTC. Once construction activities are completed, any remaining subsurface contaminated materials would be contained by paved areas or other barriers and would not present a hazard to the public. Asbestos or LBP would be removed from structures prior to deconstruction/renovation and disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations. The operation of the FSTC would not be expected to generate any contaminants.
ES.10.12 COASTAL ZONE CONSISTENCY The portion of the FSTC that lies within the New York City coastal zone is limited to the western end of the proposed Dey Street Passageway and RW - E connection at Church Street. Proposed construction in this area includes street entrances and improved access to the subway mezzanine and platforms,
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-34 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation including wider and more direct stairways and access for disabled customers. The project’s location in the coastal zone necessitates consultation with the State and City for determining consistency of the project’s construction and operations with Coastal Zone Management Policies. An assessment of the project’s consistency with New York City’s Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) was therefore conducted as part of this FEIS. The Coastal Zone consistency analysis contained in this FEIS indicates that the FSTC would be consistent with all applicable coastal zone policies during both construction and operation. Concurrence with this was provided by NYS Department of State by letter dated June 29, 2004 (Appendix M). Any impacts that could occur in the coastal zone at the western end of the project are considered to be temporary and minor in nature and would be associated with construction only. Coastal zone consistency would be achieved during construction through adherence to relevant regulations and guidelines, and implementation of measures employed to prevent environmental impacts.
ES.10.13 SAFETY AND SECURITY NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
Under the No Action Alternative, the Existing Complex would be maintained and operated in its current state. Minor maintenance and rehabilitation activities could occur, including typical station and transit infrastructure maintenance and repair. Although NYCT would continue its usual programs and procedures to assure passenger and facility safety and security throughout the transit system, the Existing Complex would continue to suffer from the safety and security concerns associated with crowded peak- hour operating conditions. Operational inefficiencies created by poor LOS associated with current system deficiencies would continue. In the event of a safety or security incident, the No Action Alternative would not allow NYCT to take advantages of improved safety and security conditions that could be created within the Build Alternatives.
BUILD ALTERNATIVES
Construction Impacts
Under both Build Alternatives, construction of the FSTC would be implemented in compliance with relevant Federal, State and City codes, policies and guidelines, including those of NYCT, intended to protect safety and security for construction workers, patrons and the general public. Construction contracts would incorporate requirements for developing and implementing a contract-specific HASP to protect construction workers and the public. The NYCT would monitor to ensure compliance with each HASP. As a result of these measures, the proposed FSTC under both Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative is not expected to result in adverse impacts to safety and security during the construction phase.
Operational Impacts Operation of the FSTC would improve public safety and security by the implementation of enhanced safety and security features. A number of features would be included in the design to enhance and maximize safe use of the FSTC, including adequate spacing in public areas, use of natural light, and a visible police presence. The Preferred Alternative, and to a lesser degree Alternative 9, would include retail spaces surrounding the lower levels of the Entry Facility. This would further contribute to safety and security, especially during off-peak hours. The Preferred Alternative, and to a lesser degree Alternative 9, would reduce the number of “blind spots” that pose a safety and security concern compared to the No Action Alternative.
The Preferred Alternative provides a direct view from within the east end of the Dey Street Passageway into the Central Station Concourse of the Entry Facility and the escalator up into the Corbin Building. In Alternative 9, the view from within the Dey Street Passageway to the east end of the Dey Street Passageway terminates in a blind wall (in order to avoid the Corbin Building) and provides only an
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-35 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation oblique view of the Central Station Concourse in the Entry Facility. This feature of Alternative 9 diminishes the benefits for safety and security that are realized in the Preferred Alternative.
Improved safety and security, especially in the event of emergency conditions, would be provided in the Preferred Alternative, compared to the No Action Alternative, by providing egress on all three (3) sides of the FSTC bounded by Fulton Street, Broadway and John Street. Similar, but less extensive, improvements to safety and security would be realized under Alternative 9; Alternative 9, in order to avoid the Corbin Building, would not provide direct egress to John Street.
The FSTC design would be based on applicable prescriptive codes as well as performance-based fire protection design approaches considering potential hazard scenarios. The design would also be based on results of a Smoke Purge Study and a Threat and Risk Assessment Study which would be completed as part of ongoing engineering. Security measures would be included in the design and operation features consistent with the current security methods, practices and procedures being employed and implemented by NYCT.
ES.10.14 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE Under the No Action Alternative, temporary impacts associated with the construction of the FSTC would not occur, but neither would the permanent benefits of the FSTC for Manhattan communities, including low-income and minority communities. Without the FSTC, the Lower Manhattan recovery would be affected, thereby adversely affecting the long term vitality of Lower Manhattan communities, including low-income and minority communities.
BUILD ALTERNATIVES As a project that would use Federal funds, the FSTC must comply with Executive Order 12898, “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations”. This Executive Order requires Federal agencies to identify and address disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations, and to include outreach to the public in its decision-making process. In the area affected by the FSTC, the portion of Chinatown within the study area boundaries represents a community of concern for environmental justice issues because a portion of the construction truck route would pass through this area. Based on the evaluation of impacts identified in the noise, air quality, traffic, social and economic conditions, and displacement and relocation chapters of this FEIS, it has been determined that the construction of the FSTC would not result in disproportionately high or adverse impacts on low income or minority communities.
The FSTC would not result in disproportionately high or adverse human health or quality of life impacts to communities of concern related to construction truck traffic off-site. The construction-related truck traffic routes would pass through neighborhoods with both high and low proportions of low-income and minority persons. Overall, the race, ethnicity and income characteristics of the secondary truck route study area are similar to those of Lower Manhattan as a whole. In addition, the increase in traffic along these City-established truck routes is not anticipated to be substantial nor result in traffic, air or noise impacts, as defined by established impact threshold criteria.
All property acquisition required for the FSTC would be undertaken within the framework of the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act and in accordance with the New York State Eminent Domain Procedure Law. In the case of relocating displaced businesses, it is anticipated that adequate space is available for relocation elsewhere in Lower Manhattan and that relocation of these establishments would not result in an overall change in land use or community character in the adjacent neighborhood in the primary study area or in communities of concern in the secondary study area. No indirect business or residential displacements or overall change in land use or
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-36 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation community character would result from the FSTC in communities of concern or other neighborhood areas.
The FSTC project would result in improvements to the overall transportation service in Lower Manhattan. Improved access to Lower Manhattan would not only make it an attractive business destination but also contribute to restoring Lower Manhattan to its pre-existing economic development potential. The project would benefit workers, transit riders and visitors; residents in the area would also benefit from the transportation service improvements. No single racial, ethnic or income group would be denied the overall benefits anticipated by the project. The operation of the FSTC would not result in impacts to resources that would be borne disproportionately by low income or minority communities of concern.
ES.10.15 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS The cumulative effects analysis presented in Chapter 20 of this FEIS has been prepared in accordance with the FTA’s Approach to Cumulative Effects Analysis for the Lower Manhattan Recovery Effort (FTA, 2003). The impacts of the FSTC were conservatively analyzed by including in the analysis the cumulative effects of all Lower Manhattan Projects combined for each resource throughout the technical chapters of this FEIS. Among the resources cumulatively analyzed throughout this FEIS, five (5) were identified as being especially important because of their interrelationship, because the events of September 11 in particular affected these resources, and because the management of these resources was considered most instrumental for optimizing recovery and growth with minimal adverse environmental impacts. Consistent with the focus on these resources, a separate chapter in this FEIS is dedicated to the discussion of cumulative effects on these resources. Reflecting the importance of these five (5) resources for recovery and environmental protection, the EPCs also focus on these particular resources.
In a coordinated effort, the FTA, other Federal partners, and local project sponsors identified the following five (5) critical environmental factors as resources of particular concern for cumulative effects: air quality; access and circulation; noise and vibration; cultural and historic resources; and economic factors. Following are conclusions from the cumulative effects analysis from Chapter 20 for each of the analysis years: 2005/2006, 2008, and 2025 for each of the Build Alternatives during construction and operation. The effects of the No Action Alternative are discussed under the preceding technical resource categories within this Executive Summary.
TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION Coordination on the development of the access and circulation analysis among NYCT, FTA and the other Lower Manhattan Transportation Recovery Project sponsors occurred through several meetings in 2003 and 2004 during which potential issues, analytical methods to address the issues, and data to support the analysis were discussed. As a result of these meetings, traffic, parking, transit, and pedestrian data, analyses results and methodologies were shared by the Recovery Project sponsors to minimize redundant efforts and to promote consistency among the projects. In terms of construction, truck routes, truck assignment, truck quantities, construction schedules, MPT plans and EPCs proposed for each project were coordinated and compiled for this FEIS. These data were shared with the other Recovery Project sponsors and provided consistency among the projects.
Cumulative Construction Impacts
Traffic delay increases are anticipated to be relatively minor and, with the exception of two (2) intersections, are all within the tolerance of 10 seconds, an initial threshold of potential impact as defined by NYSDOT. However, these changes would not meet the threshold for an impact and neither of the intersections is forecast to experience a significant impact. Truck access would be maintained to all streets affected by construction activity and the construction of the FSTC is not expected to result in significant adverse impacts on parking conditions.
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-37 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation During the construction period, some station elements may accommodate diverted flows from partial or complete closures of other station elements. The effect is that some station elements would operate with higher congestion then projected in the 2005/2006 No Action Alternative. NYCT would develop MPT plans that would minimize congested conditions to the greatest extent possible. Construction work would be scheduled and performed as part of NYCT’s regular program for scheduling service diversions for construction projects. Some customers may experience slightly longer travel times on nights and/or weekends as a result of the construction at FSTC. Pedestrian access to, from and between all modes of travel, including subway and bus, in the vicinity of the project would be maintained throughout the duration of construction. Access to the subway system would be maintained during construction through minor schedule adjustments of subway lines as is commonly done for NYCT rehabilitation projects. Most schedule adjustments would be temporary and limited to weekends when subway volumes are low.
During construction, special accommodations would be made to not encumber ADA access on Broadway, Fulton or Dey Streets by providing ADA compliant ramp systems and sidewalk surface treatment. It is possible that pedestrians (and especially PATH patrons) may choose Fulton Street (between Church Street and Broadway) and John Street (between Broadway and Nassau Street) over Dey and Fulton Streets to travel east-west during the morning rush hour. Because economic activity in Lower Manhattan would still be below pre-September 11 conditions in 2005/2006, it is not anticipated that any traffic overflow to these streets would result in conditions worse than pre-September 11 conditions.
The analysis shows that, cumulatively, construction-related traffic is not expected to adversely affect access and circulation in the vicinity of the project during construction. Implementation of the common EPCs would further improve access and circulation above the levels estimated in the analysis. Project specific EPCs would be investigated by NYCT in the course of developing, constructing and monitoring the project in an effort to minimize the construction effects on access and circulation.
Cumulative Operational Impacts
With the FSTC, transit conditions and pedestrian flow inside the Facility Entry would operate at substantially improved levels by eliminating all LOS E and F conditions through the entire Existing Complex, resulting in a major improvement in pedestrian flow. Lower Manhattan would be supported by a much improved subway system that is more easily navigable, safer and much more accessible. This would result in the reduction of travel time by an estimated 900,000 hours per year for all commuters combined using the FSTC in 2025. In particular, the FSTC would provide better accessibility for people with disabilities, via new ADA-compliant elevators from the street to the subway system, as well as ADA-compliant platform connections within the system. ADA access, where none now exists, would be provided among all stations (45, AC, 23, JMZ) in one of the system’s busiest station complexes. This would facilitate the fullest public participation in Lower Manhattan’s economic and cultural resources, and increased ability for all to reside in Lower Manhattan.
The Dey Street Passageway is adequately sized to accommodate the substantial increase in pedestrian traffic associated with the redevelopment of the WTC site and PATH commuters. As an unpaid passageway, the Dey Street Passageway would benefit both patrons of the subway system and other pedestrians traveling east or west between Church Street and Broadway and destinations beyond. The diversion of pedestrians using the crosswalks in the No Action condition to the subsurface Dey Street Passageway would substantially reduce the number of street-level pedestrians during the morning and evening rush hour and thereby improve crosswalk LOS in the study area. This would also contribute to a better flow of vehicular traffic, expected to increase in volume as a result of continued economic growth in Lower Manhattan through 2025. As street-level pedestrian congestion would be reduced, this would create a more pleasant and safer pedestrian environment, especially for children and people with disabilities.
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-38 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation AIR QUALITY
Cumulative Construction Impacts
The analysis shows that, cumulatively, pollutant concentrations would not exceed NAAQS and de minimis criteria for Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative. Whereas no regulatory standards exist for PM2.5 emissions associated with construction, this FEIS utilized the values referenced in NYSDEC Policy CP-33 as a context for analysis. Although elevated PM2.5 levels were determined, these levels can be reduced through application of EPCs for use of ULSD fuel and appropriate engine retrofit technology/electrification for off-road equipment. In addition to the EPCs already incorporated in the project, other measures will be investigated by NYCT in coordination with the FTA and the other Recovery Project sponsors in the course of developing and constructing the project, e.g., in the event other technological advances are made, in an effort to further minimize the construction effects on air quality.
Cumulative Operational Impacts
Operational emissions of the FSTC would be insubstantial, and the project would not contribute to 2008 or 2025 operational air quality impacts. This is evidenced by the concurrence from the Interagency Consultation Group of agencies tracking transportation projects for air pollutant emissions effects that the project is classified as “exempt” under regulations implementing the Clean Air Act, i.e., the project’s emissions effects are negligible.
Operation of the FSTC would provide improved transit access to Lower Manhattan, thereby supporting economic growth while reducing the potential environmental burden associated with the increase in traffic typically associated with such growth. The FSTC would provide alternate non-polluting transportation options for residents, visitors and workers. A flexible, safe, convenient and attractive transit system in Lower Manhattan would provide the capacity needed during peak hours to provide: an easy commute for workers to and from Lower Manhattan’s centers of commercial activity; a safe and reliable travel mode for residents (in particular families and residents with disabilities), during all times of the day and week; and an easily navigable system for visitors to Lower Manhattan.
In summary, it is anticipated that compared to the condition without the FSTC in 2008 and 2025, the FSTC would have a beneficial cumulative effect on air quality in Lower Manhattan and would help reduce any adverse effects on air quality by the other Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects.
NOISE AND VIBRATION
Cumulative Construction Impacts
Mobile Sources
Compared to the 2003 Existing Condition, Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative would result in decreases or no change in traffic at two (2) of the noise receptor locations due to street closures for activities proposed under the FSTC. Additional traffic would be generated at the seven (7) other locations, six (6) of which would result in imperceptible increase of less than one (1) dBA during the AM peak traffic hour. Receptor Site 4 (Century 21 Department Store – Cortlandt Street entrance) would experience a Passenger Car Equivalent (PCE) traffic volume increase of almost 400 percent resulting in a substantial increase of 6.8 dBA during the AM peak hour. Using a three (3) dBA increase as the discernable threshold, there would be adverse airborne noise impacts from mobile sources at Site 4 during the AM peak hour.
Compared to the pre-September 11 condition and the 2003 Existing Condition, the FSTC would result in decreases in traffic at four (4) of the receptor locations, two (2) of which are due to street closures for activities proposed under the FSTC. Additional traffic would be generated at the five (5) other locations,
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-39 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation all of which would result in an imperceptible increase of up to 1.6 dBA during the AM peak traffic hour. Using a three (3) dBA increase as the discernable threshold, there would be no adverse airborne noise impacts from mobile sources at any of the nine (9) receptor locations during the AM peak hour.
The cumulative noise and vibration analysis indicates that, during the peak construction year, traffic- related noise level increases would be less than 1.1 dBA at eight (8) of the nine (9) receptor locations in the study area. These locations were identified as those where the FSTC would have the greatest potential to increase ambient noise levels and cause an impact. The one (1) receptor that would experience large increases in construction traffic, with a corresponding increase in traffic-related noise levels, is the Century 21 Department Store on Church Street. The projected construction traffic-related noise level increase at this receptor is 4.7 dBA, which represents a significant increase.
Stationary Sources
Construction activities associated with other Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects that contribute to noise impacts caused by the FSTC would be limited to the Permanent WTC PATH Terminal and the WTC Memorial and Redevelopment Plan. These projects only affect the immediate interface with the FSTC project area at Dey Street. Areas of FSTC construction further east would be shielded by intervening buildings from the noise contributions from these two (2) other Recovery Projects and background noise levels.
Peak one (1)-hour Leq, eight (8)-hour Leq, and 30-day Ldn for each month in 2006 were calculated at each of nine (9) receptor sites. Peak one (1)-hour noise levels would exceed FTA criteria of 90 dBA for residences and hotels and 100 dBA for office and commercial at four (4) of the nine (9) sites. The eight (8)-hour noise levels would exceed FTA criteria of 80 dBA (for residences and churches) and 85 dBA (office/commercial) at seven (7) of the nine (9) sites. It is noted that the calculated peak one (1)-hour and eight (8)-hour noise levels are the maximum expected noise levels at each of the receptor locations. In addition, expected noise levels would only occur during peak construction activities, which are limited to certain time periods and last for short periods of time, e.g. hours or days, over the entire construction duration.
The 30-day Ldn levels would exceed FTA criteria at five (5) of the nine (9) sites using the Minimum Distance Method. The Minimum Distance Method presents the most conservative analysis in determining the closest point that pieces of moveable equipment could be located to the receptor. (Stationary equipment would, in fact, be placed as far away from receptors as possible within the work zone). In calculating noise levels using the Minimum Distance Method, several of the noise receptors were assumed to be located at a relatively short distance from the noise generating source. This was especially the case for noise receptors associated with the construction at the Dey Street Passageway, e.g., the Millenium Hotel, and the mezzanine at Fulton Street. While construction could occur as close as five (5) feet from a building façade, it should be noted that activities would not occur continuously at such proximities, especially for small distances (less than 20 feet). Rather, equipment at such distances would continuously move within different areas of the work site. The Average Distance Method, therefore, was also used to reflect the fact that actual locations of the construction equipment would move around throughout the construction areas or zones over an extended period (e.g. 30 days). When computed using the Average Distance Method, the 30-day Ldn levels at all nine (9) locations are substantially reduced and would not exceed FTA criteria at any of nine (9) sites evaluated.
Cumulative Operational Impacts
To the extent that the FSTC would contribute to a reduction in traffic as a result of alternate transit options, the operation of the FSTC may contribute to a reduction in traffic-generated noise; thereby, ambient noise conditions for residents, workers and visitors to Lower Manhattan would be improved. The only potential mobile noise source associated with operation of the FSTC would be the existing subway station and subway trains. As stated in the FTA’s assessment guidelines, subway noise is generally not a problem for surrounding sensitive receptors because the ground acts as a barrier to noise transmission.
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-40 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation The subway lines and stations are underground and fully covered, with the exception of ventilation gratings and shafts. The project alternatives would not result in substantial increase or change in train operations, and operational noise and vibration impacts are not anticipated.
Although some noise impacts could occur during operation of rooftop HVAC equipment, affecting 15 John Street and 144 Fulton Street, measures would be employed to minimize such impacts and equipment would be designed to minimize audible noise at street-level. As part of ongoing design, opportunities are being explored to mitigate impacts, including use of quieter equipment types, noise barriers, and window replacement/insulation. Retail operations would be similar to those existing and would not substantially change existing noise conditions. Operation of the other Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects would occur at a distance too far from the FSTC to result in cumulative noise impacts during operation. The HVAC and mechanical systems would also be located in buildings that would be structurally designed to minimize vibration to adjacent uses and buildings. No cumulative adverse effects on noise and vibration conditions from stationary sources would be expected with operation of the FSTC.
CULTURAL AND HISTORIC RESOURCES
Cumulative Construction Impacts
Although the potential for archaeological resources was identified within portions of the project’s construction zone, it is not anticipated that the project would contribute to cumulative construction effects on archaeological resources. None of the other Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects has the potential to affect the same archaeological resources that may be affected by the FSTC. MTA NYCT is currently consulting with SHPO and the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission regarding appropriate measures to address archaeological resources that may be present.
Noise and Vibration
With regard to historic resources, some historic structures in the project vicinity could experience cumulative impacts arising from construction-related ground vibrations associated with simultaneous or consecutive construction projects. Some of these structures will also incur noise impacts as a result of cumulative construction noise. Vibration associated with construction truck traffic for the FSTC, in combination with construction truck traffic for the other Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects, is not anticipated to affect historic and cultural resources.
Access and Circulation
Pedestrian access to, from and among all modes of travel, including subway and bus, in the vicinity of the project would be maintained throughout the duration of construction. In addition, pedestrian access to major destinations in the vicinity of the project, including historic and cultural resources, would also be maintained. Therefore, access to cultural and historic resources in the project vicinity is not expected to be adversely affected during the construction period.
Cumulative Operational Impacts
During operation, the FSTC is not anticipated to adversely affect any cultural resources in the area. The Corbin Building under either of the Build Alternatives would have been either avoided (Alternative 9) or actively preserved (the Preferred Alternative) through an adaptive reuse program that would restore the visibility of the building’s defining elements to the public. Under either Build Alternative, potential adverse effects to any cultural resources within the APE will be resolved through a PA among the SHPO, FTA, MTA, and ACHP. Operation of the FSTC is anticipated to result in improved access to cultural resources in Lower Manhattan, including the Corbin Building and the John Street-Maiden Lane Historic District, thereby contributing to a greater enjoyment of these resources. In the Preferred Alternative, the direct connection provided through the Corbin Building between the FSTC and John Street and, thus, the historic district is an incremental and unique benefit of this alternative.
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-41 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation BUSINESS AND ECONOMIC INTERESTS
Cumulative Construction Impacts
The Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects with the highest potential to have cumulative economic impacts in combination with the FSTC are the Permanent WTC PATH Terminal, the WTC Memorial and Redevelopment Plan, and the Fulton Corridor Revitalization Study. Of these projects, the latter is still under study by LMDC. None of the other Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects have the potential to directly affect the local retail and other revenue-generating land uses that could be affected by the FSTC. Similarly, the FSTC does not have the potential to have cumulative construction-related business and economic impacts on the other Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects.
The components of the FSTC that have the potential to overlap with activities at the WTC site are: the construction of the Dey Street Passageway between Broadway and Church Street and the widening of the AC mezzanine at Fulton Street, between Broadway and Nassau Street. The closure of Dey Street and the closure of Fulton Street during construction would affect deliveries to businesses along these streets, e.g., to the Century 21 department store loading area on Dey Street, although emergency and destination delivery access would be maintained. Access to Century 21 could also be affected by construction truck traffic associated with the FSTC, the Permanent WTC PATH Terminal, and the WTC Memorial and Redevelopment Plan as well as the proposed reconstruction of Broadway and Church Street by NYCDOT. Construction activities associated with the relocation of utilities along the east side of Church Street, between Dey Street and Fulton Street, would temporarily affect vehicular access and taxi drop-off to the front entrance of the Millenium Hotel, although pedestrian access would be maintained.
To address the potential for cumulative construction impacts to adjacent properties, the construction plan for the FSTC would include MPT Plans and would be coordinated by NYCT with NYCDOT, PANYNJ and LMDC. Coordination with economic development interests on maintaining the attractiveness of Lower Manhattan as a place to live, work and recreate, while maintaining a level of accessibility commensurate with that attractiveness, would serve to minimize cumulative business and economic effects during the construction period.
Cumulative Operational Impacts
The FSTC would involve the demolition of five (5) existing buildings and the relocation of business tenants. As such, land use on the site (except for 192 Broadway) would change from a mixture of commercial and institutional space with street-level retail establishments, to a dedicated public space containing transit facilities that incorporates new retail and public spaces. Between the two (2) Build Alternatives, the Preferred Alternative would provide a greater contribution to revitalization and consistency with stated Federal, State and City public policies promoting revitalization, as it would also make the Corbin Building a more attractive key cultural resource to the public through rehabilitation and revitalization, both in terms of access and visibility. In addition, the Preferred Alternative would connect FSTC with three (3) block faces, as opposed to two (2) under Alternative 9. The higher visibility and superior accessibility of the FSTC under the Preferred Alternative would make the vicinity of the FSTC more attractive for economic activity.
Although the City property tax base would be reduced by the displacement of businesses in the Build Alternatives, it is expected that most businesses would relocate within the City. As a result there would be little or no loss in retail and business tax revenues. The FSTC would provide additional tax revenues from the new retail businesses on the site.
Operation of the FSTC would be directly responsive to Federal, State, and City-stated public policy in that it would improve accessibility to Lower Manhattan and facilitate the movement of pedestrians between destinations within Lower Manhattan. Operation of the FSTC from 2008 onward would provide immediate benefits in terms of wayfinding and mobility to and within Lower Manhattan, both of which are expected to immediately contribute to the revitalization of Lower Manhattan and may help offset
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-42 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation some of the temporary construction impacts of other Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects. In addition, operation of the Dey Street Passageway would provide an underpass beneath the busy Broadway/Dey Street intersection and provide commuters immediately with the benefits of improved pedestrian access to destinations east of Broadway, thereby contributing to the revitalization of the business environment. This would also contribute to a better flow of vehicular traffic, expected to increase in volume as a result of continued economic growth in Lower Manhattan through 2025. As street-level pedestrian congestion would be reduced, this would create a more pleasant and safer pedestrian environment, especially for children and people with disabilities.
ES.11 COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES
Resources that would be irreversibly and irretrievably committed to the FSTC include construction materials, energy, labor, funds and land. However, based on social and economic studies undertaken for the analysis of potential impacts as a result of the FSTC, these are not considered to be in limited supply. Thus, the use of such resources in the construction of the FSTC would not adversely impact the availability of such resources for other projects both now and in the future.
Development of the FSTC would result in a temporary increase in energy and fuel consumption during construction. The operation of the FSTC may result in a slight increase in energy consumption (due to HVAC and operational needs) compared to the No Action Alternative but would be expected to result in a decrease in energy consumption, through continued transit use over time. Archaeological deposits or features also may be found in the study area, and the FSTC could result in the irreversible and irretrievable commitment of these resources. MTA NYCT is currently consulting with SHPO and the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission regarding appropriate measures to address archaeological resources that may be present.
Overall, the resources used to construct and operate the FSTC would be committed to benefit residents, visitors, and commuters and support economic recovery within Lower Manhattan, pursuant to established public policy. The commitment of these resources would also benefit other residents of the State and region by an improved transportation system and from the contribution of the FSTC to the revitalization of Lower Manhattan. The FSTC would offer improved accessibility and savings in travel time, improvements to the Existing Complex, reduced train crowding and improved operational flexibility of existing subway lines. There are no other known resources that would be committed as a result of the construction of the FSTC.
ES.12 SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION
A Section 4(f) Evaluation has been prepared for the project pursuant to Federal regulations contained in 23 C.F.R. 771.135 that implement Section 4(f) of the United States Department of Transportation Act of 1966. A Section 4(f) Evaluation is required for any federally funded transportation project if the project proposes to use property from a publicly-owned park, recreation area, wildlife or waterfowl refuge area or any significant historic site. The Secretary of Transportation may approve a transportation program or project requiring the use of Section 4(f) land only if:
• There is no prudent and feasible alternative to using that land; and, • The program or project includes all possible planning to minimize harm to the park, recreation area, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, or historic site resulting from the use.
The FSTC is located in an area which contains archaeological potential, and also contains several significant historic sites, as defined by the Section 4(f) regulations. Therefore, the Section 4(f) Evaluation has been prepared to evaluate the potential use of these resources by the FSTC.
Use of Section 4(f) land occurs when:
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-43 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation • Land from a Section 4(f) property is permanently incorporated into a transportation project; • There is a temporary occupancy of Section 4(f) land that is adverse; or, • There is a constructive use of land, i.e., when the project’s proximity impacts are so severe that the Section 4(f) property is substantially impaired.
The Section 4(f) evaluation identified that seven (7) historic properties and one (1) historic district located within the APE meet the criteria for potential use. These Section 4(f) resources are: the Corbin Building; the 45 Fulton Street Subway Station; the former American Telephone and Telegraph (AT&T) Building; the Bennett Building; the former East River Savings Bank; the St. Paul’s Chapel and Graveyard; the WTC site; and the John Street-Maiden Lane Historic District. In addition, there is the potential for permanent use of historic archaeological resources: at the northeast corner of the intersection of Dey and Church Streets, along the eastern sidewalk of Church Street, north and south of Dey Street; Dey Street, under the sidewalks; Cortland Street, west of Broadway; Maiden Lane, east of Broadway; Fulton Street, between Broadway and William Street; William Street, between Ann Street and John Street; and John Street, east of William Street, as described in the Phase 1A Archaeological Study. These properties were determined in consultation with NYSOPRHP, the SHPO, and the New York City LPC.
Following are conclusions about the use of Section 4(f) resources associated with the FSTC project. A summary overview of the Section 4(f) use for all historic resources is presented in Table ES-2.
TEMPORARY USE OF SECTION 4(f) RESOURCES
The Corbin Building, Fulton Street Station, former AT&T Building and WTC site would be permanently used, so temporary use does not apply to them. No temporary use would occur to the other Section 4(f) resources, since:
• They would not be occupied; • The duration of occupancy of Section 4(f) resources would be less than the time needed for construction of the project; • The scope of work to Section 4(f) resources, in terms of the nature and magnitude of the work, would be minor; • There would be no resulting adverse impacts to the Section 4(f) resources; and, • There would be no change in the Section 4(f) resource ownership.
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-44 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation
Table ES-2 Historic Sites Located in the FSTC Historic Properties Area of Potential Effect
(APE) and their Potential Use (for purposes of Section 4(f)) Under FSTC Alternatives
No Action The Preferred Alternative 9 Alternative Alternative
use use use use use use Potential Potential Potential Landmark proposed NYC Constructive use Constructive use Constructive use NYC Landmark or eligible for inclusion Listed or considered Potential Temporary Potential Temporary Potential Temporary on National Register Potential Permanent Potential Permanent Potential Permanent
Corbin X N/A N/A N/A Yes None None Yes None None Building Fulton Street X X N/A N/A N/A Yes None None Yes None None 45 Station Former AT&T N/A N/A N/A Yes None None Yes None None Building X Bennett X X N/A N/A N/A None None None None None None Building Former East River Savings X N/A N/A N/A None None None None None None Bank St. Paul’s X X N/A N/A N/A None None None None None None Chapel John Street- Maiden Lane X X N/A N/A N/A None None None None None None Historic District Keuffel Esser X N/A N/A N/A None None None None None None Building Royal Insurance X N/A N/A N/A None None None None None None Building WTC site X N/A N/A N/A Yes None None Yes None None Source: The Louis Berger Group, Inc., 2004.
CONSTRUCTIVE USE OF SECTION 4(f) RESOURCES
No constructive use of Section 4(f) resources would occur because potential proximity impacts of the project would be minimized or avoided so as not to cause substantial impairment of the Section 4(f) resources, as follows: • A quiet setting is not a generally recognized feature or attribute of the Section 4(f) resources that could be affected by the project; therefore, construction-related noise level increases associated with the project would not substantially interfere with the use and enjoyment of Section 4(f) resources; • Views of Section 4(f) resources would not be obstructed or eliminated and because of the provisions of the PA, its setting would not be visually impacted; therefore, the aesthetic quality of the Section 4(f) resources would not be substantially impaired; • Under the Preferred Alternative, access to the Corbin Building would be restricted during the construction period; however, this is a temporary restriction that does not diminish the utility of this resource, and access would be restored following construction;
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-45 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation • Through the implementation of a CEPP, potential construction-related vibration impacts would be minimized or avoided, such that impairment of the Section 4(f) resources or their structural integrity and utility would not occur; and, • There is no wildlife or waterfowl refuge adjacent to the project; therefore, this constructive use criterion does not apply.
PERMANENT USE OF SECTION 4(f) RESOURCES
Under Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative, four (4) Section 4(f) historic resources would be permanently used (i.e., permanently incorporated) by the FSTC project. These resources include the Corbin Building, the Fulton Street 45 Station, the former AT&T Building and the WTC site. In addition, permanent use of historic archaeological resources in portions of the study area may also occur as a result of the project. The evaluation of alternatives that would avoid use of these resources found that none of the alternatives are prudent and feasible. Concurrence with this finding was provided by the Department of the Interior (DOI), in a letter dated June 29 2004, in which the DOI confirmed that there were no prudent and feasible alternatives to the Proposed Action. The DOI also agreed with the proposed measures to minimize harm, as presented in this FEIS, on the condition that such measures were consistent with the PA (included as Chapter 11-A in this FEIS).
ES.13 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION AND OTHER PLANNED IMPACT REDUCTION ACTIONS
A range of mitigation measures are proposed or being evaluated for the project’s significant impacts. Those impacts are predominantly associated with construction, rather than operation, of the proposed project and by their nature are temporary. All mitigation measures would be organized into a CEPP that would be applied to all aspects of planned project construction and operation. This CEPP would be implemented through NYCT and coordinated with pertinent agencies, and sponsors of other Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects. The CEPP is described in the Environmental Analysis Framework for Federal Transportation Recovery Projects in Lower Manhattan (October 2003) committed to by the NYSDOT, NYCT, PANYNJ and FTA. The measures are listed briefly below, organized by subject area. Table ES-3 at the end of this Executive Summary provides a summary of impacts and planned actions, including mitigation measures, for the Proposed Action by resource category. NYCT is committed to implementing proposed mitigation measures and EPCs. These measures are being developed in more detail as the design proceeds and will be incorporated into the construction specifications for the project. The CEPP and an example of the environmental measures which could be included in the specifications are included in Appendix C.
TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION
• During construction, strategic construction sequencing would be used by NYCT to reduce impacts to the patrons of the stations by providing new pedestrian pathways before the existing ones are removed. Construction would be advanced early in those areas that are not currently well utilized in order to provide refuge for passengers away from necessary construction in the congested areas of the station in later stages. General station rehabilitation would also be advanced where possible to provide tangible improvements to the users of the station at the earliest possible time to offset the unavoidable inconveniences associated with the construction of larger project elements.
• MPT plans would be developed by NYCT for the project in coordination with NYCDOT to manage traffic and minimize the impact on vehicular and pedestrian flows during construction. These plans would be coordinated with the plans developed by LMDC for the Memorial and Redevelopment of the WTC site and the PANYNJ for the Permanent WTC PATH Terminal. The NYCDDC street reconstruction projects and the NYSDOT Route 9A Reconstruction south of Chambers Street would also have a direct effect on the traffic volumes and traffic patterns. NYCDOT approvals for vehicular travel lane and sidewalk closures would take into account all October 2004 Executive Summary ES-46 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation of the construction projects that would be occurring simultaneously in Lower Manhattan. NYCT is continuing to refine the MPT plans in coordination with NYCDOT. Updated draft MPT Plans are included in Appendix C.
SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONS
• To minimize any potential impacts, a “Pedestrian Way-Finding Plan” would be prepared and implemented during construction. Appropriate signage for businesses and civic amenities would be added and public awareness promoted through mechanisms such as signage, telephone hotline, and Web site updates. A Visitor Center/Project Information Office would be established during construction, with sensitivity to local cultural resources and visual resources. Public information outlets that would receive and provide current information about access during construction would be identified, and all property acquisition would be undertaken within the framework of the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act and in accordance with the New York State Eminent Domain Procedure Law.
PUBLIC OPEN SPACE AND PARKLANDS
• The CEPP would be implemented to minimize construction impacts on resources including public open space and parklands. Dust related to construction would be controlled through, among other measures: spraying of a suppressing agent on dust pile (non-hazardous, biodegradable); containment of fugitive dust; adjustment for meteorological conditions as appropriate; erection of site barriers; enforcement of strict containment guidelines; and proactive monitoring. A draft of the CEPP and an example of construction specifications are included in Appendix C.
URBAN DESIGN AND VISUAL RESOURCES
• NYCT will maintain continued coordination among Recovery Projects to avoid or minimize interruption in access and views to cultural sites and visual resources. Design objectives to maximize the enhancement of visual resources and make a positive contribution to urban design and aesthetics would be incorporated into the project engineering. Effects on key viewsheds and visual resources would be minimized through sensitive location and design of sidewalk bridging. The presence and concurrent use of heavy equipment and construction activities within key viewsheds would be managed through careful sequencing and scheduling of construction activities. A Pedestrian and Vehicular Access, Circulation, Maintenance and Protection Plan would be prepared for implementation throughout the construction zone. Sufficient alternative street, building, and station access during the construction period would be maintained. Baselines for vehicular and pedestrian traffic levels of service ensuring east-west connectivity would be developed and monitored.
• A “Pedestrian Way-Finding Plan” would be implemented during construction. Appropriate signage for businesses and civic amenities would be added and public awareness promoted through mechanisms such as signage, telephone hotline and Web site updates. A Visitor Center/Project Information Office would be established during construction, with sensitivity to local cultural resources and visual resources. Public information outlets that would receive and provide current information about access during construction would be identified.
• The CEPP would be implemented to minimize construction impacts. Dust related to construction will be controlled through, among other things, spraying of a suppressing agent on dust pile (non- hazardous, biodegradable); containment of fugitive dust; adjustment for meteorological conditions as appropriate; erection of site barriers; enforcement of strict containment guidelines; and proactive monitoring. A draft of the CEPP and an example of construction specifications are included in Appendix C.
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-47 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation DISPLACEMENT AND RELOCATION
• All property acquisition would be undertaken within the framework of the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act and in accordance with the New York State Eminent Domain Procedure Law. • Under the Build Alternatives, it is anticipated that most relocated businesses would be successful in finding suitable alternative space near their current locations. Most relocating businesses are likely to be successful in finding suitable alternative space near their current locations because the inventory of vacant office, retail, warehouse, and other commercial space in Lower Manhattan is anticipated to be large enough to accommodate the needs of most displaced businesses. The financial burdens associated with relocation would be addressed by NYCT within the framework of the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
• A milestone review process would be developed and implemented in coordination with SHPO and LPC, in which the ultimate treatment and use of the Corbin Building is determined through consideration of the property’s historic character and of the construction and operational feasibility of possible treatment and use options. Consultation with the SHPO would continue concerning: proposed alterations to the historic 45 Fulton Street Station and development of designs and specifications consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, including appropriate re-use of historic decorative elements such as wall finishes, railings and other features of the street-level entrances.
• The CEPP would be developed to avoid construction impacts on potentially vulnerable historic buildings within 90 feet of the construction activities. Special provisions would be necessary for the Corbin Building because it directly abuts the area in which deconstruction and construction would occur, and is physically attached to a building that would be removed. The CEPP would include protective measures such as monitoring of historic buildings during construction to detect vibration or other physical impacts. A draft of the CEPP and an example of construction specifications are included in Appendix C.
• In anticipation of potential identification of archaeological resources, and/or possible modifications to the designs for the FSTC, a CRMP, including an Emergency Action Program (EAP) to address any potential archaeological impacts, within the current archaeological APE and also those which may arise should the current APE be modified as a result of design changes, would be developed and implemented. This would include the requirement of an archaeologist certified by the Register of Professional Archeologists (RPA) to be retained on the FSTC engineering team.
AIR QUALITY
• The ambient air quality impact analysis shows that the proposed FSTC construction activities in Lower Manhattan for both Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative would not exceed the NAAQS for CO (one (1)-hour and eight (8)-hour), and SO2 (three (3)-hour, 24-hour, and annual average). With the implementation of the NYCT policy of the combined use of ULSD fuel and diesel engine retrofit technology, the predicted PM and NO2 concentration in the vicinity of the project during construction would be within NAAQS standards and available guidance.
• On-site emission reduction measures would also include dust control related to the construction site through a soil erosion sediment control plan that includes: spraying of a (non-hazardous, biodegradable) suppressing agent on dust piles; containment of fugitive dust and adjustment of work for meteorological conditions as appropriate. ULSD fuel and retrofit technology in particular heavy-duty engines and off-road construction vehicles would be utilized during the construction of the FSTC. Although the EPCs require the use of ULSD for off-road construction equipment 60HP and above, NYCT is committed to the use of ULSD for equipment of 50HP and October 2004 Executive Summary ES-48 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation above, consistent with the requirements of the Coordinated Construction Act for Lower Manhattan. Diesel engine retrofit technology will be required in off-road equipment to further reduce emissions. Modeling of air quality impacts conducted prior to the enactment of the Coordinated Construction Act in July 2004 assumed the use of ULSD fuel for nonroad engines 60 HP and above, and therefore did not account for the additional air quality benefits associated with the use of ULSD for nonroad vehicles between 50 HP and 60 HP. In accordance with the Coordinated Construction Act for Lower Manhattan, NYCT will require that non-road vehicles of 50 HP and above are retrofitted with Diesel Oxidation Catalysts (DOC), Diesel Particulate Filters (DPF) or technology that achieves lowest particulate matter emissions. Based on currently available data, Diesel Particulate Filters (DPF) will be the preferred retrofit technology, with Diesel Oxidation Catalyst (DOC) as a fallback when the use of DPF is not practicable.
• The engine emission removal efficiencies applied to diesel engines due to retrofit technologies would be achieved through on-site enforcement of EPA’s regulations when project construction work begins to achieve emission reduction of at least 50 percent for CO emissions. EPA is proposing new emission standards for diesel engines used in construction, agricultural and industrial operations.
• In addition to the above, other EPCs would continue to be investigated by NYCT in coordination with the FTA and the other Recovery Project sponsors in the course of design and construction of the FSTC; that is, in the event other technological advances are made, an effort to minimize construction effects on air quality using such technologies would be appropriately considered. A draft of the CEPP and an example of construction specifications to minimize air quality impacts is included in Appendix C.
NOISE AND VIBRATION
• Measures to mitigate airborne construction noise include construction sequencing to reduce noise impacts, use of alternative construction methods (such as using special low noise emission level equipment, and selecting and specifying quieter demolition methods), project layout approaches such as constructing temporary noise barriers, placing construction equipment farther from noise- sensitive receptors, and constructing walled enclosures/sheds around especially noisy activities such as pavement breaking. Other potential measures include the installation of silencers on construction equipment to reduce noise levels; the use of electrically operated equipment; the use of soil lining inside aluminum carrying cases to reduce rock impact noise during truck load/unloading operations; the use of drive-through street-level truck enclosures for truck loading and unloading; the use of sheds/enclosures at concrete pump sites during concrete truck unloading; and, the placement of most loading/unloading inside the excavated areas and away from areas at street-level, if possible.
• Different construction methods could be used to mitigate and further minimize vibration and ground-borne noise during construction. These include, where feasible, such measures as avoiding impact pile driving and equipment with high vibratory levels in vibration-sensitive areas, using non-impact construction technology, instituting special control measures to reduce the transmission of high vibratory levels to vibration-sensitive areas, etc. Various standard mitigation techniques are already given in standard NYCT construction specifications. Project construction engineers are exploring alternative construction techniques and special low-impact equipment.
• A number of controls would be implemented with respect to mitigation of vibration during construction. A preconstruction survey of any structure or use (e.g., operation of vibration- sensitive equipment such as laser eye surgery tools) likely to be adversely affected by the construction activities would be performed and thresholds or limiting values would be established that take into account each structure’s or use’s ability to withstand the loads and displacements due to construction vibrations. NYCT, through its contractors, would also meet with medical
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-49 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation facilities or other users of especially sensitive equipment prior to construction to survey them regarding their special needs and then schedule construction activities appropriately. Detailed construction specifications that impose reasonable acceptance criteria would be included in construction contracts.
• A project-wide vibration monitoring program would also be developed and implemented to monitor and identify vibration levels from construction activities at nearby sensitive receptors. This program would be reflected in the CEPP. A complaint response procedure would be implemented to promptly address community concerns and implement additional control methods where necessary. In addition, in advance of certain activities that are likely to result in vibrations, NYCT and its contractors would conduct extensive outreach to those in the surrounding blocks that could be affected. Additionally, vibration control plans would be developed and best management practices to limit vibration would be employed in sensitive areas, depending on the construction method required.
• To avoid architectural damage (e.g., cracked plaster) to extremely fragile buildings within 90 feet of the construction work, deep saw cuts would be made between areas of pavement breaking and the sidewalk areas in front of buildings. With this technique, ground-borne vibration levels should be below the impact criteria at the foundations of most buildings and no damage is anticipated. Additionally, where practical, concrete cutters would be used on pavement surfaces instead of pavement breakers.
• The CEPP would account for the requirements laid out in the “New York City Department of Buildings Technical Policy and Procedure Notice (PPN) #10/88,” concerning procedures for avoidance of damage to historic structures from adjacent construction. The PPN defines an adjacent historic structure as being contiguous to or within a lateral distance of 90 feet from a lot under development or alteration. These measures, to be included as part of the CEPP plan for historic resources, would include the following: o Inspect and report on current foundation and structural conditions of any historic resources; o Establish a vibration monitoring program to measure vertical and lateral movement and vibration to the historic structures within 150 feet of construction activities. Details as to the frequency and duration of the vibration monitoring program would be determined as part of the project’s ongoing consultation process with the State Historic Preservation Office; o Establish and monitor construction methods to limit vibrations to levels that would not cause structural damage to the historic structures, as determined by the condition survey; and, o Issue “stop work” orders to the construction contractor, as required, to prevent damage to the structures, based on any vibration levels that exceed the design criteria in the lateral or vertical direction. Work would not begin again until the steps proposed to stabilize and/or prevent further damage to the designated buildings were approved.
• Measures to mitigate operational noise impacts associated with HVAC and mechanical equipment located within the roof area of the Entry Facility would include the use of silencers and/or enclosures to minimize these impacts. As further mitigation is expected to be necessary to achieve compliance with the New York City Noise Code, as part of ongoing design, opportunities are being explored to avoid or mitigate impacts. These include investigation of the technical feasibility of using quieter equipment types, noise barriers and window replacement/insulation.
• The draft of the CEPP and an example of construction specifications to minimize noise and vibration impacts is included in Appendix C. In addition, the executed PA is included in Chapter 11.
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-50 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation INFRASTRUCTURE, ENERGY AND SOLID WASTE
• Utility relocation activities will be subject to the CEPP to minimize community disruption. The draft CEPP and an example of construction specifications to minimize infrastructure, energy and solid waste impacts are included in Appendix C.
NATURAL RESOURCES
• Soil erosion and run-off prevention measures, pursuant to the CEPP (see Appendix C), would be developed and implemented in accordance with “New York Standards and Specifications for Erosion and Sediment Control” published by the Empire State Soil and Water Conservation Society. The erosion and run-off prevention measures would include the use of hay bales and/or silt screens to capture run-off prior to entering sewer catch basins, grading exposed soils on the project site away from the perimeter, and covering exposed soil with gravel or other materials to limit run-off.
• Dewatering of excavations would be performed in a manner that would limit the draw-down of groundwater in the vicinity of the project site through the selection of shoring or sheeting methods that limit the influx of groundwater into the excavation. If localized groundwater draw- down occurs, and has the potential to result in the settlement of structures, the Contractor would perform stabilization measures, such as injecting grout beneath the structure’s foundation, prior to dewatering. Prior to implementation, stabilization measures developed by a licensed Professional Engineer would be presented to NYCT for review and acceptance. NYCT would notify the affected property owner prior to authorizing the Contractor to proceed. Once construction is completed, groundwater levels and flow direction would return to the pre-construction state.
CONTAMINATED MATERIALS AND WASTE MANAGEMENT
• Prior to building deconstruction/renovation and station rehabilitations, comprehensive surveys for asbestos, lead-based paint, PCB-containing equipment and mercury-containing bulbs and equipment would be undertaken to identify the locations and quantities of such materials.
• Asbestos containing materials would be properly removed from the buildings and subway stations prior to deconstruction and rehabilitation, thereby minimizing the potential for human exposure during construction. Construction activities that have the potential to generate lead-containing dust or vapors would be evaluated through the performance of a lead exposure assessment and, if required, the affected surfaces would be de-leaded prior to construction. Air exposure monitoring for lead particulates would be conducted during building deconstruction/renovation and station rehabilitation to monitor worker and public exposure to lead-containing dust. Dust controls would be employed during deconstruction activities to limit public and worker exposure. PCB- containing equipment and mercury-containing light fixtures and equipment would be properly removed prior to building deconstruction/ renovation and station rehabilitations.
• Prior to construction, soil, soil gas and groundwater sampling and analysis would be conducted, as appropriate, in areas of proposed excavation to more fully assess the types and extent of contamination present. Based on the sampling and analysis investigation, a CEPP plan to manage such materials would be developed. The following related elements of the CEPP would be developed and implemented: HASP; Soil and Contaminated Materials Management Plan; Soil Gas Management Plan; and Groundwater Management Plan. Such plans would be developed by the Contractor for acceptance by NYCT to limit the potential for worker and public contact with any contamination found in the soil, soil gas, or groundwater. Oversight would be provided by NYCT to ensure that the measures specified in the CEPP are implemented.
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-51 MTA New York City Transit Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation • Contaminated material encountered during excavation activity would be handled, transported, and disposed of according to all applicable Federal, State and local rules and regulations, and in accordance with the various project-specific plans listed above.
• The draft CEPP and an example of construction specifications to minimize impacts associated with contaminated materials and waste management and solid waste impacts is included in Appendix C.
COASTAL ZONE
• Materials would undergo appropriate pre-treatment activities prior to discharge into the sewer system. Contaminated materials would be managed, remediated and/or disposed of in accordance with all laws and regulations and prevented from entering coastal systems.
SAFETY
• HASPs for each construction contract would be implemented as part of the CEPP. The draft CEPP and an example of construction specifications to ensure safety is included in Appendix C.
October 2004 Executive Summary ES-52
Table ES-3 Summary Comparison of Impacts by Alternative and Planned Action
Resource Area No Action Alternative Alternative 9 Alternative 10 – The Preferred Alternative Planned Action Common to Build Alternatives Construction Operation Construction Operation Construction Operation Increased vehicular congestion, increase MPT plans are anticipated to minimize the MPT plans are anticipated to minimize the Increased vehicular congestion, increase Improved flow of vehicular traffic, Improved flow of vehicular traffic, Traffic and in street-level pedestrian congestion, and effect of construction-related traffic, effect of construction-related traffic, in street-level pedestrian congestion, and reduction in street-level pedestrian reduction in street-level pedestrian Maintenance and Protection of Traffic Transportation poor wayfinding and pedestrian roadway closures, pedestrian diversions, roadway closures, pedestrian diversions, poor wayfinding and pedestrian congestion, and improved wayfinding and congestion, and improved wayfinding and (MPT) Plans. congestion in the Existing Complex. and station element closures with respect and station element closures with respect congestion in the Existing Complex. pedestrian flow in the FSTC Complex. pedestrian flow in the FSTC Complex. to access and circulation. to access and circulation. Construction Operation Construction Operation Construction Operation Substantially advances recovery by creating visible transit presence, better Five (5) buildings removed: (Four (4) at transit efficiency and patron amenities. Five (5) buildings removed: (Four (4) at Substantially advances recovery by Entry Facility; One (1) on Dey Street). Some retail incorporated in FSTC Entry Facility; One (1) on Dey Street). creating visible transit presence, better Corbin Building converted to public use. providing resources and tax benefits. Approx 25 restaurant/retail and 75 office transit efficiency and patron amenities. Does not contribute further to Lower Approx 25 restaurant/retail and 75 office FSTC is a major public use, strengthens Social and businesses relocated. Some retail incorporated in FSTC Manhattan recovery, Fulton Street corridor businesses relocated. Fulton Street and surrounding area; Appropriate Compensation pursuant to Economic Approx 1300 construction jobs created for providing resources and tax benefits. No Impacts. improvements, employment and tax base Approx 1300 construction jobs created for supports job growth and tax revenue Federal and State Law. Signage and Conditions four (4) years. FSTC is a major public use, strengthens growth or strengthening of the economy. four (4) years. growth. Beneficial public transit project, other pedestrian protection measures. Property tax base generating $1.0 million Fulton Street and surrounding area; Little or no effect on community facilities. Property tax base generating $1.2 million contributes to community life. Opens the per year is lost; no impact to other taxes. supports job growth and tax revenue per year is lost; no impact to other taxes. historic Corbin Building to public use and Some disruption to community life near growth. As a beneficial public transit Some disruption to community life near maintains its identity in perpetuity. The FSTC construction. project, contributes to community life. FSTC construction. Corbin Building would also anchor the northwest corner of the Historic District with public access. Construction Operation Construction Operation Construction Operation No use of public parks. No use of public parks. Construction of FSTC entries in sidewalks Improved access to existing and new Construction of FSTC entries in sidewalks Improved access to existing and new Public Open at One Liberty Plaza and 55 Church open spaces. at One Liberty Plaza and 55 Church open spaces. Construction activities will be limited in Space and No impact or benefit to existing or new Street Plaza. Small FSTC entries in One Liberty Plaza Street Plaza. Small FSTC entries in One Liberty Plaza extent and duration wherever possible. A No Impacts. Parklands parks. Construction work areas and vehicles in and 55 Church Street Plaza. Construction work areas and vehicles in and 55 Church Street Plaza. CEPP will be implemented to minimize daytime pedestrian zones on Fulton, John Improved conditions in daytime pedestrian daytime pedestrian zones on Fulton, John Improved conditions in daytime pedestrian impacts. and Nassau Streets. Limited construction zones due to reduced congestion. and Nassau Streets. Limited construction zones due to reduced congestion. on John Street. on John Street. Construction Operation Construction Operation Construction Operation Contributes to Lower Manhattan recovery by strengthening Fulton Street corridor and improving east-west connections Contributes to Lower Manhattan recovery to/from WTC; Congestion reduced, and by strengthening the Fulton Street corridor Temporary disruption to wayfinding and No contribution to recovery. Corbin amenities provided; wayfinding improved. Urban Design Temporary disruption to wayfinding and and improving east-west connections to increased congestion during construction. Building does not benefit from state Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan, signage, and Visual Some views temporarily obscured by increased congestion during construction. and from WTC; Congestion reduced and Corbin Building underpinned and Corbin Building benefits from state ownership or increased public access. Maintenance and Protection of Traffic Resources construction. Corbin Building Isolated. Corbin Building amenities provided; wayfinding improved. integrated into the FSTC. Corbin Building ownership and increased public access. FSTC has visible presence/ identity Plan (see Chapter 6). may be visually obscured. Corbin Building does not benefit from may be visually obscured during façade Views of Corbin Building restored and improving the area’s urban design. state ownership or increased public improvements. Corbin Building façade improved. Corbin access. Building adaptive reuse in conformance, as practicable, with US Secretary of the Interior Standards for the Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings Construction Operation Construction Operation Construction Operation Various permanent and temporary Various permanent and temporary easements would be required and will be Contributes to Lower Manhattan recovery Property acquisition under the framework easements would be required and will be Contributes to Lower Manhattan recovery confirmed as engineering advances. Five by strengthening Fulton Street corridor of the Federal Uniform Relocation confirmed as engineering advances. Five by strengthening Fulton Street corridor (5) buildings would be acquired and and improving east-west connections Assistance and Real Property Acquisition (5) buildings would be acquired and and improving east-west connections removed. Permanent Relocations: to/from WTC; Congestion reduced and Policies Act and the New York State Displacement removed. Permanent Relocations: to/from WTC; Congestion reduced and No easements or properties acquired. No Occupants of 189, 194-196, 198, 200-202, amenities provided. Corbin Building Eminent Domain Procedure Law. and Relocation No contribution to recovery. Occupants of 189, 194-196, 198, 200-202, amenities provided; No further real estate owners or occupants displaced. and 204-210 Broadway. Access may be benefits from state ownership and Compensation and relocation assistance and 204-210 Broadway. Access may be actions. restricted on temporary basis, but would increased public access. The Entry would be provided for all occupants restricted on temporary basis, but would The Entry Facility would house new be maintained. Facility would have new occupants. displaced. be maintained. Temporary displacement occupants. Temporary access restrictions Corbin Building acquired and adaptively Permanent relocation of Corbin Building of tenants in Corbin Building basement The MTA NYCT would work to reduce the ended. reused. Permanent relocation of Corbin occupants. may be required. duration of access limitations. Building occupants.
Table ES-3 Summary Comparison of Impacts by Alternative and Planned Action
Resource Area No Action Alternative Alternative 9 Alternative 10 – The Preferred Alternative Planned Action Common to Build Alternatives Construction Operation Construction Operation Construction Operation Historic buildings protected subject to Corbin Building structurally isolated, likely Corbin Building integrated with FSTC Environmental Performance underpinned, and protected. 195 Entry Facility and underpinned. 195 Commitments (EPCs), CEPP, and Section Corbin Building acquired by MTA and Broadway underpinned. No alterations to Broadway underpinned. No alterations to 106 Requirements, including integrated with FSTC Entry Facility, and 195 Broadway's historic features 195 Broadway's historic features Programmatic Agreement. Cultural Corbin Building remains in private Corbin Building remains in private subject to benefits associated with long proposed. 45 Station rehabilitated. proposed. 45 Station rehabilitated. Resources No Impacts. ownership without benefits associated ownership without benefits associated term public ownership. Public access to 45 station rehabilitation conforms to Potential vibration or soil settlement Potential vibration and soil settlement with long term public ownership. with long term public ownership. parts of Corbin Building. Direct access U.S. Department of the Interior (USDOI) impacts on Corbin Building, Dennison impacts on Corbin Building, Dennison from FSTC to John Street - Maiden Lane Standards for the Rehabilitation of Historic Building, St. Paul’s Chapel and Building, St. Paul’s Chapel and Historic District. Buildings, as practicable. Both Graveyard, East River Savings Bank and Graveyard, East River Savings Bank and Alternatives 9 and 10 conform to USDOI Bennett Building. Bennett Building. Standards for the Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings. Construction Operation Construction Operation Construction Operation
NAAQS not exceeded for CO, NOx, SO2, Beneficial effect on traffic-related mobile NAAQS not exceeded for CO, NOx, SO2, Beneficial effect on traffic-related mobile NAAQS not exceeded for CO, NO2, SO2, and annual avg. PM10; source pollutant emissions and annual avg. PM10; source pollutant emissions Reduction of PM , PM concentrations Air Quality No effect due to pollutant emissions from 10 2.5 and PM10 Exceeded for 24-hour PM . Exceeded for 24-hour PM . through ULSD, retrofits, best available mobile or stationary sources. 10 No effect due to stationary source 10 No effect due to stationary source retrofit technologies, and electrification. No 24-hour PM2.5 increment. 24-hour PM2.5 increases above NYSDEC emissions (from heating/mechanical 24-hour PM2.5 increases above NYSDEC emissions (from heating/mechanical CP-33 value. systems). CP-33 value. systems). Construction Operation Construction Operation Construction Operation Mobile source noise levels in 2006 would Mobile source noise levels in 2006 would decrease or have slight (less than 1.7 decrease or have slight (less than 1.7 dBA) increases over year 2003 at eight of dBA) increases over year 2003 at eight of Construction Environment Protection Plan the nine locations. The ninth location the nine locations. The ninth location & Program (CEPP) to address work Mobile source noise levels would slightly would experience a 6.8 dBA increase. would experience a 6.8 dBA increase, of hours, acoustic barriers, equipment noise increase up to 2.1 dBA over year 2003 Compared with pre-9/11, mobile source which 4.6 DBA are directly attributable to muffler/silencers, monitoring, and levels at all nine receptor locations. Noise and noise levels would decrease or remain the the Proposed Action. Compared with pre- compliance enforcement. Mobile source noise levels would Vibration No Impact. same at four locations. Stationary source No Impacts. 9/11, mobile source noise levels would No Impact. Noise reduction specifications in decrease or remain the same at five noise levels would be exceeded at seven decrease or remain the same at five construction contract. locations and increase at three locations sites. Vibration levels at Sites 6 and 8 locations. Vibration levels at Sites 6 and 8 by up to 1.6 dBA over pre-9/11 levels at Adherence to the vibration monitoring plan would exceed FTA threshold for extremely would exceed FTA threshold for extremely all 9 receptor locations. per the Section 106 PA, to be included in fragile buildings during peak construction fragile buildings during peak construction the CEPP, for potentially affected period. Five historical buildings also would period. Five historical buildings also buildings. exceed the NYC Buildings Department would exceed the NYC Buildings vibration threshold. Department vibration threshold. Construction Operation Construction Operation Construction Operation Existing utilities relocated in utility Existing utilities relocated in utility Infrastructure, No adverse impacts. Operational benefits No adverse impacts. Operational benefits corridors. DfE/Construction for the corridors. DfE/Construction for the Energy, and No operational benefits or improvements associated with public transit project. associated with public transit project. CEPP to coordinate utility relocation and No Impacts. Environment (CfE) principles used in Environment (CfE) principles used in Solid Waste to utilities. New utility connections to Entry Facility on New utility connections to Entry Facility on minimize disruption. FSTC design and construction to reduce FSTC design and construction to reduce Fulton Street and Broadway. Fulton Street and Broadway. energy use and solid waste generation. energy use and solid waste generation. Construction Operation Construction Operation Construction Operation
Construction practices will minimize suspended solids in construction site drainage and groundwater drawdown. Any groundwater drawdown or groundwater issues will be managed in accordance with the provisions of the CEPP, including Natural shoring or sheeting methods that limit the No impacts on geology, groundwater, No impacts on geology, groundwater, Resources No Impacts. No operational benefits or improvements. No adverse impacts. No adverse impacts. influx of groundwater into the excavation, terrestrial habitat or aquatic habitat. terrestrial habitat or aquatic habitat. and building stabilization measures in the event of settlement. Prior to discharging groundwater to the sewer system, a NYCDEP permit will be obtained. Groundwater samples will be collected and groundwater will be treated subject to laboratory results.
Table ES-3 Summary Comparison of Impacts by Alternative and Planned Action
Resource Area No Action Alternative Alternative 9 Alternative 10 – The Preferred Alternative Planned Action Common to Build Alternatives Construction Operation Construction Operation Construction Operation
Health and Safety Plans, Soil, Soil and Contaminated Specific locations where contaminated Specific locations where contaminated Gas, and Contaminated Material Materials and No action to address existing materials or soil may be present were Any lead paint, asbestos, or other materials or soil may be present were Any lead paint, asbestos, or other Management Plan, Groundwater Any lead paint, asbestos, or other Waste contaminants except during maintenance determined through detailed survey of contaminants would be removed during determined through detailed survey of contaminants would be removed during Management Plan could provide contaminants would remain. Management of NYCT facilities. sites to be excavated and buildings to be deconstruction. sites to be excavated and buildings to be deconstruction. procedures to detect/address all deconstructed. deconstructed. contaminants in compliance with Federal, State and City protocols.
Construction Operation Construction Operation Construction Operation Construction of westernmost edge of Dey Construction of westernmost edge of Dey Street Passageway and RW – E Street Passageway and RW - E Water pre-treatment activities prior to Connector would have relevance to New Connector would have relevance to New discharge into the sewer system. Coastal Zone York City Coastal Zone Policy Number 5: Improved public transit access will York City Coastal Zone Policy Number 5: Improved public transit access will Contaminated materials managed, Consistency No Impacts. No improved access to the waterfront. Protect and Improve Water Quality in the improve waterfront access to East River Protect and Improve Water Quality in the improve waterfront access to East River remediated and/or disposed of in New York City Coastal Area and Number and Hudson River. New York City Coastal Area and Number and Hudson River. accordance with all laws and regulations 7: Minimize Environmental Degradation 7: Minimize Environmental Degradation and prevented from entering coastal from Solid Waste and Hazardous from Solid Waste and Hazardous systems. Substances. Substances. Transit patron safety maintained/ Transit patron safety maintained/ improved through design to prescriptive improved through design to prescriptive Worker safety protected through contract codes and scenario-based evaluations of Worker safety protected through contract codes and scenario-based evaluations of Safety and Safety and security remains responsive to Health and Safety Plans. Temporary fire and incidents. Health and Safety Plans. Temporary fire and incidents. Implementation of Health and Safety Plan Existing conditions maintained. Security MTA NYCT practices/requirements. signage and traffic controls for vehicular Security improved through design of signage and traffic controls for vehicular Security improved through design of for each construction contract. and pedestrian safety. defensible space, improved sightlines, and pedestrian safety. defensible space, improved sightlines, lighting, and space activation by retail lighting, and space activation by retail operation. operation. Construction Operation Construction Operation Construction Operation No disproportionately high or adverse No disproportionately high or adverse None required. All property acquisition to No disproportionately high or adverse No disproportionately high or adverse Environmental impacts on low income or minority impacts on low income or minority be undertaken within framework of impacts on low income or minority impacts on low income or minority Justice No Impacts. No operational impacts. communities. No indirect business or communities. No indirect business or Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance communities. Access to businesses in communities. Access to businesses in residential displacements in communities residential displacements in communities and Real Properties Acquisition Policies Lower Manhattan to be improved. Lower Manhattan to be improved. of concern. of concern. Act. Construction Operation Construction Operation Construction Operation Potential cumulative effects of major FSTC would not contribute to the May cause temporary cumulative adverse May cause temporary cumulative adverse Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects revitalization of Lower Manhattan. effects on access and circulation, traffic, effects on access and circulation, traffic, Operational benefits from 2007 Operational benefits from 2007 without the FSTC would occur. The FSTC Increased transit improvements and other air quality and noise, cultural resources air quality and noise, cultural resources onward. Benefits include improved transit onward. Benefits include improved transit Cumulative would not contribute to such impacts, or benefits for Lower Manhattan through the and business/economic interests. Such and business/economic interests. Such EPCs implemented in coordination and access to Lower Manhattan over decades access to Lower Manhattan over decades Impacts interaction of cumulative impacts among contribution of FSTC to the benefits of effects would be temporary, and offset effects would be temporary, and offset cooperation with other Recovery Project and substantial contribution to the and substantial contribution to the other projects. Beneficial effects on (local) other projects would not occur. Other by long-term cumulative benefits of the by long-term cumulative benefits of the Sponsors. revitalization of Lower Manhattan and revitalization of Lower Manhattan and business and economic interests due to Lower Manhattan projects would be FSTC. Beneficial effects on (local) FSTC. Beneficial effects on (local) sustained economic growth. sustained economic growth. construction spending by other Recovery operational, aiding economic revitalization business and economic interests due to business and economic interests due to projects only and improved transit access and service. construction spending. construction spending. Construction Operation Construction Operation Construction Operation No temporary use of 4(f) properties. No constructive use of 4(f) resources would occur; proximity impacts would be No temporary use of 4(f) properties. No minimized or avoided so no substantial As applicable and practicable, work would constructive use of Section 4(f) resources impairment of the 4(f) resources. Views of conform to the Secretary of the Interior’s would occur; proximity impacts would be 4(f) resources would not be Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic minimized or avoided so no substantial Four (4) Section 4(f) resources would be obstructed/eliminated; the aesthetic Properties and other relevant guidelines impairment of 4(f) resources. Views of permanently used (i.e., permanently quality of the 4(f) resources would not be Four (4) Section 4(f) resources would be and management procedures, including 4(f) resources would not be incorporated) by this Alternative. Potential substantially impaired. Underpinning of permanently used (i.e., permanently U.S.C. Section 303 and implementing Section 4(f) incorporated) by this Alternative. Potential Evaluation obstructed/eliminated; the aesthetic historic archaeological resources present the Corbin Building would be considered a regulations codified in 23 CFR Part No Impacts. No Impacts. quality of the 4(f) resources would not be in the vicinity of Dey Street. None of the permanent use of a Section 4(f) historic archaeological resources present 771.135. in the vicinity of Dey Street. None of the substantially impaired. Underpinning of avoidance alternatives are prudent and Resource. Access to views of the Corbin Procedures to identify, evaluate and, if the Corbin Building would be considered a feasible. Building would be restricted during the avoidance alternatives are prudent and feasible. necessary, mitigate any disturbance of permanent use of a Section 4(f) construction period, however this is a archaeological resources present in the Resource. temporary restriction that does not archaeological APE during construction in Potential historic archaeological resources diminish the utility of this resource, and accordance with the Programmatic present in the project area. access would be restored following Agreement. construction. Potential historic archaeological resources present in the project area.
This Page Intentionally Left Blank