DOCSLIB.ORG

Goals and Objectives

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Goals and Objectives STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION HPPUNTERS OINT LAZA 47-40 21ST STREET LONG ISLAND CITY,NY11101 DOUGLAS A. CURREY, P.E. THOMAS J. MADISON,JR. REGIONAL DIRECTOR COMMISSIONER PHILLIP ENG, P.E. DEPUTY REGIONAL DIRECTOR GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Transportation Goal GOAL: For all modes of transportation, improve mobility, safety and access and reduce congestion within the study area. x Improve traffic operations in the corridor, reducing delays and increasing efficiency and reliability. x Reduce the frequency and severity of traffic accidents in the corridor by eliminating non-standard elements on the bridge and associated highway sections and ramps. x Minimize diversion of highway auto and truck traffic to local streets, both during construction and long-term. x Substantially conform to established design criteria to ensure safe operation and a smooth flow of traffic. x Be consistent with regional transportation plans in the I-278 corridor and any related highway, transit or freight plans potentially affected by decisions in the project corridor. x Provide cost-effective solutions to problems in the corridor related to both capital construction costs and operation and maintenance expenses. x Eliminate infrastructure deficiencies. x Provide a secure transportation infrastructure. x Improve opportunities for pedestrian/bicycle travel in the corridor. x Increase the effectiveness of mass transit in the corridor. x Address the needs of emergency response personnel and vehicles. x Enhance opportunities for the efficient movement of freight. Public Participation Goal GOAL: Provide an open, inclusive, transparent and responsive Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process that includes a proactive, comprehensive and ongoing public participation program. x Create a process that embraces the principles of context sensitive design, fosters innovation and considers all ideas. x Create a process that meets or exceeds federal and state requirements. x Ensure that important but tangential issues that cannot be addressed by the EIS process are directed to the appropriate entity for action. x Create a process in which data are accessible and in which any models used are understandable and the assumptions are clearly defined. (This could include conducting modeling workshops.) x Provide a variety of forums to solicit broad public participation from a wide range of perspectives. x Ensure that opportunities for public input are widely communicated. x Facilitate cross-communication between agencies, groups and individuals. x Develop written and graphic project materials that can be understood by the broadest possible audience. PHONE : (718) 482-4683 F AX : (718) 482-6319 E- MAIL : [email protected] WEBSITE: www.dot.state.ny.us/reg/r11/kosciuszko/kosciuszkohome.html Social, Economic & Environmental Goals GOAL: Protect and/or enhance the environment, including natural resources and open space. x Protect and enhance existing open space and parkland. x Look for opportunities to create parks and open space in order to mitigate project consequences. x Minimize adverse noise impacts and meet federal and state air quality standards. x Protect existing wetlands and waterways. x Avoid impacts to federal and state rare, threatened, and endangered species and other animal life. x Protect public recreational facilities and minimize adverse impacts on their operation during construction. x Protect against adverse visual and light impacts. GOAL: Protect and/or enhance the integrity of residential neighborhoods. x Protect residences and minimize adverse impacts on residential properties during construction. x Improve pedestrian safety. x Ensure that project impacts do not disproportionately affect one neighborhood over another. x Preserve the integrity of neighborhoods. x Protect and preserve community character. GOAL: Maintain the viability of institutional and business communities. x Protect commercial and industrial establishments and minimize adverse impacts on their operation during construction. x Protect institutional facilities (religious, educational, etc.) and minimize adverse impacts on their operation during construction. x Ensure safe pedestrian and vehicular access to institutions and businesses during construction. GOAL: Protect and/or enhance cultural, historic and archeological resources. x Protect and/or mitigate adverse impacts on cultural and historic resources that have been locally designated; identified as eligible for the State or Federal Register; or listed on the State or Federal Register. x Avoid disturbances to archeological resources. GOAL: Recognize the interrelationships between land use and transportation. x Consider the impact on land use created by any transportation improvement. x Be consistent with existing and committed transportation, community development, and land use plans and projects. PHONE: (718) 482-4683 FAX: (718) 482-6319 E-MAIL: [email protected] WEBSITE: www.dot.state.ny.us/reg/r11/kosciuszko/kosciuszkohome.html KOSCIUSZKO BRIDGE PROJECT STAKEHOLDERS ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP LIST NAME/TITLE/ORGANIZATION REPRESENTATIVE ALTERNATE(S) Elected Officials Nydia Velazquez Evelyn Cruz United States Congresswoman Marty Markowitz Michael Rossmy Alvin Goodman Brooklyn Borough President Helen Marshall Mark Scott Thomas Campagna Queens Borough President Peter Lutz Martin Connor Naftali Ausch New York State Senator Martin Malave Dilan Anna Zak New York State Senator Serphin Maltese Rosemarie Iacovone New York State Senator George Onorato New York State Senator Joseph Lentol Theresa Cianciotta New York State Assembly Member Vito Lopez Alison Hirsh New York State Assembly Member Margaret Markey Welland Fuller New York State Assembly Member Catherine Nolan Diane Ballek New York State Assembly Member Eric Gioia Zoe Epstein New York City Council Member Melinda Katz Jay Bond Leora Skolnik New York City Council Member Diana Reyna New York City Council Member David Yassky Matt Ides New York City Council Member NAME/TITLE/ORGANIZATION REPRESENTATIVE ALTERNATE(S) Agencies Douglas Currey Regional Director Robert Adams New York State Department of Transportation - Region 11 Iris Weinshall Muhammed Afzal Commissioner Mousa Nazif Moshe Strum New York City Department of Transportation Robert Arnold Division Administrator Tom Breslin Rick Backlund Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Brooklyn Community Board #1 Gerald Esposito Philip Caponegro Queens Community Board #2 Debra Markell Marilyn Elseroad Gary Giordano Queens Community Board #5 Vincent Arcuri John Schell Civic and Neighborhood Organizations Citizens of Maspeth and Elmhurst Together Rosemary Felle Ernest Swain (COMET) Concerned Citizens of Greenpoint Irene Klementowicz Madeline Donach Meeker Avenue/Apollo Street Block Mary Gottlieb Noemi Tiniski Association Steven Tiniski Noble Street Block Association Barbara Mihelic OUTRAGE Alison Cordero Joe Reemmer United Forties Civic Association Joseph Ruzalski Gus Amato Business Interests Jack Teich Acme Architectural Products Marc Teich Mike Teich Steve Martin East Williamsburg Valley Industrial Anthony Parra Development Corporation (EWVIDCO) Long Island City Business Development Gayle Baron Calvin Johnson Corporation Maspeth Chamber of Commerce Anthony Nunziato MaryAnna Zero Sagres Partners, LLC Philip Galasso Dan Torchio ORGANIZATION REPRESENTATIVE ALTERNATE(S) Other – Environmental, Transportation, Etc. Automobile Association of America (AAA) Christopher McBride Greenpoint Waterfront Association for Parks & Michael Hofmann Laura Hofmann Planning (GWAPP) Greenpoint Property Owners Christine Holowacz Newtown Creek Monitoring Committee Christine Holowacz Dorothy Swick St. Cecilia’s Roman Catholic Church Christine Holowacz Tri-State Transportation Campaign Teresa Toro Resident Annette LaMatto Last Updated – January 2007 NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION KOSCIUSZKO BRIDGE PROJECT STAKEHOLDERS ADVISORY COMMITTEE (SAC) OPERATIONAL GUIDELINES PURPOSE/FUNCTIONS The Kosciuszko Bridge Project’s Stakeholders Advisory Committee (SAC) is composed of community partners from the public and private sectors, including elected officials, community board representatives, local business interests, community-based organizations, residents and key agencies. Its purpose is to assist the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) with the Alternatives Analysis/Environmental Impact Statement process for the Kosciuszko Bridge Project by providing guidance and input on transportation, environmental, economic, community cohesion and other pertinent issues; and outreach to groups and individuals throughout the area. The Kosciuszko Bridge Project is a multi-year effort designed to develop and evaluate possible solutions for the rehabilitation or replacement of the Kosciuszko Bridge, which spans Newtown Creek between Brooklyn and Queens. The SAC will be an essential component of the Project’s Public Involvement Program and will play a central role in advising NYSDOT. It is being specifically established to: • represent a variety of interests throughout project planning and implementation; • assist with refinement of the Study’s problem statement and project goals and objectives; • assist in developing a process by which strategies/alternatives to address the problems will be evaluated, including clear and understandable screening criteria; • achieve consensus among SAC members on the information/analyses needed to support screening decisions; • review project data and findings; • review and provide input on preliminary
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Broadway Triangle Redevelopment Project Williamsburg, Brooklyn, New York
    BROADWAY TRIANGLE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT WILLIAMSBURG, BROOKLYN, NEW YORK PHASE IA CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT Prepared For: New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development New York, New York Prepared By: The Louis Berger Group, Inc. New York, New York February 2009 BROADWAY TRIANGLE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT, WILLIAMSBURG, BROOKLYN, NEW YORK PHASE IA CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT Prepared For: New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development New York, New York Prepared By: Tina Fortugno, RPA Zachary J. Davis, RPA Deborah Van Steen The Louis Berger Group, Inc. New York, New York February 2009 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD) is seeking discretionary actions in order to facilitate the redevelopment of a nine-block area known as Broadway Triangle, located in Williamsburg, Brooklyn. The Proposed Action includes zoning map amendments to generally rezone the existing M1-2 Manufacturing District to Residential and Commercial Districts; zoning text amendments to establish Inclusionary Housing in the proposed R6A and R7A zoning districts; the disposition of City-owned properties; Urban Development Action Area Projects designation; the modification of an Urban Renewal Plan; and City Acquisition through eminent domain. The Project Area encompasses approximately 31 acres and is generally bounded by Flushing Avenue to the south, Throop Avenue to the east, Lynch Street to the north, and Union Avenue, Walton Street, and Harrison Avenue to the west. As part of this action, the HPD is undertaking an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed Broadway Triangle Redevelopment Project. Consideration for cultural resources, including both archaeological and historic architectural resources, must be undertaken as part of the City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) process.
    [Show full text]
  • Tenure, Attachment, and Changing Perceptions in Gentrifying Williamsburg, Brooklyn
    City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works All Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects 5-2018 There’s Nothing Here: Tenure, Attachment, and Changing Perceptions in Gentrifying Williamsburg, Brooklyn Sara Martucci The Graduate Center, City University of New York How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! More information about this work at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/2642 Discover additional works at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu This work is made publicly available by the City University of New York (CUNY). Contact: [email protected] THERE’S NOTHING HERE: TENURE, ATTACHMENT, AND CHANGING PERCEPTIONS OF GENTRIFYING WILLIAMSBURG, BROOKLYN by SARA MARTUCCI A dissertation submitted to the Graduate Faculty in Sociology in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, The City University of New York 2018 © 2018 SARA MARTUCCI All Rights Reserved ii There’s Nothing Here: Tenure, Attachment, and Changing Perceptions in Gentrifying Williamsburg, Brooklyn by Sara Martucci This manuscript has been read and accepted for the Graduate Faculty in Sociology in satisfaction of the dissertation requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Date Professor Philip Kasinitz Chair of Examining Committee Date Professor Lynn Chancer Executive Officer Supervisory Committee: Professor John Mollenkopf Professor Jason Patch Professor Sharon Zukin THE CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK iii Abstract There’s Nothing Here: Tenure, Attachment, and Changing Perceptions in Gentrifying Williamsburg, Brooklyn by Sara Martucci Depending on the audience, the term “gentrification” conjures images of pristine condos, fancy restaurants, dive bars full of hipsters, or eviction notices.
    [Show full text]
  • Mccarren Park Uart­ View All Monuments in NYC Parks, As Well As Temporary Public Art Installations on Our NYC Public Art Map and Guide I Map)
    BOARD MEETING AFFIRMATION OF NEW MEMBERS Chairperson Ms. Fuller requested the new members to come forward to be affirmed. Mr. Solomon Green, Ms. Dana Rachlin, Mr. Michael Gary Schlesinger ROLL CALL Chairperson Ms. Fuller requested District Manager Mr. Esposito to call the roll. He informed the Chairperson that there were 39 members present, a sufficient quorum to call the meeting to order. MOMENT OF SILENCE Chairperson Ms. Fuller called for a moment of silence dedicated to Mr. Weidberg and his family, for the passing of Mr. Weidberg’s brother. ELECTIONS At 8:00 PM, Chairperson Ms. Fuller announced that it was time for elections. She requested the Elections Committee members [Ms. Barros; Ms. Foster; Mr. Torres] to come forward. Ballots were distributed and collected. The meeting continued while the Elections Committee convened in the other room to count the ballots. The committee reported the following regarding the elections: EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE POSITION CANDIDATE TALLY OF VOTES Chairperson Dealice Fuller 38 votes __________________________________________________________________________________ First Vice Chairperson Simon Weiser 23 votes. Karen Nieves 14 votes. __________________________________________________________________________________ Second Vice Chairperson Del Teague 38 votes. __________________________________________________________________________________ Third Vice Chairperson Stephen J. Weidberg 38 votes. __________________________________________________________________________________ Financial Secretary Maria Viera
    [Show full text]
  • LPC Designation Report for South Village Historic District
    South Village Historic District Designation Report December 17, 2013 Cover Photographs: 200 and 202 Bleecker Street (c. 1825-26); streetscape along LaGuardia Place with 510 LaGuardia Place in the foreground (1871-72, Henry Fernbach); 149 Bleecker Street (c. 1831); Mills House No. 1, 156 Bleecker Street (1896-97, Ernest Flagg); 508 LaGuardia Place (1891, Brunner & Tryon); 177 to 171 Bleecker Street (1887-88, Alexander I. Finkle); 500 LaGuardia Place (1870, Samuel Lynch). Christopher D. Brazee, December 2013 South Village Historic District Designation Report Essay prepared by Christopher D. Brazee, Cynthia Danza, Gale Harris, Virginia Kurshan. Jennifer L. Most, Theresa C. Noonan, Matthew A. Postal, Donald G. Presa, and Jay Shockley Architects’ and Builders’ Appendix prepared by Marianne S. Percival Building Profiles prepared by Christopher D. Brazee, Jennifer L. Most, and Marianne S. Percival, with additional research by Jay Shockley Mary Beth Betts, Director of Research Photographs by Christopher D. Brazee Map by Jennifer L. Most Commissioners Robert B. Tierney, Chair Frederick Bland Christopher Moore Diana Chapin Margery Perlmutter Michael Devonshire Elizabeth Ryan Joan Gerner Roberta Washington Michael Goldblum Kate Daly, Executive Director Mark Silberman, Counsel Sarah Carroll, Director of Preservation TABLE OF CONTENTS SOUTH VILLAGE HISTORIC DISTRICT MAP .............................................. FACING PAGE 1 TESTIMONY AT THE PUBLIC HEARING ................................................................................ 1 SOUTH
    [Show full text]
  • F. J. Berlenbach House Designation Report
    Landmarks Preservation Commission May 11, 2004, Designation List 352 LP-2152 F. J. Berlenbach House, 174 Meserole Street, Borough of Brooklyn. Built 1887; architect: F.J. Berlenbach, Jr.; builder: F. J. Berlenbach. Landmark Site: Borough of Brooklyn Tax Map Block 3053, Lot 13. On April 20, 2004, the Landmarks Preservation Commission held a public hearing on the proposed designation of F.J. Berlenbach House and the related landmark site. The public hearing was duly advertised with the provisions of law. Three witnesses testified in favor of the proposed designation, including representatives of the New York Landmarks Conservancy, the Historic Districts Council, and the Municipal Arts Society. There were no speakers in opposition to the proposed designation. The Commission held previous public hearings on the proposed designation on November 10, 1981 (LP-1263), June 12, 1984 (LP- 1503), and July 10, 1990 (LP-1791). Summary Located in the Williamsburg section of Brooklyn, the Berlenbach House is an extraordinary Queen Anne- style survivor from the last decades of the nineteenth century. The three-story frame building was constructed in 1887 by local carpenter Franz J. Berlenbach, a German immigrant, from plans drawn by his son, F.J., Jr., a young architect who had recently opened a design office nearby. The Berlenbach family occupied the house until 1899. The great wave of immigration that New York City experienced in the 1850s brought a large number of German immigrants to Williamsburg. Its population in the late nineteenth century was almost exclusively German. While most of the older wood-frame buildings in this section of Brooklyn have been resurfaced with new materials, this house not only retains its original clapboard siding, but features inventive wood carving.
    [Show full text]
  • Community Board No. 1
    COMMUNITY BOARD NO. 1 N 435 GRAHAM AVENUE - BROOKLYN, NY 11211 PHONE: (718) 389-0009 FAX: (718) 389-0098 Email: [email protected] Website: www.nyc.gov/brooklyncbl IIOX ERIC L. AOAMS BROOKLYN BOROUGH PRESIDENT greenpo,nt - -w1lllClmsburg $11',JON WEISER DEALICE FULLER HON. STEPHEN T. LE VIN FIRST VICE.-CHA!RM,\N CHAIRPERSON COUNCILMEMBER, 33'" CD DEL TEAGUE SECOND V!CE,.CHAJRP~RSO~ GERALD A. ESPOSITO HO!\". ANTONIO REYNOSO DISTRICT MANAGER COUNCILMEMBER, 3~" CD STEPHEN J. WEIDBF.KG TI-ORD VICE-CHAJR.\MN MA.WA VIERA FINANCIAL SECRETARY SONIA JGLESUS COMBINED PUBLIC HEARING RF.CORJ)Th'G SECRETARY AND BOARD MEETING PD/LIP A.. CAPONEGRO 1'1E.'\IBER,AT•LARClE SEPTEMBER 10, 2019 211 AINSLIE STREET PUBLIC HEARING ROLL CALL Chairperson Ms. Dealice Fuller requested District Manager Mr. Esposito to call the roll. District Manager Mr. Esposito conducted the roll call and announced that there were 26 members present, a sufficient number for a quorum. Chairperson Ms. Fuller noted the quorum and opened the board meeting. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA Chauperson Ms. Fuller asked for a motion to approve the agenda. Ms. Kaminski made a motion to approve the agenda as written. The motion seconded by Mr. Caponegro. The motion was unanimously carried. UNENCLOSED SIDEWALK CAFE: SJD 220 CORP., DBA BREAD BROTHER BAGEL CAFE, 220 BUSHWICK A VENUE, BROOKLYN, NY 11206-4459 (Application# 2052885-DCA) 3 Tables; 6 CIWRS (RENEWAL) - Applicant did not appear. The item was referred to the SLA Review & DCA Committee for further review. UNENCLOSED SIDEWALK CAFE: GRAND ENDEAVORS INC., DBA CLEM'S, 264 GRAND STREET, BROOKLYN, NY 11211 (Application# 1145629-DCA) 5 Tables, 20 Chairs (RENEWAL) Applicant did not appear.
    [Show full text]
  • NOTICE of PUBLIC HEARING Proposed Financing
    NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Proposed Financing NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to the provisions of Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, that the New York City Housing Development Corporation (the “Corporation”) is contemplating the issuance of one or more issues or series of bonds pursuant to plans of financing (the “Bonds”) in an aggregate amount not to exceed $5,610,583,920 in order to (i) provide a portion of the funds for the financing, refinancing, acquisition, rehabilitation and/or new construction of the residential developments described below (the “Developments”); and (ii) pay related costs including, without limitation, reserve amounts and costs of issuance of the Bonds for the Developments. The Bonds will not constitute a debt or obligation of the City or State of New York. The Corporation will conduct a hearing at 10:00 am on July 10, 2020 to receive comments from the general public on the proposed financing plans for the Developments and the Bonds. Due to the COVID-19 public health crisis, such public hearing shall be conducted remotely, through the use of telephone conference. Interested members of the public are invited to participate, and individuals will have an opportunity to make brief statements by dialing into the teleconference using the toll-free number 1-844-740-1264 and by entering the access code 160 007 3949. The hearing will also be accessible as a free-to-join webinar accessible through the world wide web address: https://nychdc.webex.com/nychdc/j.php?MTID=maa0f937f2cb92c9d75f02f5be931c531 and entering the passcode “TEFRA2020”.
    [Show full text]
  • The Historical Perspective— Excluding the Poor: Public Housing in New York City
    The Historical Perspective Excluding the Poor: First Houses, pictured here in 1939, replaced poorly constructed tenement housing on the Lower East Side with modernized apartments for low-income families. Almost 4,000 families competed for only 122 apartments when First Houses opened, in 1935. Photo courtesy of the New York City Housing Authority. page 24 page 25 Summer 2012 by Ethan G. Sribnick Public Housing in New York City In the 1930s, in the midst of the Great Depression, federal, state, standards for safety and sanitation or to board them up. Many and local officials developed their most radical response to the buildings were so old as to make the required improvements problem of inadequate shelter for the poor and working class: impossible. “The only ultimate cure for them,” opined Tenement publicly built and subsidized housing. In the years after World Commissioner Langdon Post, “is dynamite.” War II, stark high-rise towers became a common feature in the landscape of America’s cities. There was never, however, a clear In February 1934 the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA), consensus over the purpose of public housing. Some believed the city’s new public-housing agency, began its state-mandated public housing should provide shelter for the poorest and most mission to provide for “the clearance, replanning, and recon- unstable families. Others hoped to create thriving, financially sta- struction” of the slum districts of New York. Over the next four ble working-class communities by restricting residency to work- years, NYCHA demolished 1,100 tenement buildings, removing ing families who could demonstrate their potential as upstanding 10,000 rental units.
    [Show full text]
  • Writing Projects: New Deal Guidebooks, Community, and Housing Reform in New York City
    113 Writing Projects: New Deal Guidebooks, Community, and Housing Reform in New York City J. J. Butts Syracuse University The reader of the 1939 WPA Guide to New York City encounters an oddity: situated with the WPA Guide’s tours of more familiar Gotham landmarks--the Brooklyn Bridge, the Metropolitan Museum of Art, and the new Empire State and Rockefeller Center buildings--a description of the Harlem River Houses, a public housing project, seems rather misplaced.1 An East Harlem housing project, after all, was not a destination most tour- ists would put on the must-see list, particularly during the middle of the Depression. Stranger yet is the accompanying description. Quoting a re- view of the housing in the prominent architectural journal Pencil Points, the writers claim: In every really important general matter of land usage--in air, in light, in a sense of green and growing things as a concomitant of living; in the creation of an atmosphere of humanity and de- cency, a place where children would be glad to grow up; in the development of a community that brings with it a new vision of democracy and of progress […] [this development has] qualities that no money can buy. (WPA Guide 459; first brackets added) The passage’s optimism, linking public housing to the making of a national community, may seem incredible, or at least ironic, to contemporary read- ers whose imaginations picture destitution, crime, and squalor. The reasoning behind the odd inclusion of the housing project tour is illuminated by a passage in the manuscript “A Brief Narrative History of New York’s WPA for the Year ending July 31, 1936 by the Federal Writ- ers’ Reporting Project”: “Perhaps no other program of the entire New Deal offers so concrete an expression of its social objectives as does the effort to make available decent housing for people of low incomes” (Housing section 4).
    [Show full text]
  • The New Deal in the Empire State
    fdr4freedoms 1 12. Franklin D. Roosevelt, New Yorker: The New Deal in the Empire State During Franklin D. Roosevelt’s governorship, his home state of New York served as a laboratory for New Deal programs. In turn, after FDR won the presidency, the New Deal in all its variety transformed and enriched New York in ways that remain very much visible in the twenty-first century. As New York’s governor from 1929 until his election to the presidency in 1932, FDR pioneered state old-age pensions, unemployment insurance, and aid for the ever-growing ranks of the unemployed; all became central components of the New Deal. His battle to regulate private utility companies, commitment to hydroelectric power, and determination to expand access to affordable electricity set the stage for the Tennessee Valley Authority. FDR’s struggle in New York State to “help the farm dollar go as far as the [city dollar]” helped shape New Deal farm policy and work-relief projects. And his experience with New York’s failing banks helped prepare him to manage the nation’s banking crisis and push reforms such as the establishment of the Securities and Exchange Commission. The New Deal policies tested in New York went on to profoundly influence its future. Upstate rural communities benefited from New Deal farm policy and the Civil Conservation Corps’s programs to protect natural resources. Meanwhile, New York City’s ethnic neighborhoods experienced (many for the first time) American theater and music performed in their own languages. Public-works and work- relief projects dramatically marked New York State, studding countryside and city alike with schools, post offices, parks, Manhattan and Queens in January 1932.
    [Show full text]
  • Greenpoint-Williamsburg Rezoning EIS CHAPTER 8: URBAN DESIGN and VISUAL RESOURCES
    Greenpoint-Williamsburg Rezoning EIS CHAPTER 8: URBAN DESIGN AND VISUAL RESOURCES A. INTRODUCTION This chapter provides an assessment of the potential impacts on urban design and visual resources that could result from the proposed action. As described in Chapter 1, “Project Description,” the proposed action includes zoning map and zoning text amendments, street demapping, and park mapping in an area spanning 184 blocks in the Greenpoint and Williamsburg sections of Brooklyn. The proposed action would result in substantial amounts of new above-ground development by 2013 with urban design characteristics different from those currently attributed to the project area and located within areas containing resources of visual significance. Given the above conditions, an analysis of urban design and visual resources is therefore appropriate as per the guidelines of the CEQR Technical Manual. For purposes of analysis, the urban design and visual resources study area is coterminous with the study area used for the analysis in Chapter 2, “Land Use, Zoning, and Public Policy,” delineated by a ½-mile radius around the proposed action area. Together, the urban design components and visual resources of an area define the distinctive identity of a neighborhood. As stipulated by CEQR, the analysis of urban design will assess the effects of the proposed action on those attributes that constitute the physical appearance of buildings and streets in the study area. These attributes include building bulk, use, and type; building arrangement; block form and street pattern; streetscape elements; street hierarchy; and natural features. The concept of bulk is created by the size of a building and the way it is massed on a site.
    [Show full text]
  • Greenpoint-Williamsburg Rezoning EIS CHAPTER 5: OPEN SPACE
    Greenpoint-Williamsburg Rezoning EIS CHAPTER 5: OPEN SPACE A. INTRODUCTION The proposed action would add a sizable number of new residents to the area over the next ten years following the adoption of the proposed action, and map a new public park, and therefore has the potential to affect the way residents of the surrounding community use parks, playgrounds, and other open spaces in the area. In accordance with guidelines established in the CEQR Technical Manual, this chapter assesses the adequacy of those resources in the area and the project’s effect on their use. An open space assessment may be necessary if a proposed action could potentially have a direct or indirect effect on open space resources in the proposed action area. A direct effect would “physically change, diminish, or eliminate an open space or reduce its utilization or aesthetic value.” An indirect effect may occur when the population generated by a proposed project would be sufficient to noticeably diminish the ability of an area’s open space to serve the existing or future population. According to the guidelines established in the CEQR Technical Manual, a project that would add fewer than 200 residents or 500 employees, or a similar number of other users to an area, is typically not considered to have indirect effects on open space. The proposed action would result in the net addition of approximately 7,391 DUs and 253,698 sf of ground-floor local and general retail, and a decrease in industrial space, vehicle and open storage uses, and vacant land. This anticipated development would add an estimated 16,778 net new residents and approximately 805 net new retail employees to the study area over the next ten years following the adoption of the proposed action.
    [Show full text]