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. In addition, the HPD anticipates the use of federal funding from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to facilitate the construction of affordable housing. Given this anticipated use of federal funds, the EIS has been designed to include an Environmental Assessment (EA) in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). As such, the following Phase IA Cultural Resource Assessment establishes Areas of Potential Effect (APEs) for the project, those areas within which the proposed actions may affect potential archaeological and/or historic architectural resources, identifies designated and potential cultural resources that may be affected by the proposed project, and assesses the proposed action’s potential effects on those resources. This Phase IA Cultural Resource Assessment will be submitted to the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) and the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (NYSOPRHP). Within the Project Area, HPD has delineated projected and potential development sites. The proposed rezoning project consists of 35 projected development sites and two potential development sites. These development sites are located throughout the 31-acre rezoning area and encompass a total of 114 individual tax lots. LPC determined that none of the projected or potential development sites are sensitive for archaeological resources. As such, they concluded that there are no further archaeological concerns with respect to the 114 lots. Given that the Proposed Action must be reviewed by the NYSOPRHP, in addition to LPC, Areas of Potential Effect (APEs) for archaeological and historic architectural resources were defined despite the non-sensitivity determination of LPC. The archaeological APE for the Proposed Action was determined to be the area within which direct impacts would most likely occur as a result of the proposed project. Therefore, the archaeological APE was defined as the entire redevelopment area, encompassing all of the projected and potential development sites along with the blocks within which the development sites are located. As for the historic architectural survey, the historic architectural APE was determined using the CEQR guidelines that recommend a 400-foot (121.92 meters) radius from the borders of the project site as the limits of the study area for architectural resources (CEQR Technical Manual 312). Consultation with NYSOPRHP was also initiated so as to obtain a preliminary determination of the archaeological and historic architectural sensitivity of the project area. With respect to archaeological resources, NYSOPRHP found in concurrence with the LPC that there are no concerns with respect to the redevelopment project. Regarding historic architectural resources, the NYSOPRHP requested additional information, in the form of photographs of the area surrounding the project site, before issuing a sensitivity determination. The documentary study, including a review of historical accounts, cartographic resources, and previously conducted archaeological studies and previously identified archaeological sites, concluded that the archaeological APE was not sensitive for prehistoric or historic archaeological deposits. Therefore, no additional archaeological investigations were recommended with respect to the proposed redevelopment project. The comprehensive support for the conclusions regarding the sensitivity of the archaeological APE is included in the following report. Page i The Louis Berger Group, Inc. Phase IA Cultural Resource Assessment Broadway Triangle Redevelopment Project TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY......................................................................................................................................i TABLE of CONTENTS .........................................................................................................................................ii LIST OF FIGURES...............................................................................................................................................iii LIST OF PHOTOS................................................................................................................................................iii LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................................................. v 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................ 1 1.1 Project Description............................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Areas of Potential Effect....................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Scope of Work and Project Personnel ................................................................................................... 5 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING............................................................................................................... 9 2.1 Project Area and Current Land Use....................................................................................................... 9 2.2 Geology and Geography....................................................................................................................... 9 3.0 BACKGROUND.................................................................................................................................... 13 3.1 Prehistoric Overview.......................................................................................................................... 13 3.1.1 Prehistoric Archaeological Site Potential........................................................................................ 14 3.1.2 Previous Cultural Resource Surveys............................................................................................... 15 3.2 Historic Background .......................................................................................................................... 19 4.0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL POTENTIAL...................................................................................................... 41 4.1 Prehistoric Archaeological Site Potential ............................................................................................ 41 4.2 Historic Archaeological Site Potential................................................................................................. 42 5.0 HISTORIC ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY............................................................................................. 44 5.1 Methodology...................................................................................................................................... 44 5.2 Identification and Evaluation of Historic Properties within the Architectural APE............................... 45 5.2.1 Previously Listed or Eligible Historic Properties within the Architectural APE ............................... 45 5.2.2 Previously Undocumented Historic Properties within the Architectural APE................................... 51 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................... 79 6.1 Archaeology....................................................................................................................................... 79 6.2 Historic Architecture.......................................................................................................................... 79 7.0 REFERENCES CITED..........................................................................................................................